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.
Living in the same home as 5 years ago does not imply home ownership. Also this "study" is the Census Bureau. Presumably they know what they're doing, more than a poster on CD.
As far as your birth certificate proposal, did you not see the stats on where people were born?
I don't believe you picked apart anything. You may not like the information, but it is what it is.
Yes but 5 years or more ownership does not imply the lack of transplants. That's where it's flimsy. There are plenty of factors as to why someone may live in a home over 5 years. The core of my rebuttal is that it doesn't really imply the number of transplants in an area. If anything Seattle has more people there on a temporary basis, so people probably would never live there any more than 5 years.
Also Atlanta has a far lower cost of living, so people are just going to stick in the same location, since it's easier to keep a home. Pay rates in Atlanta isn't significantly lower than pay rates in Seattle . For example I currently make $55 on my contract in Seattle, where I would make something like $45 in Atlanta. Which isn't a major pay reduction. However a home in Atlanta would average $250k where in Seattle it's easily $500k and beyond.
Again that statistic just proves people in Atlanta stay in their homes longer than people in Seattle. It doesn't imply anything more. Again, a birth certificate would matter more in evaluating a transplant population.
Almost no one is going to say Atlanta has less transplants than Seattle. Because it's simply not true. One important factor is the fact that Atlanta transplants are lower income than someone moving to Seattle. They may not have a suitable residency upon living in the city, or may co habitat to the point they won't be listed as often in a statistic. Bottom line there are far to many factors in why someone would stay in an area over 5 years for it to automatically have any correlation with a city's number of transplants.
And even with that said, people in Seattle are less willing to leave Seattle and move to another city, than people in Atlanta. Again, Seattle has a more settled population than Atlanta's population, where people leave the city or go to the city on a more regular basis. I meet too many people in Seattle who have lived there their entire lives and are unwilling to leave the city. Where in Atlanta, people are much more willing to leave Atlanta if they are struggling financially. In Seattle people are willing to stay there even if they may not be able to find a job in Seattle,
This trend is mostly seem in Seattle's younger population. I personally think Seattle and the West coast are amongst the worst for young professionals. Where I think Atlanta, DC, and NYC are amongst the best for young professionals.
There is also another thing that annoy me. People on the internet are so willing to try to get on Google, grab a random statistic and run with it. Or they grab a statistic based on some arbitrary metric and try to desperately find a correlation. Statistics are numbers, they're not facts. My issue with them is that people act like they are undeniable truth's, when they're just generated numbers. The numbers are calculated right, but they don't necessarily prove or disprove anything. They're a good aid, don't get me wrong. But in many debates they're pretty much replaced critical thinking, or they're a lazy way of trying to debate. I will only throw out a statistic here of there, but I don't use statistics often, because I know people can use them to lie.
I know how to generate statistics myself. I've taken statistic courses as well. Everyone who know about statistics know they don't account for different factors. Statistics are about as good as their sample data. Population wide statistics are never going to be an indication of reality. Bottomline someone can move to a state and not be recognized by the census. I'm all for healthy debate, I'm not for a copy and pasting random numbers. Google search skills and copy paste are not great debate skills. I know schools tell you they are these days.
Residents are born in Georgia, but not in Atlanta. Even if someone is from Savannah and move to Atlanta, they are essentially a transplant to Atlanta or the metro area. I also think that this is a bloated number. Why?
It's probably only using Atlanta's urban core vs Seattle's urban core. People with an Atlanta address were likely to be born in GA. However the 5 million in Atlanta don't all have an Atlanta address. Atlanta population is only 400,000 people. Seattle has a larger urban core of 600,000. Seattle has a larger population than Atlanta's metro area.
These numbers change dramatically when you actually take into account the entire MSA though. They change quite significantly I'm sure. and also these statistics has to have a range od years. If we take 40 year statistics, Seattle would probably have higher transplants. If we take a 20 year period, Atlanta clearly has more.
Again, I can poke holes in numbers you give me all day. It's quite boring. Try to think for yourself. It's much more interesting hearing personal accounts of a city's culture than someone trying to prove 'facts' by throwing together statistics. Especially when there is guaranteed to be variation when you extend or reduce ranges.
I would say everywhere is similar in most ways, but there are a few major exceptions such as comparing New York City with a small rural village on an Indian Reservation in New Mexico, they feel like different worlds, a major modern city and a third world country.
I am certainly not going to slog through crime stats, etc for you. I simply don't know why you think PA isn't on par with the states to its north. New Hampshire is known for right-wing politics. Both it and VT have little manufacturing, etc. What's "quality of life" anyway? I'd bet the farm that housing prices are lower in PA than in any of the states to its north. Pittsburgh has some of the lowest housing prices in the country, and is consistently highly rated in "Places Rated" type guidebooks. Re: politics-Arlen Specter was one of the great US senators, also John Heinz.
Well, if you don't want to discuss comparative statistics, then expanding this discussion is sort of a lost cause.
But to answer your question: when I mention quality of life stats, I'm referring to those calculated in various categories related to physical and emotional health, behavior, personal life evaluations, etc. It's these categories, along with a few political categories, that demonstrate noticeable distinctions between PA and the surrounding Northern states (i.e. PA has the highest conservative advantage, the highest prevalence of pro-lifers, the most environmentally damanging business practices, the highest rate of obesity and diabetes, the second lowest rates of reported physical exercise, highest infant mortality, etc.).
Yet basically, there's no one state or region in this country that should be considered a single, monolithic entity in terms of its political psychology, voting behavior, cultural and political preferences, etc., which is what makes regional/state-level "nationalism" so ridiculous, if not extremely problematic for non-conforming populations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Pataki was quite controversial at the time of his first campaign. Here are some snippets about D'Amato:
Al D'Amato - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia D'Amato drew the nickname Senator Pothole for his delivery of "constituent services," helping citizens with their individual cases. While some New Yorkers meant the nickname as a pejorative, many others saw it as a positive affirmation of his attention to getting things done.
Senator D'Amato also holds the record for the second and seventh longest filibusters ever recorded in the United States Senate. He is remembered for his unique and rather comical filibusters. In 1986, a filibuster he conducted against a military bill lasted 23 hours, 30 minutes and he was known for reading the District of Columbia phone book during a filibuster.
Thank you for the sources, but surely we can both agree that none of this conjures images of Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann rambling off their warped, theocratic "visions" on national TV.
And allow me to correct the claim I made to tom77falcons about Rick Santorum's re-election in 2000: He did not beat his challenger by 3 million votes; rather, he won by 300,000 (which still put him ahead of his opponent by a comfortable 7% margin of vicotry. Disturbing, isn't it?).
Southern Louisiana has a very unique and special culture of its own.
Cajun culture influences everything down here and even the counties are renamed to parishes. Only state that does this. You will find nice trailer parks even in high income areas, because a lot of people work offshore and away from home a lot so they do not invest in a brick and mortar home. People from the cities do not look down on people from the country here because the two areas almost intermingle. You can have a small horse farm in the middle of town. There are a lot of things, big and small, that define this place and people have likened it to entering a different country in ways. Even the roads are laid out in uniquely terrible ways that only the Louisianians could come up with lol. Even the area is a sea of Catholics in the middle of the Baptist bible belt. You know when you are here and can mistake it for no other place in the US.
I am certainly not going to slog through crime stats, etc for you. I simply don't know why you think PA isn't on par with the states to its north. New Hampshire is known for right-wing politics. Both it and VT have little manufacturing, etc. What's "quality of life" anyway?
"On par" is partly a matter of opinion. Vermont and New Hampshire are small, mostly rural states, though New Hampshire has a few small cities. It's difficult to compare them to all of Pennsylvania; it's more equivalent to a part of Pennsylvania.
Quote:
Pataki was quite controversial at the time of his first campaign. Here are some snippets about D'Amato:
Al D'Amato - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[i]D'Amato drew the nickname Senator Pothole for his delivery of "constituent services," helping citizens with their individual cases. While some New Yorkers meant the nickname as a pejorative, many others saw it as a positive affirmation of his attention to getting things done.
Don't remember how controversial Pataki was, but he mostly governed as a moderate, excluding his attempts to instate the death penalty. Senator D'Amato, from Long Island, was a bit wacky and conservative, he wasn't that social conservative, he supported gays in the military in 1993. The difference is, while the rest of the Northeast has some conservatives, the type of vocal, social conservative similar to Santorum would not be elected in any other Northeastern state. And judging by how long Santorum lasted, would have trouble staying in Pennsylvania as well, but has a better chance there than elsewhere. The rural areas of PA look "redder" on average than in NY or other northeastern states, judging from maps I looked at.
Yes. You'd have to have had traveled around the country in the 1950s in order to understand how minimal the differences are now. I visited my 48th state in 1962, and compared to then, everything is the same now, wherever you go.
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.
