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.
Actually, I found them to be quite civil. I didn't find that anyone got angry with me, like here.
And I did push them about their attitudes because I already know what they are, given that I live in New England, know a fair bit about VT already, and have been there several times in the last couple months alone. Moreover, VT's hunting is very much on the decline. It's been falling out of favor for some time in society in general, but especially in places like VT.
MQT is a huge mystery to me because I haven't spent much time there. With VT, I already know a ton of factual information about it, and they're crystal clear about their short and long term plans, and I've even gone to a state-run recruitment junket that they run all over the place, all year long, in order to recruit people to move there. Basically, the one thing that I can't tell about VT from afar is how socialization works in such a largely empty area, filled with native New Englanders who tend to be pretty standoffish. It's kind of the opposite of MQT where socialization seemed easy and inevitable due to the openness of the people there, but everything else about the place is a mystery.
I think part of the reaction is due to our strong feelings of community and neighborliness. You have been direct and unfaltering in your criticism of a large portion of our residents up here. You are calling people immoral and backward, and that's really not very neighborly. You seem to think that just because you hold the moral high ground (which I would dispute, BTW) you can say really nasty things and not have to serve a consequence. Ultimately, my question is this: if you relocate to Marquette, do you want to be a good neighbor? Do you want to become a part of the community? Because those neighbors, that community, may have what you appear to deem as unsavory characters. It's like a single-issue voter--does this one thing allow you to determine that a group of people is not worth engaging or treating with respect? Because hunting doesn't follow political lines. Gun possession does not follow political lines. Environmentalism doesn't follow political lines. Not up here, anyway. Sure, there are some broad generalizations that can be made, but the nuances are important enough that the way you are talking about us is patronizing and unwelcome. Again, nobody will force anyone to hunt, nobody cares if a neighbor doesn't hunt. But our live & let live attitude does require a bit of respect that I'm not sure you're willing to give.
Hunting numbers have been on the decline, I don't dispute that. It's not just because of a great awakening, though. Shifts in lifestyle are a biggie. People moving away is another. We don't tend to see the same families hunting the same land generation after generation. But we still will be seeing stories about 8-yo girls getting trophy bucks on the evening news & on the front page of the newspaper. It bothers a lot of people. And that's okay--I think diversity of thought is important. But, even my most intensely passionate animal rights friend doesn't find me morally deficient. Nor do I find her overly judgemental. You scoff at my statement that hunters can be good conservationists, but I find it true. Not all. Some people are jackazzes whether they hunt or not. Participation in hunting doesn't make a person morally bankrupt. If you cannot accept that, I fear you will not enjoy your experience here, and we will not enjoy your presence.
I will again suggest you check out the Lake Superior Community Partnership (LSCP) and Innovate Marquette. Innovate is in a partnership with @Invent at NMU, and there may be some good information there. You can find more about NMU's Educational Access Network efforts (which are bringing requests from some lower peninsula communities now) to give the furthest reaches of the UP internet access. You can also check out Marquette Economic Club to see where some heads are looking. Marquette Chamber of Commerce is not as active as the LSCP, but their recent big project is Ampersand CoWorking, which could give you some insight into who we are.
The biggest recent news in the business arena is that our beloved food truck Dia de los Tacos is closing up at the end of summer. Not because they business can't make it, but because the owner is tired of being cold in the truck all winter long. We are a community of small businesses.
I think the area is very much a "work to live" rather than a "live to work." We all accept smaller salaries than we'd get elsewhere because we want to live here. I want to live here. And I want others to love this place like I do. But sometimes that means accepting warts & all. Ultimately, you need to decide if you can stand living and perhaps working alongside people who live an entirely different life than you. If you get a job, will you have a coworker that takes every Nov. 15 off? How will you feel covering for those hours? When you pull up to the gas station, what will you do when someone pulls next to you with a dead 8 point in the bed of her truck? When you go to a friend's house for dinner, how will you react to the trophy musky on the wall? These are things that are here. You made a statement about history & tradition. Consider that up until just a few years ago, Marquette had the only Finnish language television show in the US. And it had a lot of followers. The host retired & died--and it was a real shock to our system. History and traditions are important up here. Please don't discount their importance. We are moving forward, but we always have our hearts in our past.
So, if I have seemed angry or upset, it's because I have been. I'm sorry. But you have made some statements that I find insulting, and I feel like you know that. Does it bother you that I'm insulted over something you deem beyond reasonable ethical behavior. I am a person of strong ethics. I am compassionate. I do appreciate the beauty of nature, both flora and fauna. I am also educated and, if I may say so, reasonably intelligent. Then you come along and dispute ALL of that, seeming to dismiss me as morally corrupt. Did you mean that? I honestly can't tell--if I'm wrong, please tell me.
To Farrelli: Nope, now that I've read all your comments, I've changed my vote from VT to MT. You belong in Missoula - it's perfect for you and your family. Wide open spaces, plenty of people just like you. After all the majority of those that live there think they are the center of the universe. Just like you!
I think you could benefit from doing some real research. Visit Marquette in January or February and go to the Wooden Nickel. Tell the locals about your alien hunting analogy and you should have your answer pretty quickly.
Another great idea would be to visit during deer hunting season and make posters and tell everyone how you think hunting is morally wrong and equal to rape.
By the way, it’s not the fact that you don’t hunt, it’s your attitude toward others who choose to do so. It is a huge part of life in the UP. When my husband lived there school actually shut down for a few days for deer hunting season.
I'm sure if I jumped into a time machine and talked to people about my views on slavery 150 years ago, or women's rights 70 years ago, or civil/black rights 60 years ago, or gay rights 30 years ago, I would have gotten the same reaction. I would have ended up ostracized or even lynched. That doesn't make those people right, it makes them even more immoral and even more idiotic. The fact that you can't see that? That says a lot.
In 50 years, people won't be eating meat. Our grandchildren will look on us the same way we look back on the people who engaged in the things listed above. There were always people who opposed slavery, supported women's rights, supported gay rights, etc. but they were always marginalized and mocked, even beaten and killed. That hardly made them wrong. Christ, Da Vinci was a vegetarian, the smartest guy in 1000 years, and got crap for it. And he was hardly the first. Plato was too, and he's the foundation of modern Western culture. he got crap too. History is FILLED with super smart, super ethical people, and they got crap for all manner of things which are opposed by the masses until the last possible moment of even minuscule justification.
The King family, for example, are vegan because they see the obvious correlation between the objectification of blacks (and the consequent horror show that ensued) and the objectification of non-human animals. They get crap from their followers who want to talk about inalienable rights, but not really think about it, and hit up Popeyes Chicken on the way home from a march about how oppressed and exploited they are. Psychology will tell you that once you inure yourself to the suffering of one class of beings, you inure yourself to all. The only real question about your actions is if you are causing harm to conscious beings. If you are doing that and chose to continue to do so, even if it's not convenient to stop, you're a horrible person. Full stop.
I think part of the reaction is due to our strong feelings of community and neighborliness. You have been direct and unfaltering in your criticism of a large portion of our residents up here. You are calling people immoral and backward, and that's really not very neighborly. You seem to think that just because you hold the moral high ground (which I would dispute, BTW) you can say really nasty things and not have to serve a consequence. Ultimately, my question is this: if you relocate to Marquette, do you want to be a good neighbor? Do you want to become a part of the community? Because those neighbors, that community, may have what you appear to deem as unsavory characters. It's like a single-issue voter--does this one thing allow you to determine that a group of people is not worth engaging or treating with respect? Because hunting doesn't follow political lines. Gun possession does not follow political lines. Environmentalism doesn't follow political lines. Not up here, anyway. Sure, there are some broad generalizations that can be made, but the nuances are important enough that the way you are talking about us is patronizing and unwelcome. Again, nobody will force anyone to hunt, nobody cares if a neighbor doesn't hunt. But our live & let live attitude does require a bit of respect that I'm not sure you're willing to give.
I genuinely appreciate your civil and thoughtful response. I have very little time now but I'll address the thing I think to be most important, because it's not about me. The above response covers most of it, but being neighborly and nice about HUGE, OBVIOUS moral wrongs is not acceptable. People in the South who opposed slavery but kept quiet about it were useless and complicit. The wrongs of slavery were self evident to anyone with a brain, but people got rich from it or were at least able to make a living by it - or at the very least, remained quiet so that they themselves weren't targeted. The wrongs of Nazi Germany were self evident to anyone with a brain, but people went along to get along. I could go though the history of wrongdoing, both gross and subtle, and paint the same picture. This is not abortion where there are all manner of questions about when life begins, when sentient life begins, or even about when a nervous system is developed enough to feel pain. The evidence is in. Those beings who fall victim to hunting, either directly or indirectly, feel pain. Those beings feel fear. Those beings grieve the loss of a family member, mate, or loved one (most species). This is not some ivory tower hypothetical. The people who hunt almost always do it because the practice satisfies a need to fit in, a need for a feeling of superiority, or a need to feels some sort of accomplishment. It's all selfish glorification. That's sick when you consider the cost. And even of those who hunt for subsistence? If we dial back the clock to the people who kept slaves even in a time when it wasn't acceptable or illegal just because they couldn't figure out another way to make ends meet? Was that OK? Or were their problems their own and not something that they should have felt OK about foisting onto other feeling, sentient beings?
Living with people who disagree about things that are debatable? That's easy for me. Christ, I have a degree in philosophy. Disagreement is my bag. I genuinely love to be proven wrong because the truth I learn from it is SO worth the embarrassment (but the embarrassment is harsh, so I do a ton of homework before I pull something out to the floor). But without getting into a discussion of logic, epistemology, a priori, or a posteriori evidence, there are things which clearly line up behind the defense of reason, things which also line up behind the line of morals, and on those things, if you don't battle hard and with all evidence brought to the fore, you're less than useless and life would have probably been better off without you.
I think part of the reaction is due to our strong feelings of community and neighborliness. You have been direct and unfaltering in your criticism of a large portion of our residents up here. You are calling people immoral and backward, and that's really not very neighborly. You seem to think that just because you hold the moral high ground (which I would dispute, BTW) you can say really nasty things and not have to serve a consequence. Ultimately, my question is this: if you relocate to Marquette, do you want to be a good neighbor? Do you want to become a part of the community? Because those neighbors, that community, may have what you appear to deem as unsavory characters. It's like a single-issue voter--does this one thing allow you to determine that a group of people is not worth engaging or treating with respect? Because hunting doesn't follow political lines. Gun possession does not follow political lines. Environmentalism doesn't follow political lines. Not up here, anyway. Sure, there are some broad generalizations that can be made, but the nuances are important enough that the way you are talking about us is patronizing and unwelcome. Again, nobody will force anyone to hunt, nobody cares if a neighbor doesn't hunt. But our live & let live attitude does require a bit of respect that I'm not sure you're willing to give.
Hunting numbers have been on the decline, I don't dispute that. It's not just because of a great awakening, though. Shifts in lifestyle are a biggie. People moving away is another. We don't tend to see the same families hunting the same land generation after generation. But we still will be seeing stories about 8-yo girls getting trophy bucks on the evening news & on the front page of the newspaper. It bothers a lot of people. And that's okay--I think diversity of thought is important. But, even my most intensely passionate animal rights friend doesn't find me morally deficient. Nor do I find her overly judgemental. You scoff at my statement that hunters can be good conservationists, but I find it true. Not all. Some people are jackazzes whether they hunt or not. Participation in hunting doesn't make a person morally bankrupt. If you cannot accept that, I fear you will not enjoy your experience here, and we will not enjoy your presence.
I will again suggest you check out the Lake Superior Community Partnership (LSCP) and Innovate Marquette. Innovate is in a partnership with @Invent at NMU, and there may be some good information there. You can find more about NMU's Educational Access Network efforts (which are bringing requests from some lower peninsula communities now) to give the furthest reaches of the UP internet access. You can also check out Marquette Economic Club to see where some heads are looking. Marquette Chamber of Commerce is not as active as the LSCP, but their recent big project is Ampersand CoWorking, which could give you some insight into who we are.
The biggest recent news in the business arena is that our beloved food truck Dia de los Tacos is closing up at the end of summer. Not because they business can't make it, but because the owner is tired of being cold in the truck all winter long. We are a community of small businesses.
I think the area is very much a "work to live" rather than a "live to work." We all accept smaller salaries than we'd get elsewhere because we want to live here. I want to live here. And I want others to love this place like I do. But sometimes that means accepting warts & all. Ultimately, you need to decide if you can stand living and perhaps working alongside people who live an entirely different life than you. If you get a job, will you have a coworker that takes every Nov. 15 off? How will you feel covering for those hours? When you pull up to the gas station, what will you do when someone pulls next to you with a dead 8 point in the bed of her truck? When you go to a friend's house for dinner, how will you react to the trophy musky on the wall? These are things that are here. You made a statement about history & tradition. Consider that up until just a few years ago, Marquette had the only Finnish language television show in the US. And it had a lot of followers. The host retired & died--and it was a real shock to our system. History and traditions are important up here. Please don't discount their importance. We are moving forward, but we always have our hearts in our past.
So, if I have seemed angry or upset, it's because I have been. I'm sorry. But you have made some statements that I find insulting, and I feel like you know that. Does it bother you that I'm insulted over something you deem beyond reasonable ethical behavior. I am a person of strong ethics. I am compassionate. I do appreciate the beauty of nature, both flora and fauna. I am also educated and, if I may say so, reasonably intelligent. Then you come along and dispute ALL of that, seeming to dismiss me as morally corrupt. Did you mean that? I honestly can't tell--if I'm wrong, please tell me.
Btw, gun ownership is another think we can talk about all day but isn's as cut and dried as hunting. If I move to the UP, I have a good chance of owning a gun for various reasons, some of them to potentially kill predators. My thoughts about all this are quite complex. But in terms of the 2nd amendment, my thoughts are pretty clear. If we're to go by the thoughts of the founding fathers, even ignoring the development level of weaponry pst their very rudimentary understanding, the current ruling on the 2nd amendment ignores literally 2/3 of the wording, ignoring totally the obvious emphasis of a "well regulated militia". Literally, 2/3 of the language defining the right to bear arms in this country is ignored. If that's not food for debate, I don't know what is.
But about climate change, that's also a moral wrong because the cost is so evident. I work at Harvard and on cross projects with MIT. EVERYONE has their hair on fire about this. The smartest people in the world are on the edge of their seats about whether we will make decisions in the next 5 or so years about whether we will survive in anything like the society we know today. And yet, this is hypothetical to people who don't understand science. They don't understand positively or negatively reinforcing feedback loops. It's really a failure of our educational systems.
One of the most repeated criticisms of the predictions of today is that, in the 70's, "some scientists" (it was really based on ONE published article) predicted a new ice age. Well, that was back in the day when there was virtually no collected evidence. More to the point, climate change predictions are basically fluid dynamics equations, and if you're not sure what that is, it's nearly the most complex mathematical models you can run. Even today, the computing power needed to run complex global models is almost at the edge of our computing power, and the computing power of the computer in your pocket (your phone) is over a million times more powerful than the super computers available at the time of the "ice age" predictions in the 70's. (I actually used to make part of my living setting up a supercomputer to do fluid dynamics calculations - though not for climate change, mostly for infrastructure calculations).
If you know that the fuse has been lit, if you don't caution people about it, and the fact that they have the chance to at least mitigate the blast to their home, I would argue that you are a useless piece of ****.
I think part of the reaction is due to our strong feelings of community and neighborliness. You have been direct and unfaltering in your criticism of a large portion of our residents up here. You are calling people immoral and backward, and that's really not very neighborly. You seem to think that just because you hold the moral high ground (which I would dispute, BTW) you can say really nasty things and not have to serve a consequence. Ultimately, my question is this: if you relocate to Marquette, do you want to be a good neighbor? Do you want to become a part of the community? Because those neighbors, that community, may have what you appear to deem as unsavory characters. It's like a single-issue voter--does this one thing allow you to determine that a group of people is not worth engaging or treating with respect? Because hunting doesn't follow political lines. Gun possession does not follow political lines. Environmentalism doesn't follow political lines. Not up here, anyway. Sure, there are some broad generalizations that can be made, but the nuances are important enough that the way you are talking about us is patronizing and unwelcome. Again, nobody will force anyone to hunt, nobody cares if a neighbor doesn't hunt. But our live & let live attitude does require a bit of respect that I'm not sure you're willing to give.
Hunting numbers have been on the decline, I don't dispute that. It's not just because of a great awakening, though. Shifts in lifestyle are a biggie. People moving away is another. We don't tend to see the same families hunting the same land generation after generation. But we still will be seeing stories about 8-yo girls getting trophy bucks on the evening news & on the front page of the newspaper. It bothers a lot of people. And that's okay--I think diversity of thought is important. But, even my most intensely passionate animal rights friend doesn't find me morally deficient. Nor do I find her overly judgemental. You scoff at my statement that hunters can be good conservationists, but I find it true. Not all. Some people are jackazzes whether they hunt or not. Participation in hunting doesn't make a person morally bankrupt. If you cannot accept that, I fear you will not enjoy your experience here, and we will not enjoy your presence.
I will again suggest you check out the Lake Superior Community Partnership (LSCP) and Innovate Marquette. Innovate is in a partnership with @Invent at NMU, and there may be some good information there. You can find more about NMU's Educational Access Network efforts (which are bringing requests from some lower peninsula communities now) to give the furthest reaches of the UP internet access. You can also check out Marquette Economic Club to see where some heads are looking. Marquette Chamber of Commerce is not as active as the LSCP, but their recent big project is Ampersand CoWorking, which could give you some insight into who we are.
The biggest recent news in the business arena is that our beloved food truck Dia de los Tacos is closing up at the end of summer. Not because they business can't make it, but because the owner is tired of being cold in the truck all winter long. We are a community of small businesses.
I think the area is very much a "work to live" rather than a "live to work." We all accept smaller salaries than we'd get elsewhere because we want to live here. I want to live here. And I want others to love this place like I do. But sometimes that means accepting warts & all. Ultimately, you need to decide if you can stand living and perhaps working alongside people who live an entirely different life than you. If you get a job, will you have a coworker that takes every Nov. 15 off? How will you feel covering for those hours? When you pull up to the gas station, what will you do when someone pulls next to you with a dead 8 point in the bed of her truck? When you go to a friend's house for dinner, how will you react to the trophy musky on the wall? These are things that are here. You made a statement about history & tradition. Consider that up until just a few years ago, Marquette had the only Finnish language television show in the US. And it had a lot of followers. The host retired & died--and it was a real shock to our system. History and traditions are important up here. Please don't discount their importance. We are moving forward, but we always have our hearts in our past.
So, if I have seemed angry or upset, it's because I have been. I'm sorry. But you have made some statements that I find insulting, and I feel like you know that. Does it bother you that I'm insulted over something you deem beyond reasonable ethical behavior. I am a person of strong ethics. I am compassionate. I do appreciate the beauty of nature, both flora and fauna. I am also educated and, if I may say so, reasonably intelligent. Then you come along and dispute ALL of that, seeming to dismiss me as morally corrupt. Did you mean that? I honestly can't tell--if I'm wrong, please tell me.
Btw, gun ownership is another thing we can talk about all day but isn't as cut and dried as hunting. If I move to the UP, I have a good chance of owning a gun for various reasons, some of them to potentially kill predators. My thoughts about all this are quite complex.
But in terms of the 2nd amendment, my thoughts are pretty clear. If we're to go by the thoughts of the founding fathers, even ignoring the development level of weaponry pst their very rudimentary understanding, the current ruling on the 2nd amendment ignores literally over 1/2 of the wording, ignoring totally the obvious emphasis of a "well regulated militia". Literally, OVER 1/2 of the language defining the right to bear arms in this country is ignored as a "prefatory clause". If that's not food for debate, I don't know what is. But if even WE come down on the side of gun ownership being a "right" (I'm open to it), would we come down on the side of laws preventing the research into gun violence as a public health issue? I would suggest, no. Most people don't come down on the side of that. Most people think it's absurd that the NIH, for example, is legally prohibited from examining gun violence as a risk to society. Hell, most NRA members think that. Most NRA members even think that we need to toughen gun laws, and far more non-NRA member citizens believe that too, but we're not really a democracy anymore.
But about climate change, that's also a moral wrong because the cost is so evident. I work at Harvard and on cross projects with MIT. EVERYONE has their hair on fire about this. The smartest people in the world are on the edge of their seats about whether we will make decisions in the next 5 or so years about whether we will survive in anything like the society we know today. And yet, this is hypothetical to people who don't understand science. They don't understand positively or negatively reinforcing feedback loops -and that doing so makes you a fey, cosmopolitan, metrosexual communist. It's really a failure of our educational systems.
One of the most repeated criticisms of the predictions of today is that, in the 70's, "some scientists" (it was really based on ONE published article) predicted a new ice age. Well, that was back in the day when there was virtually no collected evidence. More to the point, climate change predictions are basically fluid dynamics equations, and if you're not sure what that is, it's nearly the most complex mathematical models you can run. Even today, the computing power needed to run complex global models is almost at the edge of our computing power, and the computing power of the computer in your pocket (your phone) is over a million times more powerful than the super computers available at the time of the "ice age" predictions in the 70's. (I actually used to make part of my living setting up a supercomputer to do fluid dynamics calculations - though not for climate change, mostly for infrastructure calculations).
If you know that the fuse has been lit, if you don't caution people about it, and the fact that they have the chance to at least mitigate the damage to their children, I would argue that you are a useless piece of ****.
So, if I have seemed angry or upset, it's because I have been. I'm sorry. But you have made some statements that I find insulting, and I feel like you know that. Does it bother you that I'm insulted over something you deem beyond reasonable ethical behavior. I am a person of strong ethics. I am compassionate. I do appreciate the beauty of nature, both flora and fauna. I am also educated and, if I may say so, reasonably intelligent. Then you come along and dispute ALL of that, seeming to dismiss me as morally corrupt. Did you mean that? I honestly can't tell--if I'm wrong, please tell me.
Based on the above, you tell me. Based on your answers so far, if you transposed your reasoning for slavery, or suffrage, or gay rights (all of which I would argue could be moved to a 1:1 value) where would you have come down in the eyes of history? Yes, hindsight is 20:20, but only the indefensible have argued that the future wasn't in ANY way foreseeable.
Btw, I don't let myself off the hook. There have been a number of issues which were things that I benefitted by ignoring but did so anyway. And even on the hunting/meat/dairy issue, though I finally took action on it at 18, I knew better long before that. I killed a number of animals in my wonton self indulgence. I'll always feel guilty about that. I could have done better, I SHOULD have done better, but not only didn't I want to be unpopular with people that I loved, I REALLY enjoyed a BK bacon double cheeseburger 3-5 times a week. Jesus, I loved the taste of that. But you know what, due to market pressures of people like me, BK just started nationally marketing an Impossible Burger, just like other chains. KFC is about to market a chicken-less chicken burger. Everyone has a meatless substitute in the wings that no one can tell apart from meat. And it's cheaper to produce and INFINITELY better for the environment. But people want to persist in the old justifications for their actions. Eating MEAT makes you a man. Eating MEAT makes you an unquestionably heterosexual, gloriously self-assured, and the most unambiguously capitalist of men. It's a turn-key solution to identity and self-aggrandizement. If people eat a substitute now, it admits fault in the past. People are irrational, and out society condones that.
Based on the above, you tell me. Based on your answers so far, if you transposed your reasoning for slavery, or suffrage, or gay rights (all of which I would argue could be moved to a 1:1 value) where would you have come down in the eyes of history? Yes, hindsight is 20:20, but only the indefensible have argued that the future wasn't in ANY way foreseeable.
Btw, I don't let myself off the hook. There have been a number of issues which were things that I benefitted by ignoring but did so anyway. And even on the hunting/meat/dairy issue, though I finally took action on it at 18, I knew better long before that. I killed a number of animals in my wonton self indulgence. I'll always feel guilty about that. I could have done better, I SHOULD have done better, but not only didn't I want to be unpopular with people that I loved, I REALLY enjoyed a BK bacon double cheeseburger 3-5 times a week. Jesus, I loved the taste of that. But you know what, due to market pressures of people like me, BK just started nationally marketing an Impossible Burger, just like other chains. KFC is about to market a chicken-less chicken burger. Everyone has a meatless substitute in the wings that no one can tell apart from meat. And it's cheaper to produce and INFINITELY better for the environment. But people want to persist in the old justifications for their actions. Eating MEAT makes you a man. Eating MEAT makes you an unquestionably heterosexual, gloriously self-assured, and the most unambiguously capitalist of men. It's a turn-key solution to identity and self-aggrandizement. If people eat a substitute now, it admits fault in the past. People are irrational, and out society condones that.
I think we should return to the topic of Marquette (ie in my profile you'll see the word "moderator" which means I can force the topic to go back to Marquette, but I leave that destiny up to you).
I think we should return to the topic of Marquette (ie in my profile you'll see the word "moderator" which means I can force the topic to go back to Marquette, but I leave that destiny up to you).
So how are things in GR? TC is kind of inflated. A friend has a summer house in Petoskey and sings its songs. I'm starting to think of it, in an off hand way. Still northernly but maybe too Yuppie-ish for my taste. I know nothing of GR.
It feels like the summer market is almost over and I have to make a choice. In 2-4 weeks I'll either buy a home that I'm not sure about in VT or try to find a place to rent there and move to MI if I don't like it in a year.
I'm 50. I'm old. My life seems almost over. I would like someone to present me with a sure bet to play out whatever I have left.
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.
