California’s Liberal Political Elite Live in Overwhelmingly White Affluent Suburbs

Apparently "Rose tinted"

 

Apparently 'no evidence provided' only wishful thinking, so into the 'wishful thinking file' it goes.

 

I used to paint address numbers on curbs as a teenager. I made a lot more money in poor neighborhoods.

Liberal politics are supposed to close the gap between the rich and poor, but results in CA show the opposite.

 

So explain why you believe they should enjoy the privilege of segregation.

 

And why is it that rich liberals don't have to eat their own dogmatic dog food as it were. So much for inclusive..

 

Pat, this is well said and an argument conservatives have made for years. Unfortunately, the left uses what you said as examples of segregation and a lack of diversity. Heck, for quite some time I've been saying people gravitate to their own kind, just like if I moved to Japan I'd be more comfy living around Americans or English speakers, even gang bangers stick to their own kind. So this is why many of us on the right groan when we hear people preaching about diversity and inclusion.

 

Good question. We all know the richest people in America seem to be liberals but for the life of me I don't know why.

 

So you knew all along that liberal elites don't want to live among illegals and refugees yet you never complained to them about it???

 

It's not hypocrisy if they don't preach about how we need to redistribute wealth, or how people have privilege.

 

Rich guy owns a yacht. Some guys have to build it, maintain it, be the crew for it, and so on. Without that yacht those guys are out of work.

 

It was precisely due to demographics, the demographics called your preference. And that's your right and it's all fine and dandy to do that. But why are other people being patronized for doing exactly what you just confessed to doing? Because of how *they* look, and their particular group associations? One could argue that it's a form of political discrimination and second-class citizenship that other groups can easily move amongst their peers just fine without political repercussions, but if you're not a special snowflake then you're **** out of luck.

The point of this article, is the blatant hypocrisy that your post outlines. Whereas everyone should be judged on their merits, but instead they are judged on the liberal utopia of fiction, and those who fail to toe the line of that fiction.

 

Friendly advice for you. If you want to honestly and correctly assess whether someone is a conservative or a liberal or like me whose political philosophy has elements of conservatism and liberalism and libertarianiism depending on the issue. You need to make that assessment over time and not with a limited number of issues.
But the issue here is not me or liberals or conservatives. The deal is that people in a certain economic class tend to cluster within the same proximity. That does not automatically make them liberal nor conservative. So are you implying that our liberal friends should all live in low income ghettos?

 

I don't see the hypocrisy, as a legislator, enacting a policy that benefits those that are struggling, and where I choose to live.

The logic employed is absurd. So, in order for an affluent legislator to NOT to be a hypocrite, he or she must live in a poor neighborhood?

That's not even logical.

 

In order for an affluent anybody to not be a hypocrite, they should at least try to make these neighborhoods better. There shouldn't be a thing as a poor neighborhood, and in developed European countries, they are much closer to this goal than we are at the moment. And it's because of our 'cultural identity' politics that is so barbaric(and backwards) that it's barely one step ahead of radical islam(you know, the people who stone people because they're gay)

Democrats are out of touch with true egalitarianism, and as a result the vast majority of ALL Americans are being disenfranchised by the government.

 

Diversity and inclusion is, or should be if it isn't, about equality of opportunity and access, NOT where one chooses to live.

btw, where conservatives I agree is more on some libertarian grounds, not conservatism overall.

 

I'm a realist, just as there will always be crime, there will always be poor neighborhoods.

the effort, therefore, is to put a dent in crime, and put a dent in poverty.

There is only so much that be done, and what can be done, if conservatives will allow democrats to do it, is to do what can be done, and what can be one is making education more affordable, health care affordable, and social programs which, at best, add some relief to the misery of poverty.

Also, what I think should be done is have a program going into the neighborhoods, community organizing, and teaching the poor that part of the problem is attitude. Sure, lack of access is the big problem, but one must also change one's attitude because without that 'can do' attitude, no social program is going to be worth a spit, for I believe there is some truth that poverty is both an inward and an outward phenomenon.

 

I don't complain about where people live. It is a personal choice.

 

Yes, you love to flaunt your political independence and I love how it pisses you off when someone calls you a lefty, which is why I do it often (you spew leftism on almost every issue(here's an opportunity to claim otherwise....don't miss it), why would I call you anything else). So spare me the speech, I've proven that I don't care what you claim to be.

Now on topic:

This has nothing to do with money. How people keep missing this point is beyond me. This is about certain people preaching about the importance of diversity and how critical it is and then choosing, willingly, to live in an area that isn't diverse at all. If they willingly choose this, how can they preach to the world how important diversity is?

 

I guess I use my eyes for actual reading.. The San Fran thing is very well documented, in fact a piece was film and aired in prime time with REAL life Latino's exposing what is and has been done to force their relocation out of the Bay Area.. I guess I'm just more interested in what the little people have to say then you and many others are in regards to this local..

 

They are as special as they are ruthless! Republican/rich are humanitarian in comparison to a leftist that experiences the taste of fortune! The comical side of this hypocrisy is they are still pretend to be the champion of the minority while slobing down a $75 dollar "Prolly more today" cheeseburger while watching them load all their belongings in to a beat up truck or while they have bulldozers tear their three generational home's down

 

I think it gives them "Hypocrisy creds" somewhat like a badge of honor while laughing it up in the cannabis smoking parlor after their lobster or Kobe Strip Steak dinner!

 

Code of ethics you know!

 

Almost every successful politician lives in an affluent area. Almost any successful anyone does.

 

Even if local costs of living are purposely inflated forcing them to relocate?

 

Funny, hardly any of them do before being elected and after few years in office..