bostonbubble.com

[Markey]

<<It's not all about Bible thumpers or Lynyrd Skynyrd. A number of Mass residents have re-located to the Texas Triangle, w/o having to become a redneck to fit in.

It's just that our version of the countryside, like the Green Mts vs the rural Southwest, is very different and so we need to live closer to locales like Santa Fe, Austin, Atlanta, Memphis, or Houston whereas in New England, we can pretty much slide in & about anywhere.>>

Well, I do have family who are Ph.D.'s from places like Stanford and Princeton (I know it sounds like obnoxious to say that - I would never get into either of these places myself, I assure you!) and they are professors in the computer science and engineering and sociology and they are in good universities in the mid atlantic and the real "south" but neither are the type to seem to mind being in states where, once you leave the vicinity, you are going to be around people who oppose teaching evolution, etc.! I would mind that very much! I want to be in a state where science literacy is taken seriously statewide, not just in a triangle or small area. Even Durham, NC, for example: Look at the political views of the average NC person. Do I want to live in a state where they can't pass legislation that is progressive for humans and animals? No, I do not. (Not only that: I abhor the heat and would much rather live where we have snow storms than oppressive heat. But that's another topic.)

But, if I were a parent of a young family, I can well understand how the attraction of good high tech jobs and affordable housing would make one want to move to, say, Durham, or Atlanta. In fact, I do have one friend whose husband moved to Charlotte, NC due to his career in bioengineering and they were able to send their kid to Williams College, so they did seem to have a successful life there. Nevertheless, the wife still misses NE very dearly, I was told by her mother. Like I said, it would kill me to move out of a progressive state to what I consider to be a backwards one, at least in some areas (oh oh, I had better watch what I say! <g>)

[Boston ITer]

[Markey]

[Boston ITer]

[Markey]

[john p]

The question for some of you is "What are these Immune Towns immune from?"

What motivates people is fear. If you have the resources to find your own sanctuary, who cares about anyone else right? This is what most people mean about "Immune Towns".

Kids who have to fight in Wars typically don't come from "Immune Towns". The poor get hurt worst when the Economy tanks. The rich get bailed out, they can refinance and buy distressed concerns. What people think about is how can I get immunity from this injustice instead of trying to fix the corruption. It is how can I be a winner and fuck the losers.

Massachusetts used to be more of a place where people cared about each other. Liberals, once they get money, move out of the poor towns and live in their own delusional bubbles.

The Housing Bubble is a manifestation of a corrupt central banking and financial system coupled with an irresponsible and ignorant population.

I've been looking at this for a long time. The deeper and deeper you look the more you realize how the ultra powerful have controlled our Economy since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. We have had a constant state of War since the CIA was put in place in 1947. The CIA has been caught selling drugs, selling weapons to Enemies who have taken our fellow citizens hostage (Iran Contra), murdered democratically elected leaders across the Globe and are above the Law. The CIA are immune from any Law; they can at any time say that they are acting under cover participating in illegal activity for "Issues National Security". Talk about Immunity. Their drive for immunity is the same thing, it is based on fear and a desire to see power and prey on others to keep you from being one of the prey.

The powerful have been and will always be looking for power and immunity from the same rules and forces that act upon everyone else.

All the greatness that is Massachusetts came from courageous and daring men and women who cared about their fellow man, and they made the world a better place. Today, I see more and more shallow yuppies who care less about the less fortunate.

All that I can say is maybe you might have a cousin who comes from a poor family that might join the Military and have to fight in some 3rd World Nation so that some MultiNational Corporation can exploit their labor force or Natural Resources. While you are living in your "Immune Town" and have your head in the sand, maybe you find out that your cousin gets killed. I'm saying that you won't be immune from the pain you will feel from betraying him or her for not using your God given gifts to change a handful of Laws that put a dangerous amount of power to a small group of people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw

[Markey]

To John P,
I loved your post and the You Tube piece, too (never go to the movies so it's new for me).

Is it just Massachusetts that is no longer the same? Isn't it the U.S.A.? Don't people feel insecure and so they run to these save haven towns? (I am not in the income category, and have never been since I turned 21 many decades ago, of the so-called "yuppies" you describe although I sent myself to graduate school and am therefore supposedly "well educated", but am barely middle class in terms of income and equity. Not that I am complaining. I followed a field of work that never pays well. I have lived in Dorchester, not a "sanctuary" place, and rented all around metro Boston.

Is it that many of the "yuppies" you complain about are not originally from Massachusetts and are therefore more right wing than most natives?

But you say this, and I disagree with you: "Liberals, once they get money, move out of the poor towns and live in their own delusional bubbles." That's a strange contention. Liberals? Not centrists or conservatives? Only liberals? And, I have to ask you this: Who in their right mind would stay in a poor area if they can't feel safe or raise their kids to feel safe, let alone go to decent schools? Did you raise your kids in a poor neighborhood or are you just blabbing?

There is nothing wrong with wanting to move out of a poor area. This is normal, not something to be criticized. And not everyone is as you say, only concerned about ME.

[john p]

Markey: I do think that Liberals, Conservatives and Moderates all tend to bail out of poorer areas if they gain the means to do so. It is just that Liberals are the most hypocritical in this regard because their values are supposedly to help the poor.

Think about what happens when this entire process takes place, think Meso Level Picture here (regional metropolitan centric view).

If everyone who made a bit of money left the poorer towns around the City or the poorer areas of the City to more affluent areas two things happen, the poorer areas nosedive in value and the rich areas skyrocket. So what happens? Rich people overpay and nobody wants to invest and repair a home in an area where they will not get their money back so the poorer areas deteriorate.

Now, add the Liberal mindset where you get a mix of the powerful coming from either these ultra rich towns where money is no object and poorer towns that are dependent on Big Government Spending or in this State "State Aid". In many of the poorer towns and cities, to run their Budgets they need approx. 60% plus in State Aid. These poorer towns and cities need to elect big government bring home the bacon liberals because they don't have nearly enough money to pay their bills. Now if all the people who grow up in these towns who are capable, intelligent, and hard working leave that town and the less fortunate of other more affluent communities move to poorer towns, you get concentrations. When these polar opposites get together on Beacon Hill, the yuppie elite says "Gee, wouldn't it be nice to let every kid have an Ipad and shouldn't all the janitors be able to get PhD's after they retire at age 45? Let's expand benefits and pass down Mandates to the 350 Cities and Towns and let them pay for what we think is mandatory. I live in one of those towns that is working class, yet does not rely that much on State Aid (given our income level).

This is Massachusetts:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9JTYnMpRyg

The part at minute 3:20 is what I am talking about

[Markey]

I'm sorry - you wrote about so many topics and sub-topics that I would have to spend more time than I have to reply to each of your points in your very long, complex post.

[mpr]

[john p]

Hi MPR:

No, I haven't read David Graber, but I checked him out after reading your post and now plan to read his recent book Debt: The First Five Thousand Years.

I guess my consistency is in Social Populism. I don't like hero worship because I think power corrupts, so I never liked seeing everyone worshiping Barack Obama because once people think some "Elite" is going to be this Knight in Shining Armor that is going to fight all their battles so they can put their heads in the sand and go to sleep, is not a good thing.

I get that Obama didn't himself feed into this as much as his opponents claim, but the Obama effect is sort of a Bubble of sorts, it is when people want to believe so badly in something that isn't real so they can feel safer and have an excuse to again, go back to the mental womb of security.

I will have to hold my nose and vote for Obama over Romney because I think Romney will just let the CIA run wild.

Isn't it interesting that the "Powerful" hated JFK, yet the "People" loved him. I think the cohesion that you're mentioning is sort of an understanding that united we stand, divided we fall. I'd like to think that Government is a way that was intended to facilitate this cohesion, but unless individuals do their individual share of research, our form of representative government will always serve the wealthy who have the advertisment dollars.

My philosphy now is:

Politics is the method to manipulate the majority of people who either have limited capacity in critical thinking or limited interest.

Once you master politics you can get power. Authority is what you have, Power is what you take. If you can fill and control the authority structure through politics, you can then take whatever you want because nobody is going to stop you. "National Security" has been the great white wash of crime and the CIA has been this awful private military of the powerful elite who are above our laws.

All these bubbles and busts are really the powerful elite pulling our pricks around and until we get rid of the rules that let them use "National Security" as cover, our kids, and their kids will have the wool pulled over their eyes as well.

[admin]

Please don't let me derail the current discussion, I just wanted to post some stats that were just released that are directly pertinent to the original poster's (Talia/John F.) assertions about Arlington. Here are The Warren Group's just released median home prices by town:

https://bankerandtradesman.esecuretransactions.com/files/twgstats/march_2012_mass._home_sales_by_town.pdf

Note Arlington. The median sale price in Arlington was down 16% year over year in nominal terms (18% in real terms). Furthermore, the median was also below all of the prior years listed in your Boston Magazine link even in purely nominal terms. (While that's affected by seasonality, the 18% YOY drop isn't.)

I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this for many reasons. My point is one that I didn't mention earlier - the median sale price for Arlington and probably most individual towns is a lot more volatile than for the greater metro area. Consequently, it's not particularly useful to just compare two medians in isolation. That applies to comparing the March 2012 median to March 2011 as well as to comparing the 2006 median to 2011.

- admin

[john p]

I really agree with is point on minute 10:50.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01zb3SOFzBw

David Graeber is a pretty interesting cat.