5 ms·

It's funny, I'm pretty open minded and have spent time pretty much every where, with a base of operations in both the bay area and rural Midwest. I'll have to

It's funny, I'm pretty open minded and have spent time pretty much every where, with a base of operations in both the bay area and rural Midwest. I'll have to be honest with you. The super conservatives in the Midwest and the super liberals in the bay have a lot more in common than you might think. Hell just the other day I was listening to a group of women with their dogs discussing murdering Trump because we don't need any more of that "white man privilege". This isn't that different than some white dudes discussing killing Obama because he's a "black terrorist" or something. My point is that we all need to live and let live. Anyone who is generalizing whole portions of the population are bound to run into the "long tail" of people out of the probabilistic norm. I actually think as a society people mostly fall out of the norm. All that being said, I do have to say - the rudest people I've meet are from (1) D.C. (2) S.F. and (3) downtown Chicago. The nicest have actually been in the suburbs of Chicago, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Virginia (outside of D.C.)

r00fus 10y ago
There's outward niceness and human decency and then there're things like public policy. Take for example schooling or policing. You can't tell me St. Louis has the same level of dysfunction as SF. Conservative states are more likely to disadvantage the poor, disabled and minorities. There's also more likely to be localized corruption. And that's not even taking into account culture and diversity which matter if you're a relatively new immigrant.
- Hydraulix989 10y ago
  I would consider gentrification a form of economic segregation; as a consequence, the poor here are also disadvantaged but in very different ways.
- lettergram 10y ago
  I somewhat disagree here. Have you seen the homeless problem in SF, or the massive drug problem? Look, my point is that just because people have differing views on life doesn't mean that they aren't equally capable of being correct. > Conservative states are more likely to disadvantage the poor, disabled and minorities. I would argue that is not necessarily the case. I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. Perhaps they are just more visible, but the breakdown of the stats seem to agree with me[1]. Generally, conservative states just deal with things differently than liberal states, they both end up with their own issues. Disclosure: Personally I a libertarian at heart. I believe in the whole "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" thing, basically meaning I fall more in line with the "middle" than just about anyone. I find the bay area equally as appalling as most conservative regions, I think the only thing I find more appalling about conservative places are the whole anti-abortion thing. Honestly, racism and sexism is probably worse in the bay area than most places because everyone is trying to be so "equal" they end up being racist and sexist against the other parties. This leads to ridiculous conflicts that make no sense. [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/america-drug-use-maps_n_5974592.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/america-drug-use-ma...
  - klipt 10y ago
    > I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. Perhaps they are just more visible, but the breakdown of the stats seem to agree with me[1]. Generally, conservative states just deal with things differently than liberal states For example, if other states' way of dealing with homeless people was "buy them a bus ticket to California", wouldn't that have exactly the outcome you are describing? http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-were-given-bus-pass-california-by-nevada-government-program/210607/ http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-we... The problem with one state treating the homeless well is that it simply attracts more homeless from other states, overloading the system. Homelessness really needs to be addressed on a federal level.
    - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
      But if you actually follow the news in the Bay Area, you'd know tech companies growing and raising the cost and demand for housing is a large part of why you can't walk through San Francisco without tripping over a homeless guy. People are being driven from their apartments to make room for higher paying tech employees.
      - Decade 10y ago
        And if you actually looked into the issues, you’d know that tech companies don’t like it that costs are so high. Most of them are trying to become profitable before they run out of runway. Tech companies grow and raise the demand: True. Tech companies increase the cost: False. Most of the cost increases have been NIMBYs and misguided community organizers and environmentalists. For example, a major source of funding against homes near the T light rail line has been a retired insurance industry executive and consultant. That’s not tech. If there are not enough houses near the jobs, then somebody is going to be driven out. If you had to choose for your own property, then it would be irrational not to pick the higher paying tech employee.
      - r00fus 10y ago
        Don't blame Tech for what FIRE [1] is mainly responsible for. Ownership^W Rentership society and all that - it's here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy
- mooman219 10y ago
  "There's also more likely to be localized corruption" [Citation required] If anything I've found corruption is much higher around more liberal states.
- dropit_sphere 10y ago
  >There's outward niceness and human decency and then there're things like public policy. We need more of the former and less of the latter.
CydeWeys 10y ago
I've never lived in the Bay Area, and having been there a few times, it doesn't seem like the place for me. I think you are making a false equivalence. As someone who is rather liberal, but not "super liberal", maybe San Francisco isn't the best fit, but it's still way better than a super-conservative, super-religious southern city. And I don't value superficial niceness very highly; sure, they may be polite when I interact with them in public, but then they're also super racist, support decades-long prison sentences for drug offenders, and wish terrible things upon LGBT people. I know someone who lives in suburban Charlotte. She is actively discriminated against at work because she doesn't attend a church. I have no interest in submitting myself to that kind of judgment, and fortunately, because I don't live in the south, I don't have to.
- lettergram 10y ago
  If you're a white male in the Bay Area you're discriminated against as well. I can't tell you how careful you have to be trying to get work done with many of the people there. I've have/had to sit through at least 20 different talks/seminars a year on how women are discriminated against and it's the white males fault. Last year, I worked with a team of 3 women, and myself (the only male). I was put in charge (by my women director), to help train the team on web development. OH BOY that was a big TODO, regardless of the fact I have years more experience and have managed teams before... Eventually, I just quit the team because one of the women was so insufferable and would basically refuse to do any work until a women was put in charge. Point is, you're right, there are different flavors to each group. All of them are wrong though. They all discriminate just to different extremes. That's part of the reason I really enjoyed the Chicago Suburbs, they have a decent mix of both so both extreme groups become more moderate.

r00fus 10y ago

There's outward niceness and human decency and then there're things like public policy. Take for example schooling or policing. You can't tell me St. Louis has the same level of dysfunction as SF. Conservative states are more likely to disadvantage the poor, disabled and minorities. There's also more likely to be localized corruption. And that's not even taking into account culture and diversity which matter if you're a relatively new immigrant.

Hydraulix989 10y ago
I would consider gentrification a form of economic segregation; as a consequence, the poor here are also disadvantaged but in very different ways.
lettergram 10y ago
I somewhat disagree here. Have you seen the homeless problem in SF, or the massive drug problem? Look, my point is that just because people have differing views on life doesn't mean that they aren't equally capable of being correct. > Conservative states are more likely to disadvantage the poor, disabled and minorities. I would argue that is not necessarily the case. I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. Perhaps they are just more visible, but the breakdown of the stats seem to agree with me[1]. Generally, conservative states just deal with things differently than liberal states, they both end up with their own issues. Disclosure: Personally I a libertarian at heart. I believe in the whole "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" thing, basically meaning I fall more in line with the "middle" than just about anyone. I find the bay area equally as appalling as most conservative regions, I think the only thing I find more appalling about conservative places are the whole anti-abortion thing. Honestly, racism and sexism is probably worse in the bay area than most places because everyone is trying to be so "equal" they end up being racist and sexist against the other parties. This leads to ridiculous conflicts that make no sense. [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/america-drug-use-maps_n_5974592.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/22/america-drug-use-ma...
- klipt 10y ago
  > I have seen WAY more homeless, poor, disabled, and generally disadvantaged in California (and heroin users) than any other state. Perhaps they are just more visible, but the breakdown of the stats seem to agree with me[1]. Generally, conservative states just deal with things differently than liberal states For example, if other states' way of dealing with homeless people was "buy them a bus ticket to California", wouldn't that have exactly the outcome you are describing? http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-were-given-bus-pass-california-by-nevada-government-program/210607/ http://www.mintpressnews.com/500-homeless-mental-patients-we... The problem with one state treating the homeless well is that it simply attracts more homeless from other states, overloading the system. Homelessness really needs to be addressed on a federal level.
  - ocdtrekkie 10y ago
    But if you actually follow the news in the Bay Area, you'd know tech companies growing and raising the cost and demand for housing is a large part of why you can't walk through San Francisco without tripping over a homeless guy. People are being driven from their apartments to make room for higher paying tech employees.
    - Decade 10y ago
      And if you actually looked into the issues, you’d know that tech companies don’t like it that costs are so high. Most of them are trying to become profitable before they run out of runway. Tech companies grow and raise the demand: True. Tech companies increase the cost: False. Most of the cost increases have been NIMBYs and misguided community organizers and environmentalists. For example, a major source of funding against homes near the T light rail line has been a retired insurance industry executive and consultant. That’s not tech. If there are not enough houses near the jobs, then somebody is going to be driven out. If you had to choose for your own property, then it would be irrational not to pick the higher paying tech employee.
    - r00fus 10y ago
      Don't blame Tech for what FIRE [1] is mainly responsible for. Ownership^W Rentership society and all that - it's here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIRE_economy
mooman219 10y ago
"There's also more likely to be localized corruption" [Citation required] If anything I've found corruption is much higher around more liberal states.
dropit_sphere 10y ago
>There's outward niceness and human decency and then there're things like public policy. We need more of the former and less of the latter.

CydeWeys 10y ago

I've never lived in the Bay Area, and having been there a few times, it doesn't seem like the place for me. I think you are making a false equivalence. As someone who is rather liberal, but not "super liberal", maybe San Francisco isn't the best fit, but it's still way better than a super-conservative, super-religious southern city. And I don't value superficial niceness very highly; sure, they may be polite when I interact with them in public, but then they're also super racist, support decades-long prison sentences for drug offenders, and wish terrible things upon LGBT people. I know someone who lives in suburban Charlotte. She is actively discriminated against at work because she doesn't attend a church. I have no interest in submitting myself to that kind of judgment, and fortunately, because I don't live in the south, I don't have to.

lettergram 10y ago
If you're a white male in the Bay Area you're discriminated against as well. I can't tell you how careful you have to be trying to get work done with many of the people there. I've have/had to sit through at least 20 different talks/seminars a year on how women are discriminated against and it's the white males fault. Last year, I worked with a team of 3 women, and myself (the only male). I was put in charge (by my women director), to help train the team on web development. OH BOY that was a big TODO, regardless of the fact I have years more experience and have managed teams before... Eventually, I just quit the team because one of the women was so insufferable and would basically refuse to do any work until a women was put in charge. Point is, you're right, there are different flavors to each group. All of them are wrong though. They all discriminate just to different extremes. That's part of the reason I really enjoyed the Chicago Suburbs, they have a decent mix of both so both extreme groups become more moderate.