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.
Japan is a country that is homogeneous. Their citizens may be packed like sardines in a large city, but things run more smoothly there and people get along better because everyone is the same race, religion and nationality. They share common values and a common national identity.
Some years ago a Japanese official was censured in the American press for saying that homogeneous societies are superior to societies with a lot of diversity. At the time this remark was considered to be politically incorrect if not outright racist, but I see his point. Human beings are a tribal people. We prefer to associate with members of our own tribe and see outsiders as a threat. This tendency is not inherently a fault and has nothing to do with racism. It's just human nature.
I can pretty much guarantee you that, if 63 million more Californians were shoehorned into a state that now holds 37 million, you would not see anything like the social harmony that exists in Japan.
California pretends have social harmony now because they don't count what they don't want to acknowledge as a problem. So many of the good people have left, or are planning to, because of the crowded conditions and now the c-virus. Crime is out of control but the criminals have more rights than victims.
America was a better place to live when people actually respected the country and assimilated if they came here to escape real issues, not to get the American tax dollar. but all that has been discussed on many threads here.
Does anyone remember Dale Carneige, How to Win Friends and Influence Enemies?????
Does anyone remember Dale Carneige, How to Win Friends and Influence Enemies?????
Yes, but it was Dale Carnegie and the title was "How to Win Friends and Influence People." My father had a copy of that book, and I remember reading it as a teenager.
I have to take exception to the statement that "so many of the good people" are leaving California. I'm a "good people," and I'm not going anywhere. And I know a lot of others like myself who are happy here. The people who are leaving generally are those who feel CA is too crowded, those who can't afford the kind of house they want in the location they want, and/or people who are bothered by California politics and would be happier in a red state. Retirees may be looking to relocate in a small town with a friendlier vibe and less crime. Another factor may be that those who are leaving are seeking out communities that are mostly white. It's that tribalism thing again.
As for "pretending" to have social harmony, I've never heard that one before. We have the same problems that every other state has, though perhaps on a larger scale. Maybe you're thinking of San Francisco, where people do seem to be more tolerant of different races, nationalities and lifestyles. We have no choice but to be tolerant, because no one group is a majority.
Last edited by Bayarea4; 06-12-2020 at 09:45 PM..
Reason: clarity.
That's not as true as it used to be.
Women have half as many children as they did 50 years ago. The fertility rate (number of children per woman) is now at 2.5 world wide and only 1.7 in the US.
Since only women can bear children the fertility rate has to be 2 in order to provide a replacement population. The US population is reaching a peak, and will soon decline, just like the rest of the world.
What I meant was...in a world where the population has doubled (from post war to late 80s), that the world keeps producing more & more people, instead of the entire population cutting back on growth. Not the number of kids per family.
If 10 people have 10 kids each, that makes 110 people.
If those 110 people have 1 kid each, that's 220 people.
If those 110 people have 3 kids each, that's 440 people.
People had a lot of kids in older days because of a lack of birth control, needing help on the farm, cultural influence, religious beliefs (churches like members to have a lot of little members), tradition. In the even older days, some countries wanted a lot of births in order to populate the country.
There's going to be a shortage of water. I think there already is, actually. George W. Bush bought a huge area of land in nowhere, I read. The reason is that underneath that land is a huge reserve of water.
Earth lost half of its wildlife just in the last few decades, in no small part because of loss of habitat.
I can't imagine an earth without wildlife, nature reserves, untouched lands, etc.
Good point, bpollen. It should also be noted that despite a lower birth rate, the world population is still growing. This is due to improvements in health care. In the old days it was sadly common for children to die of diseases that would be easily be prevented or cured today, so more survive to adulthood and procreate themselves. The world population can still spiral out of control even with a declining birth rate.
[quote=bpollen;58368303]What I meant was...in a world where the population has doubled (from post war to late 80s), that the world keeps producing more & more people, instead of the entire population cutting back on growth. Not the number of kids per family.
If 10 people have 10 kids each, that makes 110 people.
If those 110 people have 1 kid each, that's 220 people.
If those 110 people have 3 kids each, that's 440 people.
[\quote]Opposite
You've got some people having 13 kids each due to counting them twice.
Response:
Born ,Raised ,Retired New Yorker. Do not be fooled. I have watched over population slowly erode my quality of life. I am very alert to my surroundings and you may have noticed during the lockdown how navigating the city roads and highways were reminiscent of the late 80's ad early 90's. For once in my life I felt no anxiety of driving. No pumping of brakes ,sudden stops, getting cut off,getting honked etc.... Total peace and relaxation.What took 1 hour back in March of 2020...to drive 7 miles was accomplished in 20 minutes. Once New york City entered Phase 1 the masses slowly trickled back onto to streets. Congestion, smell of pollution back in the air. Yup...Little Dolphin... you have heightened senses and are correct. Over population can be observed by all 5 and more human senses if you are only willing to accept them as truth... American cities are overpopulated. Rural areas are looking more palatable day by day...even if you must sacrifice living off the grid just to breathe.
Response:
Born ,Raised ,Retired New Yorker. Do not be fooled. I have watched over population slowly erode my quality of life. I am very alert to my surroundings and you may have noticed during the lockdown how navigating the city roads and highways were reminiscent of the late 80's ad early 90's. For once in my life I felt no anxiety of driving. No pumping of brakes ,sudden stops, getting cut off,getting honked etc.... Total peace and relaxation.What took 1 hour back in March of 2020...to drive 7 miles was accomplished in 20 minutes. Once New york City entered Phase 1 the masses slowly trickled back onto to streets. Congestion, smell of pollution back in the air. Yup...Little Dolphin... you have heightened senses and are correct. Over population can be observed by all 5 and more human senses if you are only willing to accept them as truth... American cities are overpopulated. Rural areas are looking more palatable day by day...even if you must sacrifice living off the grid just to breathe.
I'm the OP and I sure enjoyed reading your intelligent response.
After being a city person all my life (Philadelphia, San Francisco), my DH & I moved to a town with 5500 citizens--nearest city of size 2.5 hours away by car).
A big change. But a good one. I could feel my tension melt away. As a reader/writer/nature lover, my needs were small....simple. Trips to a city for museums, concerts were still doable with some travel/planning.
But even with few people, there were also few roads in our town as far as main arteries (no more 12-lane freeways as in CA)--and during summer tourist season (we live in a popular tourist destination) those few roads would become clogged with traffic. As would the quaint historic district with its limited parking...
But with Covid shut-down of our town (since re-opened), we enjoyed roads with scant traffic. It was fun to ride our bikes with little competition from cars--like being a kid again--back to the 50s! And it was gratifying to see so many real kids, family groups and all ages riding their bikes--or walking.
Uncrowded places have their charms...room to breath and grow. Not to mention air that's free from car fumes...
Our air here smells of good earth, jasmine, and honeysuckle. It's sweet.
California's population has grown from 18 million when I was in first grade to 40 million now.
Many government paid income streams are a ponzi scheme. They used to be pay-as-you-go from taxes, but there are such massive numbers of peolpe receiving government money, it is not possible to collect enough taxes to pay them.
The only solution is an ever-growing population, so the new tax payers constantly coming on board, can service the current costs of the ever-growing number of people receiving money from the government. A nation with well managed finances can get by with a constant population, but a mismanaged one needs a constant stream of new taxpayers.
Corporations and businesses like seeing a constantly increasing population. They get constantly increasing profits.
Where all this breaks down is, the constantly increasing population also consumes more energy and water, damages roads at an accelerated rate, and puts more demand on government services. In the end, this rat race results in a lower quality of life for all involved but the very rich who skim the cream off the top. I am not judging the rich here. I am just noting that they are the exception to the constantly declining quality of life among the rest of us.
Beyond that, life is much more stressful and less peaceful than when I was in first grade. There are just too many of us in too many popular locations. To avoid crowds, you have to live in places most people don't like or in places where the weather sucks.
California's population has grown from 18 million when I was in first grade to 40 million now.
Many government paid income streams are a ponzi scheme. They used to be pay-as-you-go from taxes, but there are such massive numbers of peolpe receiving government money, it is not possible to collect enough taxes to pay them.
The only solution is an ever-growing population, so the new tax payers constantly coming on board, can service the current costs of the ever-growing number of people receiving money from the government. A nation with well managed finances can get by with a constant population, but a mismanaged one needs a constant stream of new taxpayers.
Corporations and businesses like seeing a constantly increasing population. They get constantly increasing profits.
Where all this breaks down is, the constantly increasing population also consumes more energy and water, damages roads at an accelerated rate, and puts more demand on government services. In the end, this rat race results in a lower quality of life for all involved but the very rich who skim the cream off the top. I am not judging the rich here. I am just noting that they are the exception to the constantly declining quality of life among the rest of us.
Beyond that, life is much more stressful and less peaceful than when I was in first grade. There are just too many of us in too many popular locations. To avoid crowds, you have to live in places most people don't like or in places where the weather sucks.
I believe you've hit the proverbial nail on the head! The only exception I would quibble with is your last sentence....there are lovely places--both stateside and abroad that have a good quality of life and are not crowded. The challenge is finding a job-- if needed.
If retired, the options are more plentiful.
But, for the most part, it is quite challenging to have uncrowded, pretty surroundings, a terrific climate, AND a low cost of living--the holy grail that most retirees are seeking...if I spoke Italian, there are some less-visited hill towns of Italy that I would seek out in a heartbeat...
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.
And I know a lot of others like myself who are happy here. The people who are leaving generally are those who feel CA is too crowded, those who can't afford the kind of house they want in the location they want, and/or people who are bothered by California politics and would be happier in a red state. Retirees may be looking to relocate in a small town with a friendlier vibe and less crime. Another factor may be that those who are leaving are seeking out communities that are mostly white. It's that tribalism thing again.
