OT Something nice I read about Portland

[andalusian]

The American economy has improved only built on the Federal Reserve's stimulus program. Its not real, the economy is totally dependent on the FED. As the state with the largest economy in the US, California bears the most of this imaginary success.

So, you are telling me that in order to have a healthy business model someone had to invest money... When you can show me a business or country that can have a positive cash-flow without investment - we can talk. I never believed in the model that you need to let it all burn to the ground so it will restart new and fresh - the Japanese tried this approach in their economic recovery at the end of the 80s and it took them 20 years to regain their footing.

Is there going to be a downturn at some point, certainly - things can not go on all roses for ever. Is California going to bear the most of this crash? It depends where the crash comes.

California's biggest industry is finance, real-estate, insurance and rental. It will certainly hurt if this is the cause of the downturn - but I believe New York has a bigger portion of this industry than California.

If there is a tech crash - it can certainly hurt California, but it is only the 5th largest sector of the California GDP - so it is not like the entire state is dependent on it.

Manufacturing is California's 4th largest sector - if there is a crash because of trade that hurts manufacturing - I suspect there are states that are a lot more reliant on manufacturing than California.

But "it is the biggest and will thus bear most of it" is a nonsense argument. This basically suggest that it is best to be a super-poor state - because when the downturn comes - there is little to be lost.

The reality is that California's success in the recent years was because it has high taxes, has a positive cash flow and properly invests this income. It is certainly a lot better than states like Kansas that lowered taxes to stimulate the economy and saw it fall to pieces.

 

[MarAzul]

California's success in the recent years was because it has high taxes, has a positive cash flow and properly invests this income.

Wow! That is amazing. Why not raise the taxes a bit more?

 

[MarAzul]

I think it's fair to say that you and he have similar respect for civil rights.

Thank you!
Like a great man said, we are all endowed by our creator. So who could argue with that truth?

 

[riverman]

Riverman, all urban centers were built on major waterways - rivers, oceans, large lakes. They grew from town built there. Of necessity due to need to transport goods and people. It's not a matter of wanting an ocean view.

Cities, like organisms, evolve.

Far from people moving away, California is growing. If people were moving away housing would become cheaper, obviously. Supply and demand.

I understand why they built in ports....I was a sailor, but now I'm seeing that it's a high risk place to live. ..I read that the original settlers were suffering from malaria from mosquitos in Jamestown and the locals warned them, they shouldn't live there...just go there to fish. Live above sealevel...as I've traveled and watched....natural disasters do frequent those watershed areas and sea level developments....New Orleans is a good example. Terrible place to build a city. Now they are starting to build them on the ocean...man made islands. The original settlers for the most part also didn't realize sewage needs to leech...they contaminated their own pottable water....which also baffled the natives

 

[MarAzul]

.New Orleans is a good example. Terrible place to build a city

You got that right. What is screwed up though, since many know the truth you just spoke, is, Why the hell we continue to spend money on the hole in the river known as New Orleans?
We even know the sea is still rising!

Now they are starting to build them on the ocean...man made islands.

Another man made madness venture. They want the Economic zone around the island they own. 200 mile diameter circle, probably full of oil as well as fish. The last treaty of the sea
created this worm.

 

[Minstrel]

Like a great man said, we are all endowed by our creator.

Creators. It takes two people to create a child (even if one is by proxy).

 

[MARIS61]

There was an article in a newspaper here in Israel, by a reporter that was visiting in San Francisco. He said it's still beautiful but has gotten way more expansive and that it's not the same place for young people, that it became a city for rich people and doesn't have the same colture and appeal it had in the 60s.
He then said that to find vibrant colture and that buzz of SF in the 60s you'd have to look elsewhere and the city he mentioned: Portland, Oregon.

20-30 years ago is when that crap really started pushing out the Natives, and it displaced a much older, deeper and more genuine culture.

Now it resembles Oakland more than SF. Gang-infested, politically corrupt, and heading for bankruptcy while flipping the bird to Democracy itself.

 

[MarAzul]

Creators. It takes two people to create a child (even if one is by proxy).

Seems like you may have been studying, biology maybe. Anyway you are spot on! But we were discussing rights, and you know I am sure, that neither member of the pair of progenitors gave the child any rights. I am sure you know this. There is a clue though, of where to look, do you know where that might be? Perhaps you have read it.

 

[MarAzul]

20-30 years ago is when that crap really started pushing out the Natives

Maybe 35.

 

[riverman]

20-30 years ago is when that crap really started pushing out the Natives, and it displaced a much older, deeper and more genuine culture.

Now it resembles Oakland more than SF. Gang-infested, politically corrupt, and heading for bankruptcy while flipping the bird to Democracy itself.

Yet actually Portland was born from a gangster culture way back long before the roaring 20's...Portland has a pretty corrupt political history...I think at one time I read that in the 30s maybe? the mayor owned most of the strip joints. also a pretty seedy red light district history. Was a wild place in my father's day. I don't think modern day Portland is anything like Oakland or SF. Seems to me to be turning more and more into Seattle

 

[riverman]

I think Portland is still a beautiful city to visit for a weekend and eat the food..buy some books..check out some art..I have friends who have lived in the city for 30 years and still love it today. Too much city for my taste but most are.

 

[Minstrel]

Seems like you may have been studying, biology maybe.

Nah, biology's not my field.

But we were discussing rights, and you know I am sure, that neither member of the pair of progenitors gave the child any rights. I am sure you know this.

Yeah, which is why I thought it was strange that you brought up parents at all. The Constitution gives us our rights within this society, but unless you're lumping the Constitution into "the government" and saying the government created us, I have to say that I'm not quite getting your initial point!

And if you consider us to be government creations--well, that's actually a really interesting point and I'd love to hear more.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

This is somewhat similar to Portland, but Portland's high rent is largely self inflicted. San Francisco is constrained by geography. Virtually all available land on the peninsula has been developed. Portland has the Urban Growth Boundary, which artificially (to a point) increases property values by limiting growth/development. The shortage of available properties has lead to bidding wars for virtually every residential property that comes up for sale. And "larger" inner city lots are being carved up so more house can be shoehorned in. Buyers don't care about yards and privacy, so long as they can live in Portland. We have plenty of room to sprawl if we want to destroy prime farmland and encourage housing developments to spread from Portland to Eugene....and beyond. Fortunately, our "blue" majority has stopped that from happening so far. But the pilgrims from (especially) California certainly haven't helped the situation, as @riverman has pointed out. Now, because they can't find housing in Portland, they're skewing the real estate market in the areas surrounding Portland (and is why @Jade Falcon's rent has skyrocketed....and property values in formerly affordable Vancouver have taken off). To really illustrate just how bad it is becoming, property buyers have actually begun to focus on Salem, after years of ignoring it and/or pretending it didn't exist (not hard to do). Property values there have started to significantly increase and there appears to be no end in sight. And it's only going to get worse in the Willamette Valley as more and more climate change refugees make their way here. Of course, these refugees (and some of you think foreign refugees are a plague!) are the folks who will help destroy the UGB and our already waning quality of life eventually.....I was born and raised in Portland, but, all it's charms aside, it ain't what it used to be and never will be again.....

A solid reason why I moved from the Metro...

 

[riverman]

A solid reason why I moved from the Metro...

space, the final frontier! ..quiet night's sleep is priceless.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

space, the final frontier! ..quiet night's sleep is priceless.

Truer words. Simpler is nicer.

 

[BLAZINGGIANTS]

LOL at Cali and their 4-8 months delays in taxpayer refunds. Had numerous family and friends freaking out during that time frame. Or the rolling blackouts. Or the drought.

Mo' money, mo' problems.

The greater the gains, the bigger the losses. .

The higher the ups, the lower the downs.

 

[MarAzul]

I have to say that I'm not quite getting your initial point!

Yes, I can see the struggle.

The Constitution gives us our rights within this society,

Not quite right.
A great man told us how we acquired our rights;

"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..."

He then went on to tell us how we secure those rights;
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

So after fighting the battles necessary, they did indeed institute our government, including the Constitution and the bill of rights to codify for all to see, written by men, the government is not the giver or the creator of rights. It is to provide us with security so that we may keep our rights. They are not negotiable, they are our endowment to be protected and our government has agreed.

the government created us

The government is not a creator of men, rights, or a damn thing. At best it can only help us keep rights, so that we may create a few things ourselves.

 

[Minstrel]

A great man told us how we acquired our rights;

"they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights

As you pointed out, though, our parents don't endow us with rights, so how great could this man be, having made a mistake like that?

 

[crandc]

Rolling blackouts were planned by utility companies. They are thankfully in the past. So is drought, at least for now.

California is prosperous. Not perfect but prosperous.
Kansas, the conservative dream state, cut taxes on the rich and corporations and slashes services, of course restricted women and voting rights and instead of the expected miracle are in severe crisis. To the point where courts have ordered them to find more funds for schools because the school funding is so low it does not meet legal requirements. Their solution is to replace the justices on the state supreme court, not fund schools. You know, for me, if my income is cut my revenue does not increase but there is this persistent conservative myth that if you cut taxes on rich people somehow revenue will increase! Never has. But rich people love it.

 

[Jade Falcon]

Rolling blackouts were planned by utility companies. They are thankfully in the past. So is drought, at least for now.

California is prosperous. Not perfect but prosperous.
Kansas, the conservative dream state, cut taxes on the rich and corporations and slashes services, of course restricted women and voting rights and instead of the expected miracle are in severe crisis. To the point where courts have ordered them to find more funds for schools because the school funding is so low it does not meet legal requirements. Their solution is to replace the justices on the state supreme court, not fund schools. You know, for me, if my income is cut my revenue does not increase but there is this persistent conservative myth that if you cut taxes on rich people somehow revenue will increase! Never has. But rich people love it.

Well. You're not biased at all. No sir.

 

[Minstrel]

Well. You're not biased at all. No sir.

Neither are the people bashing California. The beauty of this forum is that no one is biased--everyone else is.

 

[Jade Falcon]

Neither are the people bashing California. The beauty of this forum is that no one is biased--everyone else is.

At least I was objective in my ranting. I acknowledge that there are some good things about California, and much of it is beautiful.

But trying to compare a barren Plain State to that of the 6th largest economy in the world is not just asinine, but defies logic and reason as well.

Add in the typical Leftist rants against corporations, their made-up lies about conservatives hating women, and other Leftist bullshit, and it's no wonder they lost this election.

I voted for Trump, but I don't like him, and I don't follow him blindly. THAT is being objective.

 

[Minstrel]

At least I was objective in my ranting. I acknowledge that there are some good things about California, and much of it is beautiful.

Ha, you didn't acknowledge anything good about California socially or politically. I agree that you're objective about landscaping. I'm sure crandc could find some things in Kansas' landmass physically attractive. No one on this board is anything close to objective politically or socially and no one should pretend otherwise.

Also, you find what crandc said about Kansas to be "Leftist bullshit" because of your political biases. It's fine to have them, just don't pretend that your opinions are objective. No one's are.

 

[Jade Falcon]

Ha, you didn't acknowledge anything good about California socially or politically. I agree that you're objective about landscaping. I'm sure crandc could find some things in Kansas' landmass physically attractive. No one on this board is anything close to objective politically or socially and no one should pretend otherwise.

Also, you find what crandc said about Kansas to be "Leftist bullshit" because of your political biases. It's fine to have them, just don't pretend that your opinions are objective. No one's are.

The problem with your argument, however, is trying to suggest that one is no more objective than the other.

I disagree.

When you have the majority of the Left who think that Trump is going to get us into a nuclear war, round up gays and torture them, lynch black people, and then grab every woman he meets by the pussy.....I'm sorry, but there's simply no comparing this kind of "objective" mentality against that of the Right.

Do I have my biases? Sure, you bet I do. But I also use logic and reason to form my opinions and beliefs.

The Left uses emotion instead of logic and reason to form their opinions, and uses click-bait articles and cherry-picked clips from the Huffington Post and Twitter to argue statistics and facts. And then tries to convince others that what they're saying is true based on their assumptions of what Trump means, instead of what he actually says.

That tells you all you need to know.

 

[Minstrel]

When you have the majority of the Left who think that Trump is going to get us into a nuclear war, round up gays and torture them, lynch black people, and then grab every woman he meets by the pussy.....I'm sorry, but there's simply no comparing this kind of "objective" mentality against that of the Right.

First of all, that's not the "majority of the left." Your biases lead you to believe it's the majority. And it's no different than all the conservatives who insisted Obama was a secret Muslim, hated America, wanted to impose Sharia law in the US, had hidden allegiance to ISIS and other terrorists, etc.

Do I have my biases? Sure, you bet I do. But I also use logic and reason to form my opinions and beliefs.

The Left uses emotion instead of logic and reason to form their opinions, and uses click-bait articles and cherry-picked clips from the Huffington Post and Twitter to argue statistics and facts.

The fact that you think conservatives use logic and liberals use emotion and no logic or reason is purely due to your biases. You may be shocked to know that liberals consider conservatives to be the ignorant ones who ignore facts, science and logic. Cherry-picked clips from Breitbart, FOX News, Drudge Report, Infowars? All conservative!

You're not more objective, nor are conservatives. That's just an image you like to believe about yourself and "your side," because it makes you feel better and superior. The same smug superiority you probably detest in liberals. Odd, that.

 

[Jade Falcon]

First of all, that's not the "majority of the left." Your biases lead you to believe it's the majority. And it's no different than all the conservatives who insisted Obama was a secret Muslim, hated America, wanted to impose Sharia law in the US, had hidden allegiance to ISIS and other terrorists, etc.



The fact that you think conservatives use logic and liberals use emotion and no logic or reason is purely due to your biases. You may be shocked to know that liberals consider conservatives to be the ignorant ones who ignore facts, science and logic. Cherry-picked clips from Breitbart, FOX News, Drudge Report, Infowars? All conservative!

You're not more objective, nor are conservatives. That's just an image you like to believe about yourself and "your side," because it makes you feel better and superior. The same smug superiority you probably detest in liberals. Odd, that.

So I'm supposed to take the rantings of someone who's admittedly not objective....about my lack of objectivity?

Right. Okay. I'm going back to arguing against Trump's use of Twitter on a gun forum. And I never thought I'd have to be the voice of reason on a forum that I've been with for 13 years. But there you go.

 

[Minstrel]

So I'm supposed to take the rantings of someone who's admittedly not objective....about my lack of objectivity?

I never really expected you to change your mind--I was just noting that you embody the same emotional lack of objectivity and smug sense of self-satisfaction that you perceive in liberals. You can continue with that. It adds color to the forum.

(Also, terming other people's posts you disagree with "rants" and your own posts "the voice of reason" is a pretty big tell about how little perspective or objectivity you have. It's also pretty emotionally driven terminology!)

 

[Jade Falcon]

I never really expected you to change your mind--I was just noting that you embody the same emotional lack of objectivity and smug sense of self-satisfaction that you perceive in liberals. You can continue with that. It adds color to the forum.

(Also, terming other people's posts you disagree with "rants" and your own posts "the voice of reason" is a pretty big tell about how little perspective or objectivity you have. It's also pretty emotionally driven terminology!)

But we've already established, by your own admission, that you aren't objective. So why should I listen to you about anything?

Sorry, but you kind of defeated yourself there.

 

[Minstrel]

But we've already established, by your own admission, that you aren't objective. So why should I listen to you about anything?

Sorry, but you kind of defeated yourself there.

Pretending that you're objective or perfect or any other impossible superlative doesn't suddenly make your argument stronger. It makes it weaker, because you're admitting that you're delusional. Your argument here is, "You just admitted you're not delusional, so you lose the argument! I'm still delusional, that makes me the winner."

 

[Jade Falcon]

Pretending that you're objective or perfect or any other impossible superlative doesn't suddenly make your argument stronger. It makes it weaker, because you're admitting that you're delusional. Your argument here is, "You just admitted you're not delusional, so you lose the argument! I'm still delusional, that makes me the winner."

Where have I said that I'm delusional? All I said was the Left uses emotion and cherry-picked assumptions based on what they believe Trump means, rather than what he actually says, to form their supposed "objectivity".

And it's obvious. You only need to look at Rasta, Dviss, crandc, and other Liberals posts on here to see this. They ACTUALLY BELIEVE the things I listed above, the first time I explained the difference between the two. They have OPENLY ADMITTED this.

Now, go try and find a conservative on this forum who thinks that Obama was a Muslim born in Kenya. I don't even think @blue32 believes that, and I'm doubtful that @MarAzul does either.

That's the difference between the objectivity of the two. Now, you can stomp your feet like a child over this issue, but I'm afraid that I actually have the facts here to back this up. I mean, it's right there in what they post!