My opinion:
The rise of California was due to a massive influx of already-Americanized migrants from the East Coast and Midwest in the middle 20th century. Some dustbowl migrants aside, many came with money in their pockets. They did not come out of desperation.
What these people came for was primarily the suburban dream. Orange and Marin counties are the northern and southern models of what people were looking for. People did not come to be part of a multiracial society, although most probably didn't think about the issue.
So here you have an affluent or middle class influx of people who contribute significantly to the tax base. Flush with money, the state is able to educate its citizens in ways the rest of the world could only dream of: the University of California system. Not only was California economically rich, but it had cultural centers in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Also, California didn't have the same level of upper-class entrenchment as the east coast. If you had it in you, you could really make your dreams come true. People were happy with California.
Beginning in the 1970s, we begin to see a massive migration of poor central americans. These people were desperate. They did not have money in their pockets or advanced skills. These immigrants aren't to blame; the federal government is. They allowed the migration and in some cases caused it with hawkish anti-communist foreign policy in central America.
At first it wasn't too big of a deal. More people simply left Los Angeles County and went to Orange County instead. (We also got burritos and cheaper produce.) Although these migrants usually found work, the menial work they did rarely compensated for the world-class public benefits that California was offering. We are seeing a continued third-world-ization of California. Very rich people on the top and very poor people in slums on the bottom.
The migration has become so pronounced that there has been white flight to Colorado and Arizona. A large part of California's tax base has gone with them. California doesn't have the money to provide world-class benefits anymore. People don't have benefits or the suburban dream either. People are unhappy with California.
It is sad that in America's effort to defeat communism, it indirectly caused the loss of one of its jewels, California of the 50's and 60's.
So what's the good news? California is now a cultural center in a different way. It is dynamic in a different way. Urban Los Angeles and urban San Francisco are continuing to push forward. They're not for everyone, especially those that moved to Colorado and Arizona, but it isn't just homeless people and gangs either. If California gets real that it can't offer the same per-person benefits that it once did, it can still grow and be vibrant in a new way.
Edit: What's your theory?
The rise of California was due to a massive influx of already-Americanized migrants from the East Coast and Midwest in the middle 20th century. Some dustbowl migrants aside, many came with money in their pockets. They did not come out of desperation.
What these people came for was primarily the suburban dream. Orange and Marin counties are the northern and southern models of what people were looking for. People did not come to be part of a multiracial society, although most probably didn't think about the issue.
So here you have an affluent or middle class influx of people who contribute significantly to the tax base. Flush with money, the state is able to educate its citizens in ways the rest of the world could only dream of: the University of California system. Not only was California economically rich, but it had cultural centers in Los Angeles and San Francisco. Also, California didn't have the same level of upper-class entrenchment as the east coast. If you had it in you, you could really make your dreams come true. People were happy with California.
Beginning in the 1970s, we begin to see a massive migration of poor central americans. These people were desperate. They did not have money in their pockets or advanced skills. These immigrants aren't to blame; the federal government is. They allowed the migration and in some cases caused it with hawkish anti-communist foreign policy in central America.
At first it wasn't too big of a deal. More people simply left Los Angeles County and went to Orange County instead. (We also got burritos and cheaper produce.) Although these migrants usually found work, the menial work they did rarely compensated for the world-class public benefits that California was offering. We are seeing a continued third-world-ization of California. Very rich people on the top and very poor people in slums on the bottom.
The migration has become so pronounced that there has been white flight to Colorado and Arizona. A large part of California's tax base has gone with them. California doesn't have the money to provide world-class benefits anymore. People don't have benefits or the suburban dream either. People are unhappy with California.
It is sad that in America's effort to defeat communism, it indirectly caused the loss of one of its jewels, California of the 50's and 60's.
So what's the good news? California is now a cultural center in a different way. It is dynamic in a different way. Urban Los Angeles and urban San Francisco are continuing to push forward. They're not for everyone, especially those that moved to Colorado and Arizona, but it isn't just homeless people and gangs either. If California gets real that it can't offer the same per-person benefits that it once did, it can still grow and be vibrant in a new way.
Edit: What's your theory?
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter