Discussion in 'Off-topic Zone' started by burmafrd, Jul 8, 2007.
Nothing in this article suprises me a bit. Makes sense.
Its always worth a laugh when the Midwestern crowd try and act all sanctimonius and self important.
Typical. They at least go out and put out effort. Unlike all the snobs on both coasts that like to look down on the midwest. I am guessing abersonce that you are somewhat left of center?
Don't use such a broad brush there buddy -- I live on the west coast in a town that boasts one of the highest volunteerism rates in the country. I think what you missed about the article were the factors that contributed to volunteerism -- many of which are absent in many locations.
I think YOU missed the point that the stats clearly showed that selfishness and self interest prevails on the coasts.
Where did it say that?
If you look at the list of top 5 cities you have:
1) Minneapolis-St. Paul
2) Salt Lake City
Austin and Seattle are pretty liberal cities. To try to use this article to make a political statement is misguided.
It makes sense that the biggest contributing factor to volunteerism is length of the commute. It doesn't surprise me that NYC and LA areas would have low rates, they could easily spend 2-3 hours a day driving. Who would have the time?
The study said several demographic and social factors appear to contribute to higher volunteer rates:
* Short commutes to work, which provide more time to volunteer.
* Home ownership, which promotes attachment to the community.
* High education levels, which increase civic involvement.
* High concentrations of nonprofit organizations providing opportunities to volunteer.
If someone works in SF or LA, they have several strong forces working against them -- a) long commutes -- I know people in both areas who travel 90 minutes each way to and from work and b) extraordinarily high real estate prices which make ownership more difficult and often keep nonprofits out of the area. Those long commutes take a 40 hour work week and turn it into a 50+ hour week.
Some folks might however say that making such a huge commute so that your family can have a nice house rather than live in a cramped city apartment is also an act of sacrifice. Or you can just say they are bad people. Whatever you like.
Also, last time I checked Seattle was coastal.
I used to live in SLC and a LOT of people there have LONG commutes. Same for Denver, Chicago, and most other LARGE cities. Smaller cities its not so bad.
Austin is liberal- now that is interesting. Visited there a few times and never saw much of that.
What I notice most about liberals is that they are willing to spend tax money just about anywhere- but try and get THEM to write a PERSONAL check and see how far you get. As regards volunteering, the numbers seem to speak for themselves. Probably depends on how far to the left you go. Nearer the edge the less you get.
Minn-St Paul is pretty liberal as well. SLC gets its volunteer rates primarily from the church.
Riverside CA who were at the bottom is a very conservative city. They've got a conservative representative in the house - he's won handily since 1992 despite a number of controversies.
Are you serious?
I've seen t-shirts down there that say "a little spot of blue in a see of red"
Is Austin liberal?
They do have a good segment of libertarians, though (big "L" and little "l").
Also of note, Austin's traffic has gotten progressively worse since I graduated. uke: I try to avoid passing through there on a weekday, if at all possible.
Seattle is probably the most liberal city outside of SF in the US. Your theory holds no water.
And if you didn't know Austin is liberal, you didn't travel downtown or on UT's campus.
right, a conservative city at the bottom... and riverside is a looong way from downtown LA, so longer commutes for many people. hmmm, i seem to remember them mentioning something about commutes in the article...??
I'd catch the metrolink from the inland empire into LA once or twice a month when i lived there -- huge # of people from the Riverside area on that train -- that's a 90 minute ride Downtown Riverside to Downtown LA plus whatever time you need to and from the train.
How long ago was that? I'm curious to know if the public transportation has improved any. Last time I was there (five years ago) it seemed that each suburb in L.A. had its own transportation system but it was hard to go from one to another.
Public transportation still is generally awful in LA. They just won't devote the resources to really fixing it, plus I don't know if they really could.
That's the problem with cities like L.A. that are more spread out. Manhattan has a great public transportation system, but the land area is about 13 miles long by two miles wide. Other places like Dallas/Fort Worth or Oklahoma City are even worse since they're so spread out geographically and demographically.
That's actually part of the BEST transport system in LA right there -- the system in general sucks - but for getting from long distances into the city, the Metrolink (Train) system is very good.
The reason why it is 90 minutes is that it is about 60 miles away. During most of the day that would be the fastest way to get between the points
Interesting -- Salt Lake County ranked 205 out of 233 counties in the U.S regarding length of commute according the Census' 2003 community study. http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Products/Ranking/2003/pdf/R04T050.pdf
So although you may have known people with long commutes -- the reported average was 19.3 minutes