ann arbor is overrated. » Blog Archive

Clueless

Past the College Grounds gets a very prominent quote in this Free Press column about the Cool Cities initiative (in keeping with standard Web-ignorant print media practice, the column does not credit the site or its writer by name, let alone provide an address.) But while Brandon’s remarks about “well-meaning but clueless old farts” dominating the Ann Arbor Cool Cities task force meeting were a commentary aimed at what such meetings could do better, the Freep’s Dawson Bell takes them out of context to argue that the whole idea is doomed. Not only doomed, but flawed, because “[W]e might want to reconsider the value of an undertaking for which one measure of success is whether we can turn over our cities to ‘musicians and artists and hipsters and poets,’” to whom Bell refers with unintentional painful irony as “Bobos.”

83 Responses to “Clueless”

Reading the column over, I think he may be differentiating between Bobos and hipsters (et al)… maybe? And how “cool” means different things to different people and hence the Cool Cities Initiative is flawed? I really don’t understand that last paragraph.
posted by Brandon on June 28th, 2004 at 10:56 pm
Well, he quotes you making a disparaging remark about Bobos as being the opposite of the people that the Cool Cities thing is or should be trying to attract, but then uses “Bobo” throughout the rest of the column to mean the opposite: “these creative-class people, generally imagined to be young, well-educated, entrepreneurial sorts (Bobos).” I thought Bobos were supposed to be Baby Boomers?
posted by ann arbor is overrated on June 29th, 2004 at 12:59 am
Ah. Indeed. I think the “creative-class” people sometimes fall into the “yuppie” category, though. But yeah, Bobos are a bit older typically. All of them probably generate more economically than hipsters, artists, and poets, unfortunately, so they’re surely all in demand. Cool though? No.
posted by Brandon on June 29th, 2004 at 1:10 am
Don’t blame Dawson for the confusion — the confusion is also present in Florida’s magnum opus. Generally, FLorida does want Bobos, and think that creating a cool environment will attract them. In general, Ann Arbor as it presently is is precisely the sort of thing that Florida, and, presumably, Granholm’s task forces, wants for Michigan.
posted by Lucky Jackson on June 29th, 2004 at 9:44 am
I thought the point was that if you want to attract Bobos (who are essentially Yuppies, but who fancy themselves as environmentally friendly, health-conscious, and mildly crunchy in a comfortable middle-aged way) you have to attract the ‘creative class’ who are actually younger and hipper. The bobos come to soak up the creative class atmosphere while creating… well, actually, nothing, unless you count the vase made in pot-throwing 101. But they foot the bill via taxes on their expensive lofts and meticulously restored OFW houses. They then grow old, and retire someplace inexpensive, like Pheonix, AZ, since they’ve spent every cent they’ve earned on Landrovers and property taxes. In the meantime, the hipsters grow up, become Bobos, foot the bill, etc. Sustainable Cool City-ness, if you will.
posted by Anna on June 29th, 2004 at 10:36 am
The easiest way to keep them straight is to remember that Bobo is short for “bourguise bohemians.”
Guess Bell didn’t get the memo.
posted by js on June 29th, 2004 at 11:16 am
Aren’t all bohemians bourgeois?
posted by Alex on June 29th, 2004 at 12:40 pm
The Revolution sez: Hip-hop is bobo kryptonite.
posted by Steven on June 29th, 2004 at 10:33 pm
Maybe you could talk about the worshipful reaction to Farenhiet 9/11? Even as someone who generally tolerates A^2 it makes me sick.
posted by Anonymous on June 30th, 2004 at 12:46 am
There aren’t many bougeois bohemians in Ann Arbor. Most of the folks that AAIO and the rest of the underage critics here claim are bobo’s, are hard working two or more job families with kids who are neither bourgeois nor bohemian.

Even if the premise if this juvenile blog is to make fun of Ann Arbor and it’s full time residents, I cannot believe the cynicism and general negativity of the posters here. And this is from from kids who are barely out of diapers and whine about how my generation is keeping them down? Go tell the chaplain, sonny.

I thought Michael Moore’s latest film is one of the best pieces of free speech propaganda ever. What does his film have to do with A2 and your getting sick?

You wanna get sick? Don’t vote in the next election, as is the practice of your generation. I don’t expect any more from a bunch of overpriveleged college students who whine about being “stuck” here for the summer.
posted by Working Liberal Voter in A2 on June 30th, 2004 at 6:51 am
If working liberla voter is a member ofthesixties group, please tell him that the majority of college students in”his” generation supported the War in Vietnam for allb ut the final few years. Also tell him that “his” generation was the one that drove the working class out of the Democratic party and set the stage for the Regan adminsitration and the rightwing ascendency that we ahev lived under for two generations. Tell him that the President that represents “his” generation signed NAFTA and began the exportation of jobs overseas. Tell him that the voters of “his” generation conistantly refuses to fund public education (at the Univesity, high school and elementary level) at the levels that “his” generation enjoyed. If he went to U-M, ask how much the people of “his” generation paid for tuition, Ask him how much the students of “his” generation paid for rent.
(Nothing like a good old fashioned anti-boomer rant, from a card carrying member of Generation X. This is jsut like the good old days.)
posted by Lucky Jackson on June 30th, 2004 at 8:17 am
“There aren’t many bougeois bohemians in Ann Arbor.”

Hahaha.

“I cannot believe the cynicism and general negativity of the posters here”

Hahahahahaha.

“And this is from from kids who are barely out of diapers and whine about how my generation is keeping them down?”

Bwaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

May I suggest boomernet as an alternative. Maybe you’ll be more at home with your kind.
posted by Steven on June 30th, 2004 at 9:17 am
Wasn’t the term “bobo” coined by David Brooks?
He’s slid lately, but the former Liberals’ favorite Conservative does get it right (especially here) with this premise:

We all live cheerfully in our own separate tents, no group subordinate to any other. Everyone, in fact, feels happily superior to everyone else.
posted by Leighton on June 30th, 2004 at 9:17 am
Live long enough and you will be assimilated, Steve. Glad I could give you a good laugh, but it seems that’s all you can offer except your derisive remarks that lead nowhere, like your generation.

It’s terms like “your kind” that I find particularly offensive, sexist and racist.

It’s a different world that it was yesterday, what do you expect? If you continue to blame conditions and circumstances on those that came before you, there won’t be anyone to blame but yourself when they’re all dead and gone.

MS Jackson, It’s your generation that keeps idiots like Bush in office, because you don’t vote.

Like most college students way back then, we were interested in learning enough to get a job and stay out of Viet Nam. Indeed most Americans supported the war until the last few years, why should the students of that generation be any different. Like today’s situation in Iraq, a lot of folks were duped and then turned around.

Oh, I guess that working class union members don’t support the Democratic party. Don’t make me laugh. Like all poiltics, it’s about the money. Poor folks don’t have much and most of them don’t vote either.

Funding public schools? I guess that’s why Ann Arbor schools are underfunded and we just taxed ourselves a new high school. Reagan busted the Federal budget and so is W. Now tell me who underfunds public schools? My genertion’s schools didn’t have swimming pools, computers or security problems. Gee, life was simpler back then. Instead of killing each other in school, we just smoked in the boys room. Hmmm, I wonder why public schools are in such sad shape? Do the students shoulder any of the blame? Or is just their parents?

Tuition? Rent? Ever heard of inflation? Cost of living? It’s not a generational issue. It’s because of folks who think the answer is the privatization and corporatization of public instututions. Something that your generation encourages by not being actively involved… OR VOTING!

Whiners
posted by Anonymous on June 30th, 2004 at 12:13 pm
you wrote: “If you continue to blame conditions and circumstances on those that came before you, there won’t be anyone to blame but yourself when they’re all dead and gone.”

So it’s not ok to blame the generation from whom we’re inheriting a lot of these problems, but it’s ok to blame the current generation that has less power, less resources, less money and no peer representation in government? That makes no sense at all.

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but the 50%+ of the population that doesn’t turn out to vote isn’t comprised solely of 18-24 year olds. Are you going to turn around and tell the African American community that they’re responsible for the systematic inequalities they have to deal with are their own fault because they don’t vote? Not only is that absurd and offensive, but it’s also just plain wrong.

And it’s really rich that you find terms like “your kind” sexist, offensive, and racist and then turn around to make blanket statements about “you” and “your generation.” Guess it’s less offensive, sexist, and racist when you put it in terms of birth cohort. *I* find it offensive when “liberals” yell at me and tell me that voting will solve all of our problems.
posted by Alex on June 30th, 2004 at 12:32 pm
Any person or group, particularly youngsters and minorities who don’t vote, who become discouraged enough to give up, have only themselves to blame for the conditions about which they cry. If young people and minorites voted, W might not be president and things would definitely be different. Huh.

Yes, you deserve some blame as well. But if you think blaming someone will change things, you’re not only sadly mistaken, but pathetic as well.

So you’re tired of “liberals” yelling at you? Hey, the times are yours to do with what you want, my man. Do something or quit yer bellyachin’.

Yeah, a lot of folks don’t vote, but who ends up in office? Folks who get the most votes! I saw Rufus Wainwright at the Michigan a while back. The crowd was predominatly young. When he said that Bush was the devil, the place cheered. When he told them to get out and vote only a few folks whooped. Go figure.

I love watching your generation chasing their tails.
posted by Anonymous on June 30th, 2004 at 12:53 pm
I recommend you go read Lani Guinier’s “Tyranny of the Majority” and then come back and try to give me that shit about the efficacy of voter politics.
posted by Alex on June 30th, 2004 at 1:23 pm
C-can’t we all just … get along?

(Seriously, though, Working Liberal Voter — if that IS your real name — you brought this flamewar on yourself with your ridiculous You Kids Suck posturing.)
posted by Ben on June 30th, 2004 at 1:37 pm
Ah yes, the voice of the generation that brought us “greed is good” and “more greed is even better”. The generation that still had the security of starting to work at a company and for the most part be able to retire for that company. The generation who’s motto should be, “I got mine now get yours”. The generation that got where it was on the backs of the generation that went through a depression and a world war and came back, put it behind them and sought a better existence for their children. And the generation that once it got to power spawned the “Reagan Revolution” which insures that it will get what it wants and leave its children footing the bill.
posted by Kozzie on June 30th, 2004 at 4:27 pm
Without getting into the standard generational warfare, perhaps “Working Liberal Voter” could explain, concisely, given the high rents in Ann Arbor, why young professionals would want to settle in this city. What is it about Ann Arbor’s development and zoning and political climate that would make the city a place worth staying or moving to, for a young ambitious professional.

Well, WLV?

(crickets)
posted by Constantine on June 30th, 2004 at 4:37 pm
Let’s not forget that votes for president are systemitically (sp) nullified by the electoral college…it doesn’t really favor dems or reps, it just sort of causes presidents (like Bush the Second) who get less votes to still be prez.
posted by Anonymous on June 30th, 2004 at 5:37 pm
Ok, racial minorities have been systematically opressed. Some for centuries.

What is your generation’s excuse?

My father’s (your grandfather) generation elected Reagan. Don’t blame me for that one. Ahhh, but that’s all you know how to do.

Greed is good? That was in a movie, kids. In fact it’s you kids that sound greedy, the generation that wants it all on a silver platter.

Hey, it’s your generation of overpriveleged “creative class” that either does or doesn’t want to move here, so why don’t you do the explaining? If you want to live here, pony up. There’s a cost of admission wherever you go. If you don’t like it, move to Saginaw, it’s a cool city. I don’t think there’s much here in A2 for you. It’s obviously the worst place on earth. Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

All I here is the same broken record. I got everything, You got nothing. My generation is responsible for everything that’s messed up. Your generation can change the world, if you’d only let us. Waaah!

Crybabies

(roaches)
posted by Working Liberal Voter in A2 on June 30th, 2004 at 7:40 pm
Listen to yourself Working Liberal Voter.

That’s exactly what your parents said as you lolled around smoking pot and picketed city government buildings in obscure college towns. Everyone hits the age where they think the generation behind them are a bunch of ne’er-do-well-whippersnappers.

One thing that your generation can always be counted on is being one big cliche.
posted by Anna on June 30th, 2004 at 8:52 pm
At least I inhaled, walked the line and got gassed for what I believe in.
posted by Anonymous on June 30th, 2004 at 9:06 pm
If you want to live here, pony up. There’s a cost of admission wherever you go.

The problem being pointed out about Ann Arbor is that for the cost of admission, you don’t get too much. The author of AAIO is fond of reminding readers that rents in Boston were less expensive than A2 rents. For the “price of admission” one could live in Chicago or Boston or the SF/Bay area– places which are far more amenable to quality living than A2.

What’s your problem, anyway?
posted by Constantine on July 1st, 2004 at 2:39 am
As if AAIO is the arbiter of all things good. Laughable.

To compare A2 with any of the cities you mention is again… laughable. Anyone who expects a college town of 100,000 to have what those cities offer in the way of employment, housing, entertainment, etc should put down the crack pipe.

San Francisco? Ever lived there? I have. Talk about arm and leg costs of living.

Boston? Ever driven there? ‘Nuff said.

Chicago? Filthy by anyone’s standards.

“Quality living”? Is that what you seek? You will find life everywhere and anywhere. The quality of it is only your perception, grasshopper. Some people would be ecstatic to have been born caucasian, overindulged, overfed and overpriveleged, like most of the posters here. But you? you seek quality from your trappings, not from within. It seems you seek only the comforts and pleasure life can offer and measure your quality of life by those things. That’s a trait far too common among young people today. Life should be what you make it, no matter where you live it. Indeed, you’ve fallen prey to marketing and hype. I didn’t expect anything else from those of you with little life experience.

What’s your problem, Connie? Can’t find what you seek? It’s obviously not here, where you are.
posted by Working Liberal Voter in A2 on July 1st, 2004 at 7:01 am
Hey Workiong Liberal Voter:
What generation does George Bush come from?
posted by Lucky Jackson on July 1st, 2004 at 7:30 am
Hey, Lucky (to be in Ann Arbor) Jackson

Bush and I are the same age, so?

But your apathy elected him.
posted by Anonymous on July 1st, 2004 at 7:53 am
“Liberal” in Ann Arbor, it is your generation that will be the FIRST generation in American history that can say it didn’t make things better for the generation following it. Congratulations. The infrastructure is crumbling because of the incessant whining about taxes. Because of the people you are putting up to get elected, we have a bunch of cowards that wont address the problem that Social Security will be broke after you guys drain it. You talk about voter apathy, last I checked, your generation is a big part of the overall population figure, so I’m guess that it is prevelant in your generation as well.

Chicago a dirty city? Haven’t been there have you? Chicago is one of the cleanest cities this side of Toronto.
posted by Kozzie on July 1st, 2004 at 9:35 am
The idea that rents in Boston are less than rents in Ann Arbor is an outright falsehood. We moved here from Boston, lived in and around the Boston area for years, and are intimately familiar with the rental market. Trust me, there’s **nowhere** in Boston my husband and I could rent a nice 2 BR apt, on multiple bus lines, next to a public library, in a quiet development, with a so-far perfect landlord, 10 minutes from downtown, for $835.(as we do here). We’re practically giddy with the difference in cost of housing (although that is the only noticeable cost-of-living difference, I should add).

My old, unmodernized, 2br apt in Porter Sq. rented for $1400 in 2001, and that was a pretty good deal. My sister and her husband live in a tiny 2br Arlington for $1250. My best friend rents a 1br in Everett for $1200. Everett!! And she only lives there because she can’t find a condo to buy inside of Rte 128 that’s under a quarter million, let alone a house.

So yes, Ann Arbor may lack many things, but outrageous rents is NOT one of its problems. Not compared to Boston, SF, Chicago, NY, or any number of places that rank higher for housing costs.
posted by Elizabeth on July 1st, 2004 at 11:12 am
Also, re: what generation Bush the Lesser comes from — it’s irrelevant. Bush is to his generation as Kennedy was to his — wealthy, privileged, raised to be in power from birth. There’s no sense in comparing any of us here to the oligarchy — it’s like comparing the Queen to the commoners.

That said, I seriously doubt that anything productive ever comes from finger-pointing. Stereotyping is for lazy people.
posted by Elizabeth on July 1st, 2004 at 11:23 am
I was born in Chicago. I remember alewives littering the lakeshore and the dead Chicago River. It’s a dirty place compared to most every other midwest city.

I guess Columbine is representative of how you young whippersnappers solve your problems.

At least my generation didn’t get boob jobs or need prozac or therapists to enjoy life when we were 25. Pot was good enough.

If it wasn’t for folks my age you wouldn’t be able to play your XBox until you have carpal tunel syndrome. No go out and play in the sunshine. Learn a trade.

I keep hoping that my generation will be responsible for health care for everyone. There WILL be a gray revolution if Bush keeps chipping away at our (and your) social benefits and shouldering you and your kids with the debt. I paid for my folks Social Security, now it’s your turn to pay for your folks’. You obviously don’t understand how it works. One generation pays for the past generations benefits. Oh, I’ve heard that you kids don’t want Social Security, you want to invest your “retirement” dough in private stock market accounts (guffaw). Hey, blame your grandparents for having all us kids after WW2. Now go out and make a bunch of rugrats to support you in your old age.

Oh, I guess Big Bill Clinton wasn’t a boomer. He presided over the longest economic expansion in US history and made a bunch of young folks outrageously wealthy. He only lied about getting a blow job, not about sending your generation to die in the desert.
posted by Working Liberal Voter in A2 on July 1st, 2004 at 11:56 am
Oh, SUCH a troll… don’t feed it, kids.
posted by Elizabeth on July 1st, 2004 at 12:19 pm
“Boston? Ever driven there? ‘Nuff said.”

The whole point of “real” cities is that you don’t NEED to drive anywhere– walking and transit will easily get you to all of your daily needs, wants, and entertainment. Try that in Ann Arbor with its limited night and weekend bus schedule– especially if you live in the suburban part of town. It’s “your generation” that is addicted to SUVs and highway commuting.

Chicago? Filthy by anyone’s standards…

I was born in Chicago. I remember alewives littering the lakeshore and the dead Chicago River. It’s a dirty place compared to most every other midwest city.”

Yeah, and I was born in Holland, Michigan. We had alewives wash up on the lakeshore there every year, too. Alewives are everywhere in the Great Lakes– if Ann Arbor was on one we’d have them too. A Great Lake is an asset, not a liability. And “filthy”? Why, because there are poor people? The Ann Arbor undergrad neighborhoods are a lot dirtier than much of Chicago. Besides– the word is “gritty,” which is why many of us like places like Ypsi or Hamtramck more than over-sanitized and gentrified Ann Arbor.
posted by Brandon on July 1st, 2004 at 12:43 pm
You know, I was actually finding your thread entertaining until you unadvisedly brought up Columbine High School.

Speaking as a graduate of Columbine, and I am trying very hard to be polite here, you best keep your mouth shut. That’s as polite as I can get. Your comments have crossed a line for me.

Why don’t you take your own advice and go outside and play?
posted by todd on July 1st, 2004 at 12:46 pm
WLV has invoked Columbine, which can be said to be a corollary of Godwin’s law. This thread is now dead. Thank goodness.

If there’s disagreement on that, then this should fix it:

WORKING LIBERAL VOTER = HITLER.

There!
posted by Dan on July 1st, 2004 at 12:50 pm
about rent prices… yes, Ann Arbor’s rents are flat out ridiculous. Coming from Philly, both myself and others will pay from $100-250 more in AA than Philly for the same sized apartment, whether it be a 1-BR/studio or a 2-BR condo-ish apartment.

And as for thinking that Ann Arbor is some terribly place to be stuck - well, I’m 24, grew up in the city of DC, and just spent a few years in New York and Philly, and I can’t wait to live AA. Literally counting the minutes until I can XC run, XC ski, homebrew without a problem, go camping in a heartbeat, glee in the UM library and its resources (I’ll be staff not a student), and drink damn well for little at the Heidelberg and Arbor Brewing. Thats all a shitload better than my life has been in NYC or Philly.

Better to realize that comparing AA to cities, like those mentioned above or local ones like Chicago, is apples to oranges. You can have the apple of a city all you want, but recognize that AA is definitively NOT an apple. So adjust your thinking accordingly. Instead of Ann Arbor being overrated (true, maybe, i dunno) how about ann- arbor-is-not-for-you-but-a-big-city-is.

And no I’m not a troll, I’ve been reading this site for quite some time.
posted by soon moving to AA on July 1st, 2004 at 1:16 pm
I best keep my mouth shut? Whatcha gonna do? Punch me out through your keyboard?

So, the net cops todd and Dan have shown their teeth.

I am shaking in my Gucci loafers.

Thread not dead

DAN = Stalin
posted by Anonymous on July 1st, 2004 at 3:26 pm
WLV probably lives in Dexter and in accordance with this thread is positivley clueless.
posted by mucho gusto on July 1st, 2004 at 3:33 pm
People died in the community that I grew up in, and bloodied kids were parked in my parents yard during the shootings. Gee, I must just be overly sensitive.

Don’t let me get in your way, though…keep proselytizing, clearly you are several cuts above the rest of us.
posted by todd on July 1st, 2004 at 4:00 pm
I’m glad you can make broad generalizations of a generation based on a sample size of two. To say that this generation solves its problems with guns because of two folks in Columbine is misleading at best. Of course if you want to get down to, they gave off a number of warning signs that their parents, teachers, school administrators etc. missed. I read that they basically told their parents to butt out, and they did. Who’s fault is that?

We keep hearing about how the Baby Boomers are the largest block of people in the country right now. To blame Reagan on my grandparents is again misleading. Unless of course, you guys weren’t guilty of voting as well. Speaking of which, Ann Arbor just held a bond issue and the news was thrilled about a 14% turnout. Wow, that must be reason to be excited. 14% of the people cared enough to show up. Seeing how you are lashing out as us for not voting, I’ll assume that you were one of the 14%?

Like it or not, it is the boomer generation that is in power and it is the boomer generation that thinks short term profits are more important than the country by their outsourcing.
posted by Kozzie on July 1st, 2004 at 4:15 pm
A note on the baby boomers electing/not electing Reagan. By 1980, anyone born after 1962 could vote; by 1984, anyone born after 1966 could. That’s all the boomers, by the widest definitions. You can’t exactly skewer X-ers for apathy while blaming your “father’s generation” for voting in the gipper.
posted by Ben on July 1st, 2004 at 6:12 pm
Er, born *BEFORE* 1962, 66
posted by Ben on July 1st, 2004 at 6:13 pm
WVL may not be a bobo, but is an idiot. I hate to admit that I probably come from the same generation because I do not want to be lumped into the same catagory. So please, do not think all people of his (?) generation are like that.

However, I do take exception to another comment about social security and the fact the people of my generation will suck it dry. I have been paying big time into it for a long, long time without the option of investing the same dollars myself, which I would have preferred. The generation before me paid little and is collecting and collecting. Now, we’re told that. “hey, I don’t think there will be anything left for your generation to collect. Sorry, go to plan B”. Now what? I’ve put my kids through school and have sort of planned on SS supplementing retirement, but…oh, well.
posted by b.boomer on July 1st, 2004 at 7:39 pm
The problem with social security is that all generations aren’t the same size. A generation with fewer people (mine) is going to be asked to pay for a generation that is larger in number (baby boomers). The generation before the boomers was also smaller, so while the boomers paid a lot, it will still be less than we’ll pay for them.

That’s not to say that I think the boomers should just be SOL, given that they’ve paid in and haven’t been allowed to invest the money themselves, but that’s going to happen to somebody, and if not the boomers, probably us (Gen-X). Plus we’ll pay more in the meantime, because we’ll be supporting more people.

Social security is like a big pyramid scheme. What a mess.
posted by Anna on July 1st, 2004 at 9:06 pm
It’s not “like” a pyramid scheme; it IS a pyramid scheme. It would be illegal for any other entity to make the claims and engage in the bookkeeping shenanigans the government does wrt social security.
posted by Elizabeth on July 1st, 2004 at 9:15 pm
I don’t think that your generation will have to pay the load for the boomers. I think that the reality is that we will be told, “sorry, we’re really sorry, but we screwed up and I’m sure you all can find a way to survive”. My mom, who is in her 90’s, paid such a miniscule amount to SS and has been collecting SS and Medicare for 30 years! Now, I don’t begrudge her that and I realize she is a bit of an exception, but the reality is that she paid, for example, maybe $3,000 in SS taxes and has collected perhaps $500,000 in SS and Medicare. It’s not just the numbers of people who pay and collect, but since SS was just started about 50 years ago, it is also the fact that the older generation paid so little and collected so much.
posted by b. boomer on July 1st, 2004 at 11:16 pm
It was the generation prior to the “Greatest Generation” that didn’t pay anything into Social Security and could start drawing from it. That is where it started to get screwed up. However, it doesn’t help that the folks in Washington don’t recognize now that there is a problem because now is the time for them to do something about it. It really doesn’t help that the Current Administration is spending like a kid with dad’s credit card.

I really shouldn’t get into generational slamming but when arrogant asses ask for it, they’re going to get it.
posted by Kozzie on July 2nd, 2004 at 12:04 am
the biggest problem with social security is not even the fact that different generations have different numbers (that type of thing is a gradual phenomenon and doesn’t really create that big of an impact)- its that the age at which one can collect has never kept up with the changing life expectancy of the population.

when it was founded, the initial SS collection age was 62 (the life expectancy at the time). before, just living long enough to collect put you ahead of half of the crowd. this is no longer the case- now, probably 75-80% of people live to be 65 or older (and are therefore eligible to collect).

DISCLAIMER: my numbers may be off a little bit, since its been a while since i read up on this topic, but you get the idea…

as for the issue of voter apathy, the basic truth is this: if you don’t vote, you have no ground to bitch and complain. sure there are plenty of things that your vote may or may not have changed, but the point is to become an ACTIVE PARTICIPANT. yes, there are many screwed up things with politics and government (like the electoral college), but when voters become disengaged and apathetic, “the establishment” ultimately wins- not you and me.
posted by craig on July 2nd, 2004 at 9:38 am
There’s nothing wrong with the electoraal college — it keeps little states “in the game.” Otherwise, their votes would be meaningless. This is federalism, folks. Not just one big mob.
posted by Elizabeth on July 2nd, 2004 at 10:25 am
A few thoughts on all this:

The problems with Social Security don’t really have much to do with one generation living like kings at another’s expense - the system hasn’t really changed all that much since its inception. The real problem is that it hasn’t changed enough to cope with the situation we’re facing viz., demographics and economics. Each generation does pay for the previous generation’s benefits, and what we have now are the Baby Boomers beginning to retire and a proportionately smaller generation being asked to pay for their benefits (this, by the way, is the gaping hole in the Bush “SS accounts” plan, which Krugman has nailed on the head - if the present generation puts money into accounts for themselves, you need a plan of some kind for the current retiree generation). This is complicated by the life-expectancy issue - thanks to all the terrific new drugs and medical technologies out there, people just live well into their 80s and longer these days. The basic financing problem gets even worse when you factor in Medicare Part A - SS hasn’t really been able to keep up with the faster-than-inflation growth in healthcare costs, and people living longer does have the implication that they use more healthcare - and we haven’t really done anything about this beyond expensive boondoggles like Medicare+Choice and the new drug plan. So, yeah, it’s a complete mess, but you can’t really pin it on any one generation. I don’t really have a guess as to what might happen with it. Ultimately we will have to seriously think about how to fix the problems, and this will likely mean either cutting benefits or raising the payroll tax to pay for the status quo. I know lots of people worry about the former, but I would hold out hope that the latter might happen - maybe not with the current administration, but political climates have a way of changing.

As far as voting and participating in politics, Elizabeth is right on in saying that stereotyping is lazy. It’s ecological fallacy to call me personally apathetic just because I belong to a demographic group with low voting rates - just like it would be wrong to blame my parents for the Reagan-Bush years because they voted back then (the fact that they voted for neither should make some difference in how I judge them). Like it or not we’re in this together - it might be easy and viscerally satisfying to blame others for the state of the world, but the situation isn’t likely to change unless people do the intellectual legwork of figuring out constructive responses to it and working together to make them happen.

And reading this thread does demonstrate why progressives in this country have lost traction in the political process. Say what you will about conservatives, but they do have a knack for putting aside differences and getting behind politicians who can deliver on common interests (that those common interests are often, well, evil is another discussion). Progressives do seem to have an idealism that I like, but it often goes along with a very anti-progressive need for ideological purity and intolerance of dissenting views. The Nader phenomenon is a perfect example of this - we should all be able to agree on the common goal of defeating Bush, but the inability of many liberals to half-step off their ideological high horses and work with others toward that goal might be the biggest obstacle to achieving it.
posted by Nick on July 2nd, 2004 at 10:36 am
Hey Todd,

Columbine sucks. Arvada West kicks its ass.
posted by Mark on July 2nd, 2004 at 11:22 am
Mark,

That is true, but A West kids still have to live in Arvada.
posted by todd on July 2nd, 2004 at 11:49 am
Talking about politics is overrated
posted by mucho gusto on July 2nd, 2004 at 12:33 pm
No argument on that point, but at least I was saved from the horrors bussing in DPS. At least that was the thinking at the time on the part of the decision-makers.

And, at the risk of further hijacking the thread (which might not necessarily be a bad thing), nice place you have over there. It opened right around the time I moved here, and will be one of the few places I genuinely miss when I leave.

I am a huge fan of the lack of filtration, and all those lagers under one roof. It has been an inspiration to a 10-year amateur brewer who only started using grains a few years ago.
posted by Mark on July 2nd, 2004 at 12:35 pm
sorry to get off the subject of brewing, but…

i’d have to say that i disagree with elizabeth re: the electoral college. true, there was a time when this country WAS a federalist state- 200 years ago. its really a democratic republic. but that’s besides the point.

why don’t we have a true GENERAL election - choosing our national leader by popular vote? we do that for virtually every other election on every level from 6th grade class president on up. besides, the electoral system only further discourarges entire groups of people to vote.

this year, for instance, NY and CA will almost certainly go to kerry and TX will go to bush. if you live in one of those places but don’t belong to the “majority”, your vote is essentially meaningless. its even more so in places like utah, wyoming, rhode island and vermont. interestingly, voters in the smaller swing states will have a disproporionaly greater say in who gets elected, since the EC way of tabulating votes is basically winner-take-all.

and don’t get me started on accurate vote counts. why is it that they can tell you what MACHINE spit out the winning numbers in a 20-state powerball lottery, but they can’t tell you if a “dimpled” or “pregnant” chad should be counted as a vote? please…
posted by craig on July 2nd, 2004 at 1:38 pm
What’s your problem, Conn[stantine]? Can’t find what you seek? It’s obviously not here, where you are.

I don’t live in A2. The point of AAIO is that the amenities available in other small cities are unavailable in A2. For all A2’s claims of a cosmopolitan environment, it promotes the exact opposite. It’s not complaints about A2. It’s mockery towards people who are deluded into thinking they live someplace interesting.
posted by Constantine on July 2nd, 2004 at 3:49 pm
Constantine, why don’t you give us a couple of examples of similar sized cities and “amenities” that A2 lacks?

Toledo is a very interesting place. So is Bay City and Saginaw. Kalamazoo? Hartford? Port Huron?
posted by Anonymous on July 3rd, 2004 at 8:21 am
Toledo and Battle Creek have zoos. Bay City has a pizza restaurant that blows anything in Ann Arbor away (even the vaunted Cottage Inn). Bay City also has the river and bay and is starting to get the restaurant base to support itself as a tourist mecca.

However, I will still take Ann Arbor over them.
posted by Kozzie on July 3rd, 2004 at 11:06 am
Toledo has three times the population of ann arbor, it’s worth pointing out. About the electoral college: its two biggest problems are that (1) the number of electors isn’t totally proportionate to the state’s population (Wyoming deserves .2 and has 2) and (2) dividing the electorate up into states is arbitrary. There are plenty of other, more meaningful ways to divide the electorate. African Americans are a minority, like Wyomingans; they’re also a /historically repressed/ minority. That doesn’t mean they should have more votes per capita.
posted by Ben on July 3rd, 2004 at 2:58 pm
Zoos are abominations. The Toledo zoo in particular has a horrible record.
posted by Elizabeth on July 3rd, 2004 at 7:17 pm
Clicking my sparkly red shoes twice

There’s no place like home. There’s no place like home.

(wherever it might be, wherever it might be)
posted by mucho growing mellow in his old age) gusto on July 4th, 2004 at 10:46 am
Ann Arbor would be a hell of alot nicer to me if Detroit wasn’t such a toliet.

I think people on this board are unaware of how much nicer that current s—hole was before the 1970s or so. I have a older friend who tells me that young people who travel to exciting uban environments like Chicago, Boston, San Fransisco, would be quite surprised to see that detroit was once a city on that scale. I think we’ll all be in our coffins before detroit gets back to that.
posted by theCuban on July 4th, 2004 at 12:18 pm
Constantine, why don’t you give us a couple of examples of similar sized cities and “amenities” that A2 lacks?

Cambridge, MA and Berkeley, CA are both examples of cities with ample access to late night food, coffee, live music venues, and a more thriving culture than A2. All three cities have a population of about 100,000.

The point of this weblog is not that Ann Arbor is awful. The point of the weblog is that Ann Arbor is overrated. The city would like to think that it can compete with college towns like Berkeley and Cambridge, but it can’t. The opportunity cost of moving to Ann Arbor is pretty high, given the alternatives.
posted by Constantine on July 5th, 2004 at 5:14 pm
Cambridge is part of Boston Metro.

Berkeley. The same for the Bay area.

Comparing A2 to those places is, as someone said before, is apples and oranges.

This weblog is rather pointless no matter how much serious talk we try to imbue on it’s pages.

“Opportunity cost”? I’m glad you’re getting an education in buzzword compliance.
posted by mucho gusto on July 6th, 2004 at 7:11 am
Okay, let’s try comparing Ann Arbor to Madison Wisconsin. No metro area there. Ann Arbor loses on every category.
posted by Lucky Jackson on July 6th, 2004 at 8:45 am
Ah, Madison: the bane of AA backers everywhere.
posted by Leighton on July 6th, 2004 at 9:43 am
I think we might have just hit on exactly what makes Ann Arbor less of a town or a city or exburb or whatever the hell it is: no scenic bodies of water. True, the Huron is great. But compared to Madison’s two lakes, Berkeley’s bay, etc., etc., Ann Arbor has nothing. Now, I guess if we started comparing AA to Bloomington, Champbana, or Lansing. . .
posted by AA Hater on July 6th, 2004 at 12:24 pm
Or Austin, TX? (too big)
posted by leighton on July 6th, 2004 at 3:34 pm
Austin’s also the state capitol. Which means that you should look to Lansing.
Which is when the hilarity really ensues.

As for Madison, I’ve only visited, and it seemed nice but about the same as, say, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, or Fayetteville, Arkansas. That being said, I’ve lived here long enough that I’m sure visitors see Ann Arbor as not much different from Fayetteville or Cedar Rapids.
posted by js on July 7th, 2004 at 12:26 pm
Madison is a lot bigger than Ann Arbor, and also the state capital, too, lest we forget. Boulder is really about the most comparable college-town in size and proximity to a major city, at least off the top of my head. Most others are either rather larger or smaller, or else right next to a major city (one wonders, though, what it might be like if UM had stayed in Detroit in 1837). Of course, we don’t have mountains here, so it isn’t perfect… but we sure have a lot in common with Boulder, and compare more favorably in some ways, and less in others. I think we are only going to be more Boulderesque, both in positive ways (better bike transit infrastructure) and negative (gentrification), as Todd has frequently suggested.
posted by Anonymous on July 7th, 2004 at 6:11 pm
Funny, I always hated Boulder too…
posted by Alex on July 7th, 2004 at 6:21 pm
Let me take a stab at helping us all learn to agree to disagree . . .

I think how you feel about this place depends a lot on your reference point. My sense is that many (maybe most) people here are from somewhere else, even if they’ve lived here a long time, and they have another place to compare it to. If you’ve come from a place you really couldn’t stand, you might well find a lot to like about it - and, conversely, if you’re from a place you really liked, particularly a larger city, you might well be less than impressed by AA and somewhat puzzled by the pretentiousness. I think I fall into the latter group largely because I really like the place I’m from (Pittsburgh), and the place I’m from also happens to be prettier, livelier, more friendly, and less expensive than AA. All about the reference point.
posted by Nick on July 8th, 2004 at 4:09 pm
nick is right.

i happened to grow up in upstate ny (an area with lots of good things, except for a robust economy). after my time at UM, i moved to the ‘burbs of philly (the things you will do for love) and found certain aspects of my new location great, while others abysmal. while there is nothing (objectively) wrong with my current town, it lacks the neighborly-ness of my hometown and the personality of a quirky place like AA. moreover, not only are the locals here even bigger snobs than what you’d likely find in AA, but they have less reason to be.

all they’re interested in is who’s got the biggest house and the highest-priced car. they don’t have exceptional backgrounds, educations, or experiences- only their family’s old money. they consider themselves “green” if their SUV gets more than 10 miles to the gallon OR has more than one person in it at any given time.

i’d go on but would (no doubt) be told to start a blog about philly being overrated. which would be fine, except that philly actually has an inferiority complex.
posted by craig on July 8th, 2004 at 4:53 pm
craig is a funny guy in a kinda unpretentious way
posted by mucho gusto on July 8th, 2004 at 5:57 pm
Eh. Ann Arbor IS over-rated. It’s full of obnoxious authoritarians from all political stripes, its over-blown ego dovetails synergisticly with U-M’s overblown ego, it’s far more expensive than it deserves to be, and for all the bullshit about being “arts friendly,” not only is it fairly hostile to “unapproved” art, it’s not like there have been any decent artists coming out of here in a long time.
What that means, from my eyes, is that things like the art (and music, etc.) scene get supported here out of a dutiful obligation rather than love, and then hyped to all fuck for every modest victory. It is friendlier to arts than, say, Lansing, but not nearly as cool as the shit-storm of hype would lead an unbiased observer to expect.
Which, of course, means that those without a nose good for sniffing out the bullshit are horribly disappointed by the Potemkin village of Ann Arbor. But I’ve always found the hype pretty easy to ignore, and have generally enjoyed myself. I don’t need breathless exhortations to enjoy a Leopold’s brew (or an ABC one, for that matter), and I think they’re good, but not the absolute best I’ve ever tasted.
That about sums up Ann Arbor for me…
posted by js on July 9th, 2004 at 3:13 pm
The reason Ann Arbor is overrated is because it is a small town/suburban environmnent that mimicks large cosmopolitan cities. Why does ann arbor copy these places you ask. Because there is only one real city in this state (detroit). And the middle class is so completely alliented from it that they create these pseudo urban environments all over southeast Michigan ie Royal Oak or as it should be called Royal Joke. Who we have to blame for Ann Arbor being overrated? The Shithole on the river(Detroit).
posted by alex teijido on July 9th, 2004 at 6:04 pm
Or Alex, maybe you should blame the fuckin’ white surburbanites as well as federal highway and housing policies for Detroit’s “shithole” status, instead.
posted by Brandon on July 10th, 2004 at 6:11 pm
Hey Brandon,

Have you read Tom Sugrue’s “Origins of the Urban Crisis?” If not, you might want to check it out–good book.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0691058881/qid=1089502918/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-5539045-9720904?v=glance&s=books
posted by (not) Alex (Teijido) on July 10th, 2004 at 7:44 pm
Brandon and both Alex’s,
The city of Detroit has alot of beautiful things about it. I like Belle Isle, the DIA, Wayne State’s campus, Corktown, Mexicantown, and a few other things. But lets be honest the place has such a long way to go before it is anything like Chicago it is not even funny. Where do we begin.
1. There’s zero pride left in the city. People from Ann Arbor and the suburbs look down on Detroit.
2. The threat of crime be it real or imagined. Which explains why you never see white people in the DIA or Belle Isle. There to scared to leave Greektown.
3. Enough urban decay to make the Bronx look like a daycare.
posted by theCuban on July 11th, 2004 at 2:44 pm
Hey Cuban,
There is tons of pride IN Detroit and it only seems to be rising in recent years, and people from Ann Arbor and the suburbs looking down on the city only fuels it more (see also Ypsilanti). Those t-shirts from Pure Detroit and Made in Detroit seem to be flying off the shelves… you won’t see somone similarly sporting their Garden City or Novi pride too frequently. Oh, of course when something good happens in Detroit, like when the Red Wings or “Detroit” Pistons win a championship, the suburbanites are glad to proclaim themselves as proud Detroiters. When there are problems to fix or work to be done, though, it’s “those people”’s mess. You never see white people in the DIA? Most of the people there are white suburbanites, at least when I’ve visited. And Belle Isle seems to get broad use by folks throughout the region. Anyway, my point was that Detroit has a lot of problems, but also a lot of pride, and it is silly to blame the victim… those attitudes are just the sorts of ones that perpetuate the problems.

And Alex, I did read parts of the Sugrue book a few years ago in a class, and should pick it up again.
posted by Brandon on July 11th, 2004 at 4:00 pm
I never see those shirts on any actual Detroit residents…I think they’re just trendy. I wouldn’t be surprised if similar shirts are in stock at Urban Outfitters.
posted by Anonymous on July 12th, 2004 at 2:53 pm
I lived in Detroit for three years when it was at the absolute nadir. People from outside southeast Michigan (like myself) don’t understand Detroit’s stigma until they experience it. Suburbanites outnumber Detroiters about three to one. And the fear and loathing that suburbanites have toward the city is very deep.

And believe me, for Detroiters, the stigma is debilitating, not empowering. Even among those I worked with who had the most to gain from prosperity in Detroit, hope for the city was like a bitter joke. It may be a little better now, but the stigma is a little less too.

I don’t know what it is now, but in 1990, the median value of an owner-occupied house in the city of Detroit was about $29,000; in the suburbs, something like $130,000. Detroit’s taxes may be theoretically high, but that is much more than made of for by the astonishingly low housing costs.

Practically anyone in southeast Michigan could get much more housing for their money by moving to Detroit. And the city (contrary to the monochromatic image) has a huge variety of housing types and intact neighborhoods. Yet the population continues to move in the other direction — outward, depopulating Detroit and further depressing demand for housing there — obviously for non-economic reasons.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on July 12th, 2004 at 9:52 pm