Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about anything else but whoever keeps posting about how people live grouped solely into ethnic/racial groups in LA hasn't been to LA since 1980 or something like that. It's some sort of weird segregationist fantasy that's actually really disturbing because that PP seems to be fetishizing it. I don't even like LA much, but that PP is so crazily wrong that it makes me think the PP wishes what he keeps posting were true. It's really weird and disturbing.

Well actually I lived in LA up until a couple months ago, lol. So you're wrong again. The racial issues are still alive and well, and no one is praising it. I think you're confusing yourself because you're mad that people are calling out the racial issues in LA, which are ongoing and well documented, like in the article a PP posted about segregation in LA schools. Pay a visit, you'll see.

What? You are putting words in my mouth. I never said there weren't significant racial issues in LA. There are and they are serious. But you are lying about living there, or you are wishing for some weird segregationist fantasy in your head. The totally isolated world you paint just isn't true, and you are weakening your point substantially by painting a wildly inaccurate picture of modern LA. There is no need to make up a segregationist fantasy when talking about race issues in LA. I honestly find it really disturbing how you are doing that. This claim that racial groups in LA only live in one neighborhood in LA is not remotely supported by actual population data.

Stop the segregationist fantasies. It's awful.

I'm absolutely not lying about living there, what an absurd statement. And the data backs up my experience, not yours. I experienced a ton of racial segregation in Los Angeles, and trying to pain it as some weird fantasy that has me salivating, when in fact I've actively condemned it, and gave it as one of my main reasons for disliking Los Angeles since the first time I posted, is a really bold, and dare I say stupid, argumentation strategy.

Did the person who compiled the data about racial segregation in Los Angeles schools have a "fantasy" about it too?

You truly sound crazy and like you need to be medicated.

I don't argue with crazy people with disturbing segregationist fantasies. I will just show the data. Here are some links for you to peruse:

This website visualizes DC racial breakdown by neighborhood and starts from 1970:

https://dcist.com/story/20/01/14/this-gif-shows-how-the-d-c-areas-demographics-have-changed-since-1970/

While more integrated than it was, DC still remains quite separated. Meanwhile, the LA Times provides a neighborhood breakdown that, if you walk through, shows much greater average neighborhood diversity than DC:

http://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/

None of this is to take away from the very serious racial issues that LA has. Those are undeniable. I agree with the school issues, I don't deny them. But you need to stop with your false characterizations of neighborhood demographics of LA. They aren't supported by data, and you sound like you are making up very disturbing fantasies.

There is no way that DC is less integrated than Los Angeles. It's also interesting to note that Los Angeles is dominant racial minority- white people are the minority. So the fact that the west side and prosperous areas are almost all white, and black people get routinely stopped and questioned when they enter into Beverly Hills, is extremely shocking in 2020. The fact that you can drive through the barrio and not see one black or white face, and drive to south central and it's all black people, and drive to the westside and see all white people in a town where the population is so diverse- that's segregation. And it's very heightened in LA, as is racial tension in general

Well, you foundationally don't understand population data or statistics, that much is clear.

And neither do you. Nor can you respond to arguments. Oh well.

Okay, use the data I've already provided for you to make your point rather than going off into your disgusting fantasies. I can get plenty more data for you too. Both DC and LA population statistics are well known down to the neighborhood. Truthfully, I do not think you are bright enough to do the math required but I am basically spoon-feeding you data at this point.

So, prove your assertions. Prove what you say is true, and that neighborhoods in LA are totally isolated by race. I believe you said LA is more segregated than any city in the US, but let's just compare to DC to make your job even easier. Show me the data that supports what you say. Prove that LA is far less integrated than DC by using population statistics. I have literally provided you with the data you need, and if that's not enough, there is plenty more. Show your work, my disturbed friend.

Also, you didn't actually make any arguments. It appears you don't understand what arguments are any more than you can do basic statistics.

Sure, here's some data for ya: https://www.apartmentlist.com/research/persistent-effects-residential-segregation LA 10th most segregated housing market in the country. WELL above DC, btw. Not even close.

How about addressing or explain that away?

I made plenty of arguments, but you seem to be content with just ignoring and dismissing my minority friends' lived experiences. Why does that not surprise me?

"My minority friends?" I'm done with you. You are awful, awful, awful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about anything else but whoever keeps posting about how people live grouped solely into ethnic/racial groups in LA hasn't been to LA since 1980 or something like that. It's some sort of weird segregationist fantasy that's actually really disturbing because that PP seems to be fetishizing it. I don't even like LA much, but that PP is so crazily wrong that it makes me think the PP wishes what he keeps posting were true. It's really weird and disturbing.

Well actually I lived in LA up until a couple months ago, lol. So you're wrong again. The racial issues are still alive and well, and no one is praising it. I think you're confusing yourself because you're mad that people are calling out the racial issues in LA, which are ongoing and well documented, like in the article a PP posted about segregation in LA schools. Pay a visit, you'll see.

What? You are putting words in my mouth. I never said there weren't significant racial issues in LA. There are and they are serious. But you are lying about living there, or you are wishing for some weird segregationist fantasy in your head. The totally isolated world you paint just isn't true, and you are weakening your point substantially by painting a wildly inaccurate picture of modern LA. There is no need to make up a segregationist fantasy when talking about race issues in LA. I honestly find it really disturbing how you are doing that. This claim that racial groups in LA only live in one neighborhood in LA is not remotely supported by actual population data.

Stop the segregationist fantasies. It's awful.

I'm absolutely not lying about living there, what an absurd statement. And the data backs up my experience, not yours. I experienced a ton of racial segregation in Los Angeles, and trying to pain it as some weird fantasy that has me salivating, when in fact I've actively condemned it, and gave it as one of my main reasons for disliking Los Angeles since the first time I posted, is a really bold, and dare I say stupid, argumentation strategy.

Did the person who compiled the data about racial segregation in Los Angeles schools have a "fantasy" about it too?

You truly sound crazy and like you need to be medicated.

I don't argue with crazy people with disturbing segregationist fantasies. I will just show the data. Here are some links for you to peruse:

This website visualizes DC racial breakdown by neighborhood and starts from 1970:

https://dcist.com/story/20/01/14/this-gif-shows-how-the-d-c-areas-demographics-have-changed-since-1970/

While more integrated than it was, DC still remains quite separated. Meanwhile, the LA Times provides a neighborhood breakdown that, if you walk through, shows much greater average neighborhood diversity than DC:

http://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/

None of this is to take away from the very serious racial issues that LA has. Those are undeniable. I agree with the school issues, I don't deny them. But you need to stop with your false characterizations of neighborhood demographics of LA. They aren't supported by data, and you sound like you are making up very disturbing fantasies.

There is no way that DC is less integrated than Los Angeles. It's also interesting to note that Los Angeles is dominant racial minority- white people are the minority. So the fact that the west side and prosperous areas are almost all white, and black people get routinely stopped and questioned when they enter into Beverly Hills, is extremely shocking in 2020. The fact that you can drive through the barrio and not see one black or white face, and drive to south central and it's all black people, and drive to the westside and see all white people in a town where the population is so diverse- that's segregation. And it's very heightened in LA, as is racial tension in general

Well, you foundationally don't understand population data or statistics, that much is clear.

And neither do you. Nor can you respond to arguments. Oh well.

Okay, use the data I've already provided for you to make your point rather than going off into your disgusting fantasies. I can get plenty more data for you too. Both DC and LA population statistics are well known down to the neighborhood. Truthfully, I do not think you are bright enough to do the math required but I am basically spoon-feeding you data at this point.

So, prove your assertions. Prove what you say is true, and that neighborhoods in LA are totally isolated by race. I believe you said LA is more segregated than any city in the US, but let's just compare to DC to make your job even easier. Show me the data that supports what you say. Prove that LA is far less integrated than DC by using population statistics. I have literally provided you with the data you need, and if that's not enough, there is plenty more. Show your work, my disturbed friend.

Also, you didn't actually make any arguments. It appears you don't understand what arguments are any more than you can do basic statistics.

Sure, here's some data for ya: https://www.apartmentlist.com/research/persistent-effects-residential-segregation LA 10th most segregated housing market in the country. WELL above DC, btw. Not even close.

How about addressing or explain that away?

I made plenty of arguments, but you seem to be content with just ignoring and dismissing my minority friends' lived experiences. Why does that not surprise me?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about anything else but whoever keeps posting about how people live grouped solely into ethnic/racial groups in LA hasn't been to LA since 1980 or something like that. It's some sort of weird segregationist fantasy that's actually really disturbing because that PP seems to be fetishizing it. I don't even like LA much, but that PP is so crazily wrong that it makes me think the PP wishes what he keeps posting were true. It's really weird and disturbing.

Well actually I lived in LA up until a couple months ago, lol. So you're wrong again. The racial issues are still alive and well, and no one is praising it. I think you're confusing yourself because you're mad that people are calling out the racial issues in LA, which are ongoing and well documented, like in the article a PP posted about segregation in LA schools. Pay a visit, you'll see.

What? You are putting words in my mouth. I never said there weren't significant racial issues in LA. There are and they are serious. But you are lying about living there, or you are wishing for some weird segregationist fantasy in your head. The totally isolated world you paint just isn't true, and you are weakening your point substantially by painting a wildly inaccurate picture of modern LA. There is no need to make up a segregationist fantasy when talking about race issues in LA. I honestly find it really disturbing how you are doing that. This claim that racial groups in LA only live in one neighborhood in LA is not remotely supported by actual population data.

Stop the segregationist fantasies. It's awful.

I'm absolutely not lying about living there, what an absurd statement. And the data backs up my experience, not yours. I experienced a ton of racial segregation in Los Angeles, and trying to pain it as some weird fantasy that has me salivating, when in fact I've actively condemned it, and gave it as one of my main reasons for disliking Los Angeles since the first time I posted, is a really bold, and dare I say stupid, argumentation strategy.

Did the person who compiled the data about racial segregation in Los Angeles schools have a "fantasy" about it too?

You truly sound crazy and like you need to be medicated.

I don't argue with crazy people with disturbing segregationist fantasies. I will just show the data. Here are some links for you to peruse:

This website visualizes DC racial breakdown by neighborhood and starts from 1970:

https://dcist.com/story/20/01/14/this-gif-shows-how-the-d-c-areas-demographics-have-changed-since-1970/

While more integrated than it was, DC still remains quite separated. Meanwhile, the LA Times provides a neighborhood breakdown that, if you walk through, shows much greater average neighborhood diversity than DC:

http://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/

None of this is to take away from the very serious racial issues that LA has. Those are undeniable. I agree with the school issues, I don't deny them. But you need to stop with your false characterizations of neighborhood demographics of LA. They aren't supported by data, and you sound like you are making up very disturbing fantasies.

There is no way that DC is less integrated than Los Angeles. It's also interesting to note that Los Angeles is dominant racial minority- white people are the minority. So the fact that the west side and prosperous areas are almost all white, and black people get routinely stopped and questioned when they enter into Beverly Hills, is extremely shocking in 2020. The fact that you can drive through the barrio and not see one black or white face, and drive to south central and it's all black people, and drive to the westside and see all white people in a town where the population is so diverse- that's segregation. And it's very heightened in LA, as is racial tension in general

Well, you foundationally don't understand population data or statistics, that much is clear.

And neither do you. Nor can you respond to arguments. Oh well.

Okay, use the data I've already provided for you to make your point rather than going off into your disgusting fantasies. I can get plenty more data for you too. Both DC and LA population statistics are well known down to the neighborhood. Truthfully, I do not think you are bright enough to do the math required but I am basically spoon-feeding you data at this point.

So, prove your assertions. Prove what you say is true, and that neighborhoods in LA are totally isolated by race. I believe you said LA is more segregated than any city in the US, but let's just compare to DC to make your job even easier. Show me the data that supports what you say. Prove that LA is far less integrated than DC by using population statistics. I have literally provided you with the data you need, and if that's not enough, there is plenty more. Show your work, my disturbed friend.

Also, you didn't actually make any arguments. It appears you don't understand what arguments are any more than you can do basic statistics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about anything else but whoever keeps posting about how people live grouped solely into ethnic/racial groups in LA hasn't been to LA since 1980 or something like that. It's some sort of weird segregationist fantasy that's actually really disturbing because that PP seems to be fetishizing it. I don't even like LA much, but that PP is so crazily wrong that it makes me think the PP wishes what he keeps posting were true. It's really weird and disturbing.

Well actually I lived in LA up until a couple months ago, lol. So you're wrong again. The racial issues are still alive and well, and no one is praising it. I think you're confusing yourself because you're mad that people are calling out the racial issues in LA, which are ongoing and well documented, like in the article a PP posted about segregation in LA schools. Pay a visit, you'll see.

What? You are putting words in my mouth. I never said there weren't significant racial issues in LA. There are and they are serious. But you are lying about living there, or you are wishing for some weird segregationist fantasy in your head. The totally isolated world you paint just isn't true, and you are weakening your point substantially by painting a wildly inaccurate picture of modern LA. There is no need to make up a segregationist fantasy when talking about race issues in LA. I honestly find it really disturbing how you are doing that. This claim that racial groups in LA only live in one neighborhood in LA is not remotely supported by actual population data.

Stop the segregationist fantasies. It's awful.

I'm absolutely not lying about living there, what an absurd statement. And the data backs up my experience, not yours. I experienced a ton of racial segregation in Los Angeles, and trying to pain it as some weird fantasy that has me salivating, when in fact I've actively condemned it, and gave it as one of my main reasons for disliking Los Angeles since the first time I posted, is a really bold, and dare I say stupid, argumentation strategy.

Did the person who compiled the data about racial segregation in Los Angeles schools have a "fantasy" about it too?

You truly sound crazy and like you need to be medicated.

I don't argue with crazy people with disturbing segregationist fantasies. I will just show the data. Here are some links for you to peruse:

This website visualizes DC racial breakdown by neighborhood and starts from 1970:

https://dcist.com/story/20/01/14/this-gif-shows-how-the-d-c-areas-demographics-have-changed-since-1970/

While more integrated than it was, DC still remains quite separated. Meanwhile, the LA Times provides a neighborhood breakdown that, if you walk through, shows much greater average neighborhood diversity than DC:

http://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/

None of this is to take away from the very serious racial issues that LA has. Those are undeniable. I agree with the school issues, I don't deny them. But you need to stop with your false characterizations of neighborhood demographics of LA. They aren't supported by data, and you sound like you are making up very disturbing fantasies.

There is no way that DC is less integrated than Los Angeles. It's also interesting to note that Los Angeles is dominant racial minority- white people are the minority. So the fact that the west side and prosperous areas are almost all white, and black people get routinely stopped and questioned when they enter into Beverly Hills, is extremely shocking in 2020. The fact that you can drive through the barrio and not see one black or white face, and drive to south central and it's all black people, and drive to the westside and see all white people in a town where the population is so diverse- that's segregation. And it's very heightened in LA, as is racial tension in general

Well, you foundationally don't understand population data or statistics, that much is clear.

And neither do you. Nor can you respond to arguments. Oh well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about anything else but whoever keeps posting about how people live grouped solely into ethnic/racial groups in LA hasn't been to LA since 1980 or something like that. It's some sort of weird segregationist fantasy that's actually really disturbing because that PP seems to be fetishizing it. I don't even like LA much, but that PP is so crazily wrong that it makes me think the PP wishes what he keeps posting were true. It's really weird and disturbing.

Well actually I lived in LA up until a couple months ago, lol. So you're wrong again. The racial issues are still alive and well, and no one is praising it. I think you're confusing yourself because you're mad that people are calling out the racial issues in LA, which are ongoing and well documented, like in the article a PP posted about segregation in LA schools. Pay a visit, you'll see.

What? You are putting words in my mouth. I never said there weren't significant racial issues in LA. There are and they are serious. But you are lying about living there, or you are wishing for some weird segregationist fantasy in your head. The totally isolated world you paint just isn't true, and you are weakening your point substantially by painting a wildly inaccurate picture of modern LA. There is no need to make up a segregationist fantasy when talking about race issues in LA. I honestly find it really disturbing how you are doing that. This claim that racial groups in LA only live in one neighborhood in LA is not remotely supported by actual population data.

Stop the segregationist fantasies. It's awful.

I'm absolutely not lying about living there, what an absurd statement. And the data backs up my experience, not yours. I experienced a ton of racial segregation in Los Angeles, and trying to pain it as some weird fantasy that has me salivating, when in fact I've actively condemned it, and gave it as one of my main reasons for disliking Los Angeles since the first time I posted, is a really bold, and dare I say stupid, argumentation strategy.

Did the person who compiled the data about racial segregation in Los Angeles schools have a "fantasy" about it too?

You truly sound crazy and like you need to be medicated.

I don't argue with crazy people with disturbing segregationist fantasies. I will just show the data. Here are some links for you to peruse:

This website visualizes DC racial breakdown by neighborhood and starts from 1970:

https://dcist.com/story/20/01/14/this-gif-shows-how-the-d-c-areas-demographics-have-changed-since-1970/

While more integrated than it was, DC still remains quite separated. Meanwhile, the LA Times provides a neighborhood breakdown that, if you walk through, shows much greater average neighborhood diversity than DC:

http://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/

None of this is to take away from the very serious racial issues that LA has. Those are undeniable. I agree with the school issues, I don't deny them. But you need to stop with your false characterizations of neighborhood demographics of LA. They aren't supported by data, and you sound like you are making up very disturbing fantasies.

There is no way that DC is less integrated than Los Angeles. It's also interesting to note that Los Angeles is dominant racial minority- white people are the minority. So the fact that the west side and prosperous areas are almost all white, and black people get routinely stopped and questioned when they enter into Beverly Hills, is extremely shocking in 2020. The fact that you can drive through the barrio and not see one black or white face, and drive to south central and it's all black people, and drive to the westside and see all white people in a town where the population is so diverse- that's segregation. And it's very heightened in LA, as is racial tension in general

Well, you foundationally don't understand population data or statistics, that much is clear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We are from NY but have lived outside of DC on VA for 20 years. We find the people here to be much more friendly but on the fake side

It's the fake Southern manners

Says the rude new yorker.

Anonymous wrote:

We are from NY but have lived outside of DC on VA for 20 years. We find the people here to be much more friendly but on the fake side

It's the fake Southern manners

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about anything else but whoever keeps posting about how people live grouped solely into ethnic/racial groups in LA hasn't been to LA since 1980 or something like that. It's some sort of weird segregationist fantasy that's actually really disturbing because that PP seems to be fetishizing it. I don't even like LA much, but that PP is so crazily wrong that it makes me think the PP wishes what he keeps posting were true. It's really weird and disturbing.

Well actually I lived in LA up until a couple months ago, lol. So you're wrong again. The racial issues are still alive and well, and no one is praising it. I think you're confusing yourself because you're mad that people are calling out the racial issues in LA, which are ongoing and well documented, like in the article a PP posted about segregation in LA schools. Pay a visit, you'll see.

What? You are putting words in my mouth. I never said there weren't significant racial issues in LA. There are and they are serious. But you are lying about living there, or you are wishing for some weird segregationist fantasy in your head. The totally isolated world you paint just isn't true, and you are weakening your point substantially by painting a wildly inaccurate picture of modern LA. There is no need to make up a segregationist fantasy when talking about race issues in LA. I honestly find it really disturbing how you are doing that. This claim that racial groups in LA only live in one neighborhood in LA is not remotely supported by actual population data.

Stop the segregationist fantasies. It's awful.

I'm absolutely not lying about living there, what an absurd statement. And the data backs up my experience, not yours. I experienced a ton of racial segregation in Los Angeles, and trying to pain it as some weird fantasy that has me salivating, when in fact I've actively condemned it, and gave it as one of my main reasons for disliking Los Angeles since the first time I posted, is a really bold, and dare I say stupid, argumentation strategy.

Did the person who compiled the data about racial segregation in Los Angeles schools have a "fantasy" about it too?

You truly sound crazy and like you need to be medicated.

I don't argue with crazy people with disturbing segregationist fantasies. I will just show the data. Here are some links for you to peruse:

This website visualizes DC racial breakdown by neighborhood and starts from 1970:

https://dcist.com/story/20/01/14/this-gif-shows-how-the-d-c-areas-demographics-have-changed-since-1970/

While more integrated than it was, DC still remains quite separated. Meanwhile, the LA Times provides a neighborhood breakdown that, if you walk through, shows much greater average neighborhood diversity than DC:

http://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/

None of this is to take away from the very serious racial issues that LA has. Those are undeniable. I agree with the school issues, I don't deny them. But you need to stop with your false characterizations of neighborhood demographics of LA. They aren't supported by data, and you sound like you are making up very disturbing fantasies.

There is no way that DC is less integrated than Los Angeles. It's also interesting to note that Los Angeles is dominant racial minority- white people are the minority. So the fact that the west side and prosperous areas are almost all white, and black people get routinely stopped and questioned when they enter into Beverly Hills, is extremely shocking in 2020. The fact that you can drive through the barrio and not see one black or white face, and drive to south central and it's all black people, and drive to the westside and see all white people in a town where the population is so diverse- that's segregation. And it's very heightened in LA, as is racial tension in general

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the "passive-aggressive" versus "direct" phrasing is a question of framing, and not factually-based. My DH, who jokingly calls himself an "east coast escapee" at times (we are on the west coast, he grew up in MA) says that he thinks folks in New England and NY say they are "direct" but what they mean is that they are "unnecessarily rude just for the sake of being mean." Of course, he moved out west for college and never once looked back, so I think his opinion is skewed. Similarly, what east coast folks call "passive aggressive," west coast folks call "basic courtesy."

I grew up in California and what I have seen is that some people come to California and just absorb it and flourish, while others never feel comfortable. I get it, I don't think I'd ever feel settled on the east coast, but I think there are some folks who move east and just take to it. Not sure which one you will be, OP! Honestly, it's probably better to be a person who can enjoy both -- shows better mental flexibility and a healthier outlook.

On the other hand, as an east coaster who made the move out west, I found the people unspeakably rude, and lacking in basic courtesy. A lot of things I would expect on the east coast, like people looking you in the eye when speaking and seeming honest, forthright, and like they respected you, just seemed to fall by the wayside. A lot of the people i interacted with seemed like they couldnt care less about a person or even viewed them with contempt.

I suppose it is a matter of perspective, but I noticed most big morning and talk show hosts come from the east coast and seem to be imported to the west coast. So it seems like that friendly vibe is one people get from east coasters more often than west coasters

The whole point is that your personal experience isn't representative. People have been different experiences and preferences, and so words like "rude" versus "direct" are a matter of opinion not fact. That's okay. Your talk show host thing seems outright weird, though.

In any event, mentally healthy and robust folks can live and thrive anywhere. It's a negative thing to negatively characterize a whole coast, not a positive thing. It's not something people should be boasting about. It shows a very limited world view.

Sure, but we can also have objective ideas of manners and/or niceness. Most people would agree that saying "Thank you" is an act of politeness and omitting is rude. Most people would agree that lying to someone and backstabbing them is not nice. Words have meanings.

I dont have a "talk show host thing", just an observation that most of the most popular radio/ morning hosts have originated from the east coast. Not sure why that would be "weird", unless you're just expressing a general displeasure with this fact. Which would seem to stem more from it contradicting your assertion that west coasters are just as friendly and convivial as east coasters. When it would appear that, based on which hosts get chosen and build large fanbases, does not appear to be the case. Not based on general opinion, at least- which is the tool you would use to judge social skills/abilities

Uh, talk show hosts come from the east coast because that's where the major news media is based. It is same reason why tech companies come out of silicon valley. Do you not understand how that works?

And I have no idea what you are going on about with respect to words have meaning. Uh, yeah? So what? What New Yorkers call "direct," Hawaiians would call "unbelievably rude." Those words all have meaning, yes? I'm sorry if this is a disappoinment to you, but as it turns out the world does not universally agree that you are the universal arbitrator of everyone's lived experience. I realize this will come as a shock to you but it's true.

I'm honestly confused by what point you are trying to make, except that you seem to have a virulent dislike of California based on some experience you had twenty years ago, which goes back to my point about being mentally flexible and how that is really a good thing in life.

Huh? That makes no sense considering the entertainment industry is almost completely based in Los Angeles. If anything, theyre continued sourcing of hosts from the east coast would be an expense, not a help. Actually, if you look at most actors and musicians, they are way overrepresnted by LA locals and people from the west coast in general, because it's much closer to Hollywood, obviously. The exception being personalities that are expected to speak on camera and "have the gift of gab", in which case you start seeing the east coast over and over again in representation.

And yet, we're not basing our opinions around what Hawaiians alone think. Like I said, most "social" rules tend to be crowd sourced- i.e. what the general population thinks. The general population clearly shows a preference for east coast radio hosts, presenters, interviewers, morning hosts, etc, which is proof that, whatever Hawaiians may or may not want (I trust you havent interviewed any on this issue), the general population far prefers east coast conversational skills. And that's that!

Okay, I'm out. Go ahead and continue to obsess about something that happened twenty years ago and talk show hosts. Your odd fixation is definitely making a strong point in this argument, just not the one you think it is. Yay you! You win the argument! You are right for sure!

Um... thanks? I mean you could attempt to address any of the substantive points I've brought up, or the others who posted statistics about racial segregation in Los Angeles, but sure, have a meltdown instead. Maybe try to find your "west coast chill" by smoking a blunt or something. Anyway...

Yeah, sorry but PP has a point. Here’s the thing: LA has a small black population. 8-9%!

So, you just aren’t going to see the presence of many black people in LA. And yes they are kept out of the Westside because of prohibitive real estate, but so I am I! That’s what people are living in other areas of LA, and leaving the Westside.

Yeah, as previously covered, we're not just talking about black people. We're talking about mexicans being relegated to the east side, asians being relegated to koreatown, armenians in glendale, and very specific ethnic areas and regions that keep completely to themselves. That is essentially segregation. It's very, very bizarre.

It may have been set up that way in the early-mid 1900s when various populations starting settling in Los Angeles, but when I walk through LA now it is more diverse than any city I’ve ever been to. People like to live in communities with other people who share their culture. And btw, many don’t. Many do live in other areas in the city. In the beginning, it certainly was segregation, but these areas are thriving. Jews in Fairfax. Armenians in Glendale. Persians in Westwood. But, let’s be honest. There are Persians, Armenians, Jews living in every pocket of this city! This isn’t segregation. You’re doing a disservice to the word segregation. Taking meaning away from it. I guess I’m proud of Los Angeles. It’s one big crazy melting pot. And it’s irritating to me when someone goes to Beverly Hills (filled with old rich Jewish people and rich Persians, btw) and acts like that’s the norm for LA. It just isn’t.

Regarding racism: absolutely rich people are racist. Not going to argue with that!

Most people are POC.

We are from NY but have lived outside of DC on VA for 20 years. We find the people here to be much more friendly but on the fake side

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the "passive-aggressive" versus "direct" phrasing is a question of framing, and not factually-based. My DH, who jokingly calls himself an "east coast escapee" at times (we are on the west coast, he grew up in MA) says that he thinks folks in New England and NY say they are "direct" but what they mean is that they are "unnecessarily rude just for the sake of being mean." Of course, he moved out west for college and never once looked back, so I think his opinion is skewed. Similarly, what east coast folks call "passive aggressive," west coast folks call "basic courtesy."

I grew up in California and what I have seen is that some people come to California and just absorb it and flourish, while others never feel comfortable. I get it, I don't think I'd ever feel settled on the east coast, but I think there are some folks who move east and just take to it. Not sure which one you will be, OP! Honestly, it's probably better to be a person who can enjoy both -- shows better mental flexibility and a healthier outlook.

On the other hand, as an east coaster who made the move out west, I found the people unspeakably rude, and lacking in basic courtesy. A lot of things I would expect on the east coast, like people looking you in the eye when speaking and seeming honest, forthright, and like they respected you, just seemed to fall by the wayside. A lot of the people i interacted with seemed like they couldnt care less about a person or even viewed them with contempt.

I suppose it is a matter of perspective, but I noticed most big morning and talk show hosts come from the east coast and seem to be imported to the west coast. So it seems like that friendly vibe is one people get from east coasters more often than west coasters

The whole point is that your personal experience isn't representative. People have been different experiences and preferences, and so words like "rude" versus "direct" are a matter of opinion not fact. That's okay. Your talk show host thing seems outright weird, though.

In any event, mentally healthy and robust folks can live and thrive anywhere. It's a negative thing to negatively characterize a whole coast, not a positive thing. It's not something people should be boasting about. It shows a very limited world view.

Sure, but we can also have objective ideas of manners and/or niceness. Most people would agree that saying "Thank you" is an act of politeness and omitting is rude. Most people would agree that lying to someone and backstabbing them is not nice. Words have meanings.

I dont have a "talk show host thing", just an observation that most of the most popular radio/ morning hosts have originated from the east coast. Not sure why that would be "weird", unless you're just expressing a general displeasure with this fact. Which would seem to stem more from it contradicting your assertion that west coasters are just as friendly and convivial as east coasters. When it would appear that, based on which hosts get chosen and build large fanbases, does not appear to be the case. Not based on general opinion, at least- which is the tool you would use to judge social skills/abilities

Uh, talk show hosts come from the east coast because that's where the major news media is based. It is same reason why tech companies come out of silicon valley. Do you not understand how that works?

And I have no idea what you are going on about with respect to words have meaning. Uh, yeah? So what? What New Yorkers call "direct," Hawaiians would call "unbelievably rude." Those words all have meaning, yes? I'm sorry if this is a disappoinment to you, but as it turns out the world does not universally agree that you are the universal arbitrator of everyone's lived experience. I realize this will come as a shock to you but it's true.

I'm honestly confused by what point you are trying to make, except that you seem to have a virulent dislike of California based on some experience you had twenty years ago, which goes back to my point about being mentally flexible and how that is really a good thing in life.

Huh? That makes no sense considering the entertainment industry is almost completely based in Los Angeles. If anything, theyre continued sourcing of hosts from the east coast would be an expense, not a help. Actually, if you look at most actors and musicians, they are way overrepresnted by LA locals and people from the west coast in general, because it's much closer to Hollywood, obviously. The exception being personalities that are expected to speak on camera and "have the gift of gab", in which case you start seeing the east coast over and over again in representation.

And yet, we're not basing our opinions around what Hawaiians alone think. Like I said, most "social" rules tend to be crowd sourced- i.e. what the general population thinks. The general population clearly shows a preference for east coast radio hosts, presenters, interviewers, morning hosts, etc, which is proof that, whatever Hawaiians may or may not want (I trust you havent interviewed any on this issue), the general population far prefers east coast conversational skills. And that's that!

Okay, I'm out. Go ahead and continue to obsess about something that happened twenty years ago and talk show hosts. Your odd fixation is definitely making a strong point in this argument, just not the one you think it is. Yay you! You win the argument! You are right for sure!

Um... thanks? I mean you could attempt to address any of the substantive points I've brought up, or the others who posted statistics about racial segregation in Los Angeles, but sure, have a meltdown instead. Maybe try to find your "west coast chill" by smoking a blunt or something. Anyway...

Yeah, sorry but PP has a point. Here’s the thing: LA has a small black population. 8-9%!

So, you just aren’t going to see the presence of many black people in LA. And yes they are kept out of the Westside because of prohibitive real estate, but so I am I! That’s what people are living in other areas of LA, and leaving the Westside.

Yeah, as previously covered, we're not just talking about black people. We're talking about mexicans being relegated to the east side, asians being relegated to koreatown, armenians in glendale, and very specific ethnic areas and regions that keep completely to themselves. That is essentially segregation. It's very, very bizarre.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idk about anything else but whoever keeps posting about how people live grouped solely into ethnic/racial groups in LA hasn't been to LA since 1980 or something like that. It's some sort of weird segregationist fantasy that's actually really disturbing because that PP seems to be fetishizing it. I don't even like LA much, but that PP is so crazily wrong that it makes me think the PP wishes what he keeps posting were true. It's really weird and disturbing.

Well actually I lived in LA up until a couple months ago, lol. So you're wrong again. The racial issues are still alive and well, and no one is praising it. I think you're confusing yourself because you're mad that people are calling out the racial issues in LA, which are ongoing and well documented, like in the article a PP posted about segregation in LA schools. Pay a visit, you'll see.

What? You are putting words in my mouth. I never said there weren't significant racial issues in LA. There are and they are serious. But you are lying about living there, or you are wishing for some weird segregationist fantasy in your head. The totally isolated world you paint just isn't true, and you are weakening your point substantially by painting a wildly inaccurate picture of modern LA. There is no need to make up a segregationist fantasy when talking about race issues in LA. I honestly find it really disturbing how you are doing that. This claim that racial groups in LA only live in one neighborhood in LA is not remotely supported by actual population data.

Stop the segregationist fantasies. It's awful.

I'm absolutely not lying about living there, what an absurd statement. And the data backs up my experience, not yours. I experienced a ton of racial segregation in Los Angeles, and trying to pain it as some weird fantasy that has me salivating, when in fact I've actively condemned it, and gave it as one of my main reasons for disliking Los Angeles since the first time I posted, is a really bold, and dare I say stupid, argumentation strategy.

Did the person who compiled the data about racial segregation in Los Angeles schools have a "fantasy" about it too?

You truly sound crazy and like you need to be medicated.

I don't argue with crazy people with disturbing segregationist fantasies. I will just show the data. Here are some links for you to peruse:

This website visualizes DC racial breakdown by neighborhood and starts from 1970:

https://dcist.com/story/20/01/14/this-gif-shows-how-the-d-c-areas-demographics-have-changed-since-1970/

While more integrated than it was, DC still remains quite separated. Meanwhile, the LA Times provides a neighborhood breakdown that, if you walk through, shows much greater average neighborhood diversity than DC:

http://maps.latimes.com/neighborhoods/

None of this is to take away from the very serious racial issues that LA has. Those are undeniable. I agree with the school issues, I don't deny them. But you need to stop with your false characterizations of neighborhood demographics of LA. They aren't supported by data, and you sound like you are making up very disturbing fantasies.

Anonymous wrote:I am a young person, have lived on the west coast my whole life, and am thinking of moving to one of the larger cities out east.

This is something I've wanted for a while- I like the classic look of the cities, the foliage, the old buildings, but I have some concerns.

I have heard the east coast is very fast paced, and if you're not on the ball, you will get left behind. I consider myself a hard worker but not looking forward to being outpaced by colleagues or not being able to have a work/life balance.

I've also heard east coast people can be shockingly direct. My family is mostly passive aggressive when they get mad, and that's what I tend to be used to. It's worked well where I live, but I'm not sure how I would be able to handle conflicts with the kind of people who "tell it like it is". To me, again, thinking of work situations, it sounds somewhat daunting.

Would love to hear from anyone who has made this move or has experiences in these areas.