Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Isn't it the ideal situation? Living on a lake far from crime sounds like an enjoyable and smart thing to do. If you like living with crime, you can. No one is stopping you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pojack
Haha! You win the post of the day award. . Lake living with no crime sounds horrible, doesn't it?
Living on a lake sounds fabulous.
But I don't want to have a 45-minute (+) commute each way in order to have that. And there's something to be said for walkability, especially when your tween/early teen kids want to hang out with their friends (yes, I've allowed my kids to do that, because I've wanted them to enjoy something resembling what I consider a normal childhood. Not all of us grew up in places obsessed with "stranger danger").
Besides, not all cities are crime-ridden. Some, like my hometown, are very safe to walk around in/take the subway, etc, at all hours of the day or night.
...and I think most suburbs of large cities are soulless, oppressive places.
You're in the minority... by a lot. So what are you saying? Detroit is full of soul and bliss?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdixiegirl
In fact, if I could do it all over again, my kids would NOT have spent a good part of their childhoods growing up in them. The affluent suburbs we lived and worked in had some of the most hyper-competitive, materialistic, badly mannered (yet, strangely, very conformist) individuals I've ever come across.
Where would they have gone to school? Detroit Public Schools? I'm not confident that you're child would be studying dentistry if they did. Guess what. With the exception of being hyper-competitive, middle and lower class suburbs are no better. The city is even worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdixiegirl
I work in education and found that many people, for all their preoccupation with the outer trappings of "academic excellence," considered education little more than a means to an end. They were concerned, ultimately, with their kids' ability to outperform other kids. No matter how.
This is a bad thing? Parents and kids should strive for mediocrity?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdixiegirl
What constitutes "high class" and "low class" is subjective.
You're in the minority... by a lot. So what are you saying? Detroit, Livonia, and Downriver communities are full of soul and bliss?
I haven't said anything about Detroit. I've talked about the more affluent Detroit suburbs, which is where we lived and worked for 14 years. Livonia is, in my mind, VERY much a suburb, though less affluent. And I don't know anything about Downriver. Drove through it on the way south, that's it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pojack
Where would they have gone to school? Detroit Public Schools? I'm not confident that you're child would be studying dentistry if they did. Guess what. With the exception of being hyper-competitive, middle and lower class suburbs are no better. The city is even worse.
Once again, I didn't say anything about Detroit. The discussion on this thread became one about the merits of suburbs over city because the OP said she and her husband like living in Royal Oak for its walkability, diversity, and easy access to great amenities. I don't know if you and other pro-suburb posters are talking only about Metro Detroit, or you're talking all suburbs and all cities everywhere. I do know, though, that I found the Detroit suburbs particularly bleak, socially and culturally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pojack
This is a bad thing?
This is a trick question?
I happen to think it's not a good thing to value education only for how much money one's kids will potentially make, or for how good one's kid's 401K will be. I don't think it's a good thing to teach your kids that "outperforming" others, no matter what, is all that matters -- instead of encouraging them to be curious, open-minded individuals dedicated to learning, impacting the world in a positive way, and striving to expose oneself to, and understand, other worldviews.
Where I lived and worked in Metro Detroit, is was common for parents to be WAY overly-involved in their child's experience in school, and in their learning and education, and I'm talking even about kids old enough to be high school seniors. It was pretty creepy at times, actually. Parents took control of homework assignments, for example, finding all the study materials, conducting research and taking notes, while their kids passively sat nearby, staring into their phones.
Or, at other times, the kids weren't even present to do their homework. But Super Stepford Mommy (it was usually the mothers) helicoptered in to save the day! She got the job done! Including -- and no, I'm not exaggerating -- sitting down to actually write or type their child's paper.
This kind of thing happened routinely.
Not only are these parents teaching their kids that they are incapable of doing a good job themselves, and that they needn't take responsibility for their own learning; not only are these parents teaching controlling and narcissistic behavior; but these parents are teaching their kids that it's perfectly acceptable to CHEAT. Like I said, they'll do ANYTHING to ensure THEIR kids "outperform" the next kid. It never ceased to amaze and disgust me.
So, to answer your question directly, yes, being fixated on "performance" instead of learning is a bad thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pojack
Nah. It's quite easy to differentiate the two.
I said it's subjective. In other words, some of us define "upper class" differently (hint: it involves far more important stuff than money, more important than how big one's house or how fancy one's car is, etc.). And some of us want to expose our kids to a much wider perspective.
Last edited by newdixiegirl; 07-26-2017 at 09:42 PM..
I haven't said anything about Detroit. I've talked about the more affluent Detroit suburbs, which is where we lived and worked for 14 years. Livonia is, in my mind, VERY much a suburb, though less affluent. And I don't know anything about Downriver. Drove through it on the way south, that's it.
But you did say that most suburbs of large cities are soulless and oppressive. Hint: All cities in Metro Detroit, with the exception of Detroit itself, are suburbs. And Detroit is THE large city. So if the suburbs are oppressive and soulless, which communities, in your opinion, are full of soul and bliss?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdixiegirl
Once again, I didn't say anything about Detroit. The discussion on this thread became one about the merits of suburbs over city because the OP said she and her husband like living in Royal Oak for its walkability, diversity, and easy access to great amenities. I don't know if you and other pro-suburb posters are talking only about Metro Detroit, or you're talking all suburbs and all cities everywhere. I do know, though, that I found the Detroit suburbs particularly bleak, socially and culturally.
Once again, you did reference the oppressive, soulless suburbs and stated if you had it to do over again, you wouldn't have chosen to raise your children in those suburbs. And I explained that "Suburbs" are defined as smaller communities that surround the large city (Detroit). If that's the case and you could turn back time, where would you have sent them to school? It appears, by your own admission, that your oldest did quite well in whatever "soulless and oppressive" suburban school district he attended. Otherwise he wouldn't have been accepted to dental school, no? Those soulless, oppressive schools did horrible things to him? Again, I ask, where would you have sent your kids instead?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdixiegirl
I happen to think it's not a good thing to value education only for how much money one's kids will potentially make, or for how good one's kid's 401K will be. I don't think it's a good thing to teach your kids that "outperforming" others, no matter what, is all that matters -- instead of encouraging them to be curious, open-minded individuals dedicated to learning, impacting the world in a positive way, and striving to expose oneself to, and understand, other worldviews.
Do you honestly believe that most people in upper class suburbs ONLY value their children's future income and retirement account balances? Like if they're upper class, they're pre-programmed to think this way? Generalize much? You don't think most people in these upper class communities want their kids to be open minded, curious, etc.? They want them to be money making robots? Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdixiegirl
Where I lived and worked in Metro Detroit, is was common for parents to be WAY overly-involved in their child's experience in school, and in their learning and education, and I'm talking even about kids old enough to be high school seniors. It was pretty creepy at times, actually.
Parents took control of homework assignments, for example, finding all the study materials, conducting research and taking notes, while their kids passively sat nearby, staring into their phones.
Or, at other times, the kids weren't even present to do their homework. But Super Stepford Mommy (it was usually the mothers) helicoptered in to save the day! She got the job done! Including -- and no, I'm not exaggerating -- sitting down to actually write or type their child's paper.
This kind of thing happened routinely.
I think you're exaggerating in order to make a point. I think you knew I was going to call you out on it too, hence the "...and no, I'm not exaggerating..." comment.
The problem in this discussion is that you cannot generalize about suburbs - at least not here. Some are quaint small towns (or were) some are vast oceans of soulless suburbia. Very few of them are much simlar to any of the others, so generalizing is just silly. Taylor, Grosse Pointe, Northville and Canton have about a much in common with each other as and elephant, a brick and a toe nail. I guess they are all nouns. Similarities end there.
You can just feel the racism dripping from Pojack's posts. They use all the classic Metro Detroit weasel words.
You're confusing realism with racism. Either that, or you're unable or too lazy to refute any of my points. So you then resort to the old, tired, "You're a racist!" card.
You can just feel the racism dripping from Pojack's posts. They use all the classic Metro Detroit weasel words.
Racism, arrogance, elitism...
I have a number of friends who live in Detroit, and no - not Downtown and Midtown, in Bagely, Forest Park, and Cornerstone Village. It's not an "adventure", but rather it simply makes more sense for them to live there for various reasons ranging from affordability, to commute, to a desire to be close to amenities offered near these locations. They're all various stages of middle-class earners, some have Masters Degrees and one is a professor. Detroit is not the burnt out smoldering husk it was 10 years ago.
Well Geo-Aggie, why then didn't you move to Detroit if it's so great?
Because it's not. For all its positives, Detroit still has a number of negatives. Nobody is denying this, not even the most hardcore Detroit boosters are going to tout its good schools or safe, walkable neighborhoods, because it doesn't have those, but you can have those things 2 miles from the city limits (or actually, right AT the city limits if you move to the GPs). There's no reason to move 20 miles out of the city because you want safety, good schools, and a safe community. If you're moving clear out to BFE, it's because you don't want anything to do with the city. You want a 1/3 acre lot, and a 1970s suburban environment full of cul-de-sacs, 3 car garages, and big box stores with acres of blacktop parking lots. There's nothing wrong with that beyond it being unsustainable, but for me it's incredibly unappealing. If I'm going to move clear out there I want 2 acres, a dirt road, a small barn, a huge garden plot, and a goat ... so I can do goat yoga. (not really, but I really would want a goat)
But you did say that most suburbs of large cities are soulless and oppressive. Hint: All cities in Metro Detroit, with the exception of Detroit itself, are suburbs. And Detroit is THE large city. So if the suburbs are oppressive and soulless, which communities, in your opinion, are full of soul and bliss?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pojack
I think you're exaggerating in order to make a point. I think you knew I was going to call you out on it too, hence the "...and no, I'm not exaggerating..." comment.
Why on Earth are you taking on such a combative tone and looking for an argument in this thread? You addressed another regular poster with the quip, "Hey genius," and now you're accusing me of lying, essentially, in order to, what, impress? Provoke? Not my thing.
Quite frankly, you sound like an obstinate, petulant frat boy/sorority girl.
You haven't figured it out, but I have deliberately not mentioned Detroit, because I don't want to offend those who consider it home and who, understandably, are proud of the Detroit area. I didn't want to go there. However, I will respond to your questions while considering others.
Yes, I think suburbs of most large cities are pretty blah culturally. Having said that, some are more livable and lively than others, based on the culture of the Metro area as a whole, which, in turn, is derived largely from the city proper and its downtown core. The relationship between a city and its suburbs is a synergistic one. Ideally. That is not what I found in Metro Detroit.
But suburban Toronto is definitely more lively, because the culture is different. Why? I honestly don't know all the reasons why, but one reason is certainly because Toronto suburbs have good public transit systems within each suburb, to downtown, and to other surrounding cities throughout southern Ontario. Second, and even more significant, the city of Toronto and its downtown is a busy, dynamic, thriving, safe center of commerce, recreation, and living. It is the preferred residence for millions, and many Torontonians are forced to live in the suburbs because they simply can't afford to live there. Heck, that's now the way it is in Nashville.
I think I found suburban Detroit especially insular because there isn't the same strong city core to act as an anchor uniting the many suburbs and to offer a diversion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pojack
Once again, you did reference the oppressive, soulless suburbs and stated if you had it to do over again, you wouldn't have chosen to raise your children in those suburbs. And I explained that "Suburbs" are defined as smaller communities that surround the large city (Detroit). If that's the case and you could turn back time, where would you have sent them to school? It appears, by your own admission, that your oldest did quite well in whatever "soulless and oppressive" suburban school district he attended. Otherwise he wouldn't have been accepted to dental school, no? Those soulless, oppressive schools did horrible things to him? Again, I ask, where would you have sent your kids instead?
Your logic is baffling.
I say, "I think (Detroit) suburbs are soulless."
To which you say, "Oh, yeah? Well, where would your kids have gone to school, then?"
I don't get the connection. I'm talking about an overall culture, a vibe, and you throw in the issue of schools. What one has to do with the other is beyond me. Incidentally, I've never said anything about the schools in the suburbs, but, as it happens, I thought they were very good. I have no complaints. Happy now?
My daughter has done well in school, as have my sons, because they've gone to good schools, in, yes, suburban Detroit, and for the last 6 hears, here in Nashville. Mostly, however, it's because they have parents who strongly value education, and have always stressed the importance of it. My kids have grown up in a home full of books, I always read to them starting when they were infants and took them to the library, and they've watched their parents read voraciously. They saw their mother earn her master's when they were very young, and in recent years, watched their father complete an MBA, his third master's. So, it's fair to say that my kids were going to value higher education at least somewhat and strive to do well. It's in their DNA.
And, no, I would not have sent my kids to school in Detroit because of the conditions in that city and many of its schools. That's all I'll say about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pojack
Do you honestly believe that most people in upper class suburbs ONLY value their children's future income and retirement account balances? Like if they're upper class, they're pre-programmed to think this way? Generalize much? You don't think most people in these upper class communities want their kids to be open minded, curious, etc.? They want them to be money making robots? Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?
LOL. Where did you pull this absurdity from? When did I say "MOST people in upper class suburbs ONLY value their children's future income and retirement account balances?" Making accurate inferences isn't your strong suit, is it?
I AM part of the educated, professional class. I grew up solidly middle class with a father who did well in business and gave our family great experiences. Many of my friends, family, coworkers and peers are part of that "upper class" you refer to (I assume you mean upper middle class?). So stop putting words in my mouth. I would never make such a ridiculous claim.
Many in educated middle and upper middle classes DO value education for educations' sake, but there are those -- and I found them in suburban Detroit -- who only seem to care about it in terms of its potential monetary benefits. You're perfectly entitled to disagree. I'm cool with that.
YOu reminded me. I want to look into getting a goat, the danged lawn mower is broken again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. Lake living with no crime sounds horrible, doesn't it?
You're confusing realism with racism. Either that, or you're unable or too lazy to refute any of my points. So you then resort to the old, tired, "You're a racist!" card.
