The majority fits that description.

Texas is now voting Dem in the metro areas, as a result of influx from Californians.

It is well known that they influence areas for the worse, bringing their partisan mentalities with them.

I love the "seeing eye captain"...

I will definitely think about what you have said.

Jan

Telecommuting is a mixed bag. It takes a significant investment in systems and telecommunications infrastructure to implement and support. And trying to remotely troubleshoot user issues with BYOD is a headache and a half. I'm not saying it doesn't work in some instances, I'm just saying that having to support it myself, it isn't a panacea. I'd much rather be in an office where all the computers are set up the same way and connected to a network I can control.

I think the biggest reason why people don't switch over is that at the end of the day, business is about relationships with people. You just don't have the quality of relationship via technology you have in person. It's why the owners of my billion-dollar company are constantly flying out to meet people. It isn't that they are old-fashioned. They know what works. People whine about the current youngsters inability to communicate? It's because their lives are spent telecommuting!

More sellers than buyers in California at this time...

Yeah, I hear you.

I work with an architect, great guy, who's wife is a Texan and they are planning to retire there. He and I are both noticing the transition going on there and there is some caution about it. I seriously thought about Corpus Christi for my retirement. Just so happened to be the place my grandpa first was stationed in his 20-year navy career after leaving OK as a starving teenager.

Thanks for that. You nailed it.

Good luck on escaping. I was a hands on manager when in the military, but when I opened my mouth about having a better idea for operational testing of a satellite (no one had ever tried it, treating all like they were experimental), I inherited a test program involving multiple sites across the world that necessitated monitoring and directing teams at six different locations in the US, Asia, and Europe, so my management by walking around style (me too) had to evolve.

To make matters more difficult, this was before the internet, so we had to rely on the really bad secure telephones of the 1980s and telex written communications (sort of like email). If that wasn't enough, I had rapid onset cataracts and became blind in the middle of the operation. I had a seeing eye captain who read the telex messages to me and wrote what I dictated in response. When push come to shove, you evolve, and the test program was a success, and a model Space Command has followed since I retired. If I could do it, so can others, and they must if we're to evolve to match our technology.

You may be on to something there: spreading out more might make a discernible change in the social environment. I am really looking forward to the changes that autodriving vehicles and low level robots will bring.

We have 2 employees who always work remotely and one who does so one day a week. Almost everyone else does 'occasionally'. But. We also have at least 3 (brilliant) employees who cannot work without someone hovering over them.

Much of my management technique is 'managing by walking around'. What I find is that very often, someone is blocked by a problem that a different person can easily solve...but the threshold of 'getting around to asking for help' is so high (need I mention that we have primarily introverts in the CA office?) that the problem will go unsolved for weeks (or months). If I wander in and ask, "So. What's goin' on?" and I find out about something like this, I then wander across the hall, "Hey Joe: Can you call [yadda yadda] and get [this information]?" Problem solved.

So here are two instances where remote work does not...work. (And do not suggest that I call these people and talk to them every day when they work remotely. I too am a mega-introvert and I would find excuses for learning Egyptian hieroglyphics rather than do this.)

I too am looking for a location out of CA to move to when/if Schuyler House no longer needs me (ie if we sell the company). I think I have found a decent, though not perfect, location...but I am still monitoring it.

Jan

One of the absurdities of our increasingly technological society is the mindless congregation of people into urban centers. Improved broadband communications should be making it easier to telecommute for people who work in information industries.

Increased emphasis on telecommuting would allow workers to live in less expensive areas, and also relieve salary pressure on the businesses that hire them. Why that concept hasn't occurred to these captains of the information industry has amazed me. For all their supposedly advanced thinking, they are captive of the shirtwaist factory mindset, with supervisors having to physically hover over the workers to make sure they aren't slacking off. Hopefully a fresh thinking corporate body will grasp the idea of using this distributed labor force as a competitive edge, and introduce a whole new way of doing business that doesn't require cramming more bodies into expensive urban areas where they have to live in their cars.

We haven't begun to see the real technological changes to come. Transportation innovation, like the Hyperloop and autonomous vehicles will change perspectives on physical commuting. Virtual medical visits will replace routine checkups and some treatments.

We need to start a program to wean people off the obsession with living in big urban centers. That will allow more independent thinking and exposure to nature that will reduce the mindset that socialism is inevitable.

For people abandoning the big, expensive urban centers, we should create a welcoming environment in smaller communities, rather than seeing them as invaders. They need to be introduced to the degree of freedom from increasingly intolerant social expectations. They need to learn that you don't have to tolerate the always offended, and that civility and respect make the wheels of society move easier. I find that most who claim to be liberal are anything but. Arrogant, rude, intolerant of any who think differently. I certainly hope that isn't the future ahead of us and our descendants.

I think we are talking about different things. I am not talking about the Peyton Place of current politics. I am reflecting on the comments on this thread that Californians/Liberals are carrying their ideas to other areas and infecting them.

I think that, as our society becomes more technological and people move into cities, we become (as a culture, not a political party) estranged from reality. This is what has allowed the growth of many of the liberal doctrines and is justly associated with (a) cities, (b) places like CA where much of life is virtual, (c) our increase in technology. Thus it is not so much the movement of liberals to other states that are infecting those states with liberalism but the growth of cities per se that causes a liberal environment...and people from CA move there too.

If I am correct in the above assumptions, some of which I derive from reading, then the growth of liberalism is inexorable. While, historically, I see this pattern, I do note that it applies to social rather than economic patterns. So - if the conservatives get their act together - we may have a future that includes Capitalism but your grandchildren will probably not own guns, eat meat, or think of themselves as binary gendered.

I am not saying that I want this, nor that it is the fault of one political party or another. I am suggesting that this may be an aspect of being human, as all of the cultures that develop technology seem to go through this process (admittedly, that could be imitative). If this is an accurate perception, then we must include it in any vision we have of the future.

Jan

In all honesty, I have to admit that until 4 years ago, in my world there was Texas and "out there in the boondocks." Although I traveled a lot, it was just travel. Nothing to concern myself with if it wasn't within the boundaries of Texas, because obviously I was never going to live anywhere else. Boy has that changed!

All the best. My dad's side is Okies. I have a fondness for them and the state. I have only been there once - 25 years ago in Ok City. It reminded me of this town in norcal many years before that. I have contemplated retiring there in Oklahoma...

Mark, keep in mind that it was the democrats who created, funded and murdered many, many blacks for well over a century. The Klu Klux Klan was a strictly demo invention.

Some good points from personal history, but I have to call you on a few points: first,we are not a democracy, but a republic,created that way to avoid the "tyranny of the majority." The reason the left wants to destroy the electoral college is they have confidence that as long as they offer lots of "free" stuff, they can win the majority in the big urban centers, and to hell with "flyover" country.

In truth, I think the Democrats will defeat themselves. The presidential competition has become an obscene poker game of who can promise the most goodies. They aren't even paying attention to their own polls. While polling says that 70% of voters (both parties) believe that the 2nd amendment means individual gun ownership is a right, we hear candidates screaming about confiscating our guns. Again, a majority do not support free medical care for illegal immigrants, all of the Democrat candidates have promised it. A majority do not support welfare for illegals, while all the candidates support it. A majority do not support open borders, which essentially the promises of the candidates would pretty much insure it. Medicare for all does not have voter support, but as of now only Joe Biden isn't supporting the idea. The freshmen representatives in the House are begging the party not to waste time on impeachment, but the party is afraid it will lose its insane base if they don't at least go through the motions.

One has to be careful of making general characterizations from strictly personal experiences. I grew up in the south, and if I had used the word "nigger" I would miss dinner for a couple of days. My grandfather, who had been the U.S. Navy's heavyweight boxing champion during WW I spent time teaching the young blacks in his town how to box, as he saw a boxing career as one of the few avenues for respect and recognition open to them. One of feminism's major flaws has been to portray a traditional family oriented woman as not worthy of respect. Ironically, they have high praise for a man who becomes a house husband to enable his wife to have a career.

The cockfighting may have been happening, but it was illegal, and not approved by the majority. Dog fighting still goes on, even though illegal. Is that the fault of conservatives?

“Humans are as individually unique as their fingerprints. To attempt to squeeze them into a single, unrealistically idealized mold and demand they all obey the same rules creates uncontainable stress in society that can only be kept under control with force. The world is too complex to think an authoritarian government can keep things stable and successful. Denying that reality, with unending layers of regulatory control, only destroys the ideal liberals are seeking.“
Very well said, Any one who has been with a group of people or has a family should understand that sentiment.
I prefer the term common sense to conservative.
I would settle for best practices. Right now I am a patriot , witnessing our President take on these Satanic Luciferian Globalist swamp parasites and trying to spread the word. No politician with any good ideas will survive if Trump and the Patriots are unsuccessful.

While I agree with a substantial portion of what you said and agree that your statements are historically correct, what I said about 'one generation' is also historically correct.

I know more than one person, of my father's generation, who was beaten with a razor stop - and in one case beaten so badly that he could not go to school for 2 weeks.

My paternal grandmother called blacks Niggers and thought they should not drink at the same drinking fountain that white folks used; one of my nun teachers mentioned that there were Negros in Africa who had no souls.

I have just unearthed a Reader's Digest article from the 1970's in which a woman said that she had no use for feminism and she was delighted to be known by her husband's name and to spend her life taking care of him and the kids and have him support her financially.

There was a cock-fighting ranch in my neighborhood that was raided and thousands of roosters removed. That was just a couple of years ago.

We are not arguing whether or not Conservatives should be saddled with the sins of our forefathers (but never with their virtues, one notes). What I am pointing out is that the liberals seem fore-ordained to win on a social level.

You and I agree on the granularity of decisions and the worth of freedom. D'souza is a force that may turn aside some of the steamroller of liberal economic planning (as may we in the Gulch) but there will be 'more' and 'virtually all' of our population who are distanced from reality because they never had to get up and feed the chickens in a thunderstorm. These people will keep voting for unworkable plans. And we are a democracy.

Jan

In 1978 I moved to California it was 8th in the nation in per capita income. This was before the booming tech industry. Today after decades of worldwide consumer demand for Silicon Valley
Products. An economic boon with epic proportions. Didn’t see that coming. The result is like the state shorted tech stocks.Good grief . Today they have crashed to 50th or the bottom. Good stewardship .......Brown,Newsome, Pelosi’s,Fienstien,Boxer,Pencilneck and the Rest of Getty’s patsies..

I disagree with your single generation statement. Change started for American blacks in the 1950s (the 1940s if you count Truman's desegregation of the military). Feminism was in full swing by the 1960s. Bear baiting was a thing of the 1800s, and dog and cock fights have been against most state laws since the 1950s. Extreme corporal punishment of a child has been subject to child abuse charges since I was a child in the 1950s. A single generation didn't civilize our country, which has been pressed to weigh our values on an unending scale of justice and opportunity since its founding. There were southern abolitionists before the Civil war, which illustrates a broader population seeking a better country throughout our history.

There should be a balance between responsibilities and privileges, which today's liberals seem to have thrown out. I agree that people shouldn't be persecuted for harmless differences. If one wants to be one of a number of "genders" instead of a binary sexed society, I have no problem, so long as you don't demand society must drill into my child's head that they should question their own sex and "explore" non-binary relationships. I have no problem with legal immigrants who come to our country, so long as they don't try to turn America into their society, especially if where they came from was a third world hell hole. Seeking to create the ultimate welfare state is destructive to society in general.

Technology didn't create the liberal movement, or socialism, or communism. Utopian dreams have always existed, since the beginning of civilized society. Every time they've been tried, they've failed, because they revolve around two tragically horrible concepts: that all people should be treated as if they are all the same; and that central control from a top level authority insures things will work successfully.

Humans are as individually unique as their fingerprints. To attempt to squeeze them into a single, unrealistically idealized mold and demand they all obey the same rules creates uncontainable stress in society that can only be kept under control with force. The world is too complex to think an authoritarian government can keep things stable and successful. Denying that reality, with unending layers of regulatory control, only destroys the ideal liberals are seeking.

Conservatives can win by stressing the rewards of freedom and opportunity. The reason we have such a small segment of our population in agriculture is that we've become amazingly productive. The rewards of rapidly evolving technology are a result of hard work and unleashed creativity. We can acknowledge respect for others and be unashamed to point out when the unendingly offended have overstepped and have themselves become offensive and lacking respect.

Conservatives have become too defensive. You should watch D'nesh D'souza's videos. For an immigrant from India, he has a better understanding of conservatism than most native born conservatives.

It's time to stop letting liberals saddle us with fault for all of America's sins of the past, because if we don't they will lead us into disaster.

I would go further to say the same thing is happening from those who are coming here from other countries, both legally and illegally. Look at Omar and her ilk. Fled a country because of the situations going on there and then try and bring that way of thinking to the USA and trying to force us to accept their ways instead of vice versa.

California goes in cycles; boom, then bust. It usually happens when there are no more buyers who can afford the ridiculously high prices. If it's accompanied by more companies taking their jobs out of the California economy, home prices will drop so dramatically that owners who want to move will find themselves "under water," owing more on their mortgages than the selling price of their home.

Right now the market is at the stalling point, where prices are so high it's hard to find buyers. Renting is a problem because the rents are so high it's hard to even find renters. The whole thing is at the tipping point, and as the state legislature keeps adding more regulatory burdens that drive away businesses, the house of cards will collapse and prices crater for lack of buyers.

What is happening is that California is decaying into a real socialist state, with the disappearance of the middle class. The question then has to be how long before the state economy collapses, and whether or not they cry for a bailout from the federal government. I would imagine that if Donald Trump is still the President, the conditions for a bailout would be incredibly destructive to progressive goals, with a mandatory rollback of most of the Jerry Brown and Gavin Newsome regulations.

Let me start out by reminding everyone that I am strongly conservative.

That being said, I read a lot of Steven Pinker's books, and he laments that he expects - by the end of his life - to be forced to be vegetarian because, historically, the direction that liberals move now, becomes the culture of the future.

Think about it: The ideologies of what used to be termed "Bleeding Hearts" are now what we consider to be core values of our culture: We cannot overtly despise and discriminate against Negros, and Women, and Jews. It is not OK to bait bears and have dog fights or cock fights or light cats on fire. It is illegal to beat your child with a razor strop until his back is bloody.

All of these things have changed in a single generation! All of these things were also values that 'Liberals' fought with against 'Conservatives' who were trying to keep these as revered traditional values.

I do NOT agree with the touchy-feelie modern culture in California, but I am quite aware of what history shows. We cannot deal well with the future without cognizance of the past, and so far the past shows 'we lose; they win'. If we are to change this, we must understand it.

I agree with Blarman that the liberal tendencies are linked to a technological environment that is remote from reality. In 1900, 90% of the jobs in the use were related to 'agriculture'; now it is about 2%. Most of the current generation has not had to deal with the bottom levels of Maslow's pyramid. This is going to continue. Our culture is going to become more affluent and our next generations are going to be even further removed from reality.

Is there any way we can deal with this?

Jan

I have been considering downsizing. When I get ready to sell my home in Florida, maybe I should advertise in California. And NY.

Not all of us who moved from CA to AZ fit that description. I know there are some who do, but I suspect the screwing-up you mention has more to do with the influx from south of the border.

I sold my California house four years ago and took a loss of over $100k when you consider everything we put into it after buying. Granted, we bought in 2007 just before the crash.

Amazing that they move for the superior cost and lifestyle, and then try to change it to what they left. NH is the same with socialists leaving MA.