Quote:
Originally Posted by ThirdOfFive
"It turned out that his beef was with seniors removing themselves from their jhome communities where they still had a viable and important role to 'isolate' themselves in senior communities, and The Villages was the best one to use as an example because of its size and popularity."
Interesting! We encountered kind of the same mindset among some Minnesotans when we (and a whole lot of others) decided to abandon L'etoile du nord for the land of sun and sand. Near as I could make out it really had nothing to do with our "viable and important role" in our home communities, but really more about what we were taking with us. Of course there were/are various reasons for not moving, but in a nutshell the ones who COULD afford to move, often did, and that meant taking our money, toys, spending power and various accounts with us.
Minnesota has been hemorrhaging money for some years now as the more affluent seniors as well as younger folks still working but able to move, have been fleeing the state like deranged lemmings. The population numbers in Minnesota overall have remained pretty stable, but as the people with the money leave they're being replaced by folks who more often than not see a "career" as slurping at the public trough. A third-grader can do that kind of arithmetic.
Guilt trip about shirking our responsibilities? Read "tax base". THAT is the real reason.
|
A clear, objective, realistic view—thank you—but not according to Blechman who likely knew that it would not sell books....
In the heyday of the carrying-on of those touting the 'STD school of negativity,' counts of STDs are maintained by county, not by neighborhoods, villages, or The Villages. But in one of those year the naysyers were carrying on about the count of one STD having doubled, or increased 100%. It turned out that in actual numbers, in one y ear there had been two cases, while the following year there were four! And to think there are actually people who buy into this type of interpretation....