Timbeck2
Final Approach
...Tuscon runs a close third...
Well...glad I don't live THERE.
...Tuscon runs a close third...
For some of us, continental living doesn't have to be elitist, picturesque, or racially hegemonic in order to not be considered "dirty". The point of continental living is cheap access to the artifacts of living that allows us to prosper, in ways that are economically prohibitive in resource-limited islands. That's it. The rest of the discussion is just preferences, regional cultural "-isms" and entitled petulance.
We'd give a kidney to be able to relocate life and employment to Houston area or San Antonio. We're getting the wife through nursing school, and at the end of it we will get to relocate away from real socioeconomic strife; very much looking forward to it. The fact remains, aviation has made the world smaller. I don't need to live in Bawwstah to see an overpriced game in Fenway, walk around Beacon Hill and see the sights while freezing my rear 6 months out the year.
I have to say though....What a bunch of code speak this thread is honestly. My kid doesn't need to be raised in the "culturally dignified" coasts in order to be good enough to compete in the global market and hold his own at places like Georgia Tech, MIT or Purdue. His father was born and raised in a coconut tree-laden second-world colony of the United States, and I still got the above T-shirts.
Bottom line, "Flyover Country", and the concrete jungles that litter its landscape, is still First world.
The problem with the narrative in this thread is that the subtext of the objections raised are highly socioeconomic and racially hegemonic in nature, but nobody has the stones to say what they mean. "Code speak" for racial and socioeconomic preferences is such an American staple. The fact the whole discourse on dirty cities was started by a suburbia-raised white woman under the age of 30 who monikers herself as a "princess" in a male-dominated hobby, is so par for the course it's kinda of a snooze actually.
Look, America is a lot more brown and a lot more poor than the demographics of this avocation lend to.
Y'all just need to get over that and stop adjudicating dirtiness to the socioeconomic change fostered by the very economic policies you all voted for in the first place. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes aka, vote in economic policies against your collective self-interest because they come bundled with non-issue social policies you happen to agree with, you win the trojan horse stupid prize of economic downgrade three generations later. We're all in this boat together, we're all "dirty". Holing up in Boston and calling it dignified living ain't gonna change that.
For sure; You can find dirt anywhere... just open your eyes.
For some of us, continental living doesn't have to be elitist, picturesque, or racially hegemonic in order to not be considered "dirty". The point of continental living is cheap access to the artifacts of living that allows us to prosper, in ways that are economically prohibitive in resource-limited islands. That's it. The rest of the discussion is just preferences, regional cultural "-isms" and entitled petulance.
We'd give a kidney to be able to relocate life and employment to Houston area or San Antonio. We're getting the wife through nursing school, and at the end of it we will get to relocate away from real socioeconomic strife; very much looking forward to it. The fact remains, aviation has made the world smaller. I don't need to live in Bawwstah to see an overpriced game in Fenway, walk around Beacon Hill and see the sights while freezing my rear 6 months out the year.
I have to say though....What a bunch of code speak this thread is honestly. My kid doesn't need to be raised in the "culturally dignified" coasts in order to be good enough to compete in the global market and hold his own at places like Georgia Tech, MIT or Purdue. His father was born and raised in a coconut tree-laden second-world colony of the United States, and I still got the above T-shirts.
Bottom line, "Flyover Country", and the concrete jungles that litter its landscape, is still First world. The problem with the narrative in this thread is that the subtext of the objections raised are highly socioeconomic and racially hegemonic in nature, but nobody has the stones to say what they mean. "Code speak" for racial and socioeconomic preferences is such an American staple. The fact the whole discourse on dirty cities was started by a suburbia-raised white woman under the age of 30 who monikers herself as a "princess" in a male-dominated hobby, is so par for the course it's kinda of a snooze actually.
Look, America is a lot more brown and a lot more poor than the demographics of this avocation lend to. Y'all just need to get over that and stop adjudicating dirtiness to the socioeconomic change fostered by the very economic policies you all voted for in the first place. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes aka, vote in economic policies against your collective self-interest because they come bundled with non-issue social policies you happen to agree with, you win the trojan horse stupid prize of economic downgrade three generations later. We're all in this boat together, we're all "dirty". Holing up in Boston and calling it dignified living ain't gonna change that.
Yep. In fact here is some in Tim Winter's town. Filthy place.