And strangely enough, that previous HN thread is [flagged]... It seems a lot of high quality articles are [flagged] nowadays? Or am I only noticing this because I'm mindful of my own submissions being [flagged] a lot ?
Parent of a young family with two kids (6, 2). We moved to a lower cost of living city because we simply couldn’t make it work back “home” where my parents were — and even then, they were an hour drive away within a suburb from our desired living location.
We’ve been afar two years now. It’s a short flight (2 hrs) and my parents live quite close to the airport, so we see them about four times a year.
This is still not enough but their plan is to move where we are once they can retire in 2 or so years.
What’s been hardest is parenting without parental support. Wife and I have had to really make an effort to build community with our neighbours, school parents, etc. In two years we have built a good foundation, which is a life saver! It really does take a village and I feel we’ve forgotten how to form that village. (The challenge was exacerbated due to COVID lockdowns)
Hardest days are long weekend holidays when all the neighbours and friends go visit family (nearby). It’s usually not worth for us to fly so we stay in the quiet city. Sometimes it’s great, other times it’s hard and I miss my family.
Either way, we just booked Christmas flights and we’ll be with them for two weeks. I’m looking forward to it.
> What’s been hardest is parenting without parental support.
My wife and I followed my parents to the low-COL city where they retired, and, while it's been nice to see them somewhat frequently, we were a little dismayed to discover that they kind of feel like they've "done their time" and don't take my son nearly as much as we'd like.
I think there is something about the boomer generation. This "I'm done" approach to grand parenting seems very widespread. A lot of friends have had the same realization that you describe.
I've resolved to be the opposite kind of grandparent. I really don't have a lot more I want to do later in life than spend time with the grandchildren I will hopefully have. I like my time alone and plan to travel extensively, but picking kids up from school, spending weekends with them 1-on-1, getting lost and doing interesting things are the magic of a childhood.
As a working parent we are burdened with so much other stuff it's hard to truly enjoy the simplicity of being around a child. I plan to shrug off all my other responsibilities and just enjoy it for what it is.
As someone whose kids are both (ages 27 and 23) finally out of the house in the last couple of years--but no grandkids yet--I totally get this. I've very much gotten used to having my own time FINALLY, being on my schedule, etc. My son and his fiancee have talked about moving back in with us for a year or two to save money, and the prospect does't sound that appealing to me at this point. I'm happy that our son thinks he's always welcome back, and he is, but it will be an imposition if they do it.
This isn’t directed at you specifically, but your comment about FINALLY having time back makes me think this is a generational consequence. If you had family and other support while raising your kids, you may not feel like this? Of course can’t paint a broad brush but something is broken in how western civilization does family.
How does it matter? That someone wanted to have kids doesn't mean that he want's them under the same roof till the end of his life. Especially with the grandkids.
People should not be taking for granted that they can simply come back to their parents, or close to them and ask the to look after the kids.
In the world where retirement age is increased more and more, people deserve also "me time".
If grandparents really want it and ask for it, then great for both.
Writing this as parent, having small toddler, leaving abroad, far from both mine and wife's parents. It is harder without support, but manageable.
> As we settled in, George asked about my life and how I was feeling.
> “I’m good. Busy!"
> He stared blankly through my empty words.
> Feeling the pressure of his gaze, I adjusted myself and added that living in California had begun to wear on me, it being so far from my parents on the East Coast.
> George: “How often do you see your parents?"
> Me: “Maybe once a year now.”
> George: “And how old are they?"
> Me: “Mid-sixties."
> George: “Ok, so you’re going to see them 15 more times before they die.”
...
> It wasn’t meant to be rude—it was just…math.
There's something to think about in all this but I really can't get over imagining what a weird dude George is.
"Did you and George have a good time?"
"Sort of. He stared at me blankly for a while, and then he told me my parents were going to die soon."
"..."
"Do you want to move to the East Coast?"
"Sure."
I had this conversation randomly with a friend, I was George.
It surprised me how hard this hit them, and that they've talked about it many times since then because yeah, its just a little strategic thinking about the world.
I became George after comedian Aziz Ansari had bit on one of his Netflix specials where he does math on how many times you can expect to see your parents.
Yeah, I get the feeling George may not exist outside of the author's imagination.
Sure, there could be back story that fed that interaction, but I'm betting that didn't happen and it is a way of framing an unpopular decision in a flattering light.
I find myself being that George all the time. Once I apparently convinced a friend of a friend of a friend (ie a stranger) to make another baby.
I only know this because when I saw these people two years later they had an extra kid in tow and thanked me for convincing them to make a plunge. I have no idea what I said, but they were adamant that I shoved them over the fence.
Another time I got a kid in undergrad admit to me that he wasn't going to the job fairs because he was expected to go to grad school.
I pointed out to him that applying to a job is a skill, and a hard one at that. I also told him that just because you apply for a job doesn't mean you'll take it. His jaw dropped at that realization (he's first gen Korean-American).
If you want to be George all you need to do is say basic, obvious, truths everyone pretends to ignore.
Making perhaps unpleasant but relevant and topical observations that help a friend isn't weird. It's charitable. The author brought up the fact that he would like to see his parents more often. George simply threw some light on the obvious in order to help a friend who is waffling and hesitating and wasting time instead of making the right decision. It was an obvious inference based on the stated facts and an important thing for the author to understand so that he could live a better life. It wasn't arbitrary, it wasn't nosy or intrusive or rude (if the author's story is accurate).
It seems at least as likely that a Roe Jogan listener might enact that story with a friend, as that they would just hear it and then make up a story where they ask the question.
It's of course quite pointless to speculate about the truth or fiction of an Internet story starring people you don't know.
I wonder about the people who think it's implausible however. Do you never discuss difficult things with your friends? Whether to marry the girl/guy/human, how many times you'll see your parents again, how's your cousin's health, that kind of thing?
That's supposed to be normal, I worry that what y'all would call friends is what I would call colleagues or casual acquaintances.
Or, once someone has heard the story, they are more likely to bring it up again, continuing the cycle.
I genuinely plan on mentioning this to my wife this evening. Not in a "let's move to live near my parents" way, but just as a way of bringing up that time is valuable.
If she then mentions to someone that I said this, will they say "I don't believe you, I've heard this story before?"
While not quibbling with the math, I think there are two things that mitigate this meaningfully.
1) quality of the time spent (I have more meaningful conversations in a couple of hours now, than months as a child + much of that time was spent administratively / logistically)
2) voice / video / text communication is not meaningless (I’ve lived >1,500 miles from my parents for the past ~12 years, but on average probably talk to them one a week? Those conversations matter, and shouldn’t be discarded for in-person time)
Childhood is much more than logistics and administration. Your parents are there during your formative years, teaching you, often through example. Also, your emphasis on conversation seems strange. As much as I like a good conversation, this is not what defines the parent-child relationship. It is not what makes this relationship valuable above all else. Who would you rather have? A parent who sacrifices immensely for your good, or a good conversationalist who can't be bothered?
Everything you said is true, and is not mutually exclusive with my point that all hours spent together should carry the same weight.
I use the word conversation as a short hand for being present with someone.
Just look around a restaurant and see families eating a meal together where some or all of them are lost in their phones/devices, in some respects those people are having dinner on their own.
Put another way, I’ve seen plenty parents that are physically present, and emotionally absent, and other parents that may have have less physical hours spent with a child, but are more are more present and involved in their lives.
> It turns out that when I graduated from high school, I had already used up 93% of my in-person parent time. I’m now enjoying the last 5% of that time. We’re in the tail end.
Around that time, I attended an offsite of a larger private equity firm and there was a organizational psychologist who gave a talk on work life balance. He said something I'll never forget. He said that you have about ten to twelve years to connect with your kids and then they turn into teenagers, tune you out, then turn into adults and build their own lives. I thought about my kids who were five, three, and a baby and realized that time was short and I needed to be present in their lives in every way that I could.
This "story" is likely inauthentic and is an overused trope. I was looking for the time one of Joe Rogan's guests used it. Instead I found yet another example of a different guest on a different podcast also using it: https://www.tiktok.com/@thequotebibles/video/693557468395790...
ETA: One set of parents could have moved from east coast to west. They had enough savings and could have found a modest place in a nice peripheral location. We had good SV jobs and would have helped them. They never really liked where they lived, never made the most of it, and only stayed there out of inertia; I hated the weather and sprawly shabbiness, would never have moved back. We spent a lot of time looking for nice places for them and got a lot of excuses.
Our jobs became fully remote. The other set of parents got sick. So we moved to their clean, quiet, beautiful, small town in the northern UK. It sucks, you’d hate it, stay away.
Though you're getting down voted I do think there's some merit to your comment. When I moved from Canada to the Bay area I thought, and everyone said, that they (friends, family) would come visit. I got 2 visits in 8 years, both by my mom.
This despite me going back to see varying people roughly twice per year. I've sadly learned that many of those relationships are a one way street of convenience. They're happy to see me when I come, to walk down memory lane. But they'll never put in the effort to come see me. Sadly this realization has been the demise of many of those relationships that I was carrying.
I understand this sentiment, but I've also been at the other end of it. The reality is that most people have a limited amount of travel time, fairly limited amount of money and a longer list of trips they'd like to make. I've got some great friends who've moved to places far away - but unless they're very, very close friends it's really hard to justify spending thousands, taking time off work and then spending hours travelling to see them for a few days. If I was in the area I'd definitely look them up - but I simply can't base my entire family's limited holiday time around seeing them. Add children into the mix and that becomes even harder.
The part that you and peer commenters are missing -- they all wanted to see me, I _did_ travel to them, expended my limited PTO time and money to demonstrate that the relationship was worth keeping alive etc. But it was unrequited. Thats the part that stings the lip service of "Yeah we'd love to make it there someday, why dont you come see us this year?"... I do it. They Dont.
Don't be too harsh. People have their own busy lives and perhaps relationships are often made when they are convenient.
Also, too, sometimes the strength of the relationship is in a shared context — like co-workers. When a co-worker moves on, goes to another company, retires, there is less to chat about were you to meet up later, less shared context.
Your oldest friends though will often always have that shared context of having grown up with you in the same environment, same "era". You act as a foil to one another in the degree to which you turned out differently (also to the degree you stayed similar). Your eyes and theirs will gaze upon the same landscape from the same vantage point: "Look at those kids and their phones, we were out riding bikes when we were their age." (Ha ha, etc.)
When I go back I have a large number of people to visit. When someone comes here they are here to visit me. Motivation is additive - I kind of want to visit X people and so in total it is worth going. While they only have their kind of motivation to visit me.
I get a few visits just because I'm at a large crossroads and a good driving distance away to stop for the night. (they might go a few more hours if I didn't live here, but since they can have supper with me that makes stopping here worth it.
Well, I understand how you feel but... you are the one who moved, not them, I'm not from North America but I imagine it's not a small distance just judging from a map, not that easy.
I have a friend who moved to Switzerland for example, being from Argentina it's impossible for me and almost anyone else to go there and visit him, but he chose that
That happened to me too. When I moved to the US a lot of people said they would visit, especially once I was in California. But so far only two of my sisters and my mom have visited in 20 years. This made me in turn very reluctant to visit people when I fly to Europe. I guess it is what is but it is very disappointing.
It doesn't seem to be a popular sentiment, but I agree. My parents are retired, moderately wealthy, and in reasonably good health, yet the burden to spend time with them seems to be entirely on my partner and me, who have demanding careers. Not to mention, my in-laws are in worse health than my parents, so now we have to prioritize our limited travel time between two sets of elderly parents, visiting our friends dispersed across the planet, and engaging in our own interests. Quitting our jobs and moving to be near my parents (or my partner's) isn't an option, so the status quo of seeing them every other year will remain until they decide to change it.
This. It is the responsibility of aging parents to move to where their children can earn a living, not the other way around.
My grandparents lived around two and a half hours away from their daughter (my mother) and I and half an hour away from their son (my uncle). We were pretty poor after the financial crisis so it meant we could only really go visit once or twice a year. My uncle was away a lot (works in the military) so they didn’t get particularly frequent visits from him. We asked them to move closer to us, but neither of them liked change and my grandfather was fond of the view.
My grandfather ended up getting ill and dying. We only got to see him a few times between diagnosis to death because of how far away they were. My grandmother ended up living alone in the house for about two years and getting Parkinsons. She’s now bed bound in a care home, again with hardly any visits because of how far away she is and the fact that we’re still not financially recovered, even after all this time. This whole sorry state of affairs could have been avoided if they just decided to move closer to us. They had more than enough resources to do so. But no. Primarily because they didn’t like change and my grandfather liked looking at the sunset over some hills.
To anyone reading this, do not bury your head in the sand about the realities of aging and dying unless you want to end up living a similarly tragic story.
You may be overgeneralizing your particular situation. These sorts of things are subject to numerous factors and details that vary across families. You have three options: parents move closer to children, children move close to parents, or neither (both operate independently). Which is the best possible move is not the same everywhere and at all times.
You’re definitely right. But if there are no extenuating circumstances then I do think the default view should be parents move to kids rather than the other way around. At the end of the day, one set of people are shortly going to become unable to take care of themselves and the other isn’t. Whilst you still have the ability to do something about it, lessen the burden on your loved ones by moving closer to them rather than increasing it by staying put.
Personally, if I’m in terminal decline and have enough forewarning and ability left to do something about it, I think I’d be inclined to take myself out of the game and save my family the pain of having to spend thousands on care costs and watch me slowly wither away. I’d rather go out on my own terms with a bit of dignity and for my family to spend the extra inheritance money on whatever they want. But obviously that is a very personal decision and I wouldn’t ever cast judgement on someone for being for or against it. I will however, cast some judgement if you’re past seventy and burying your head in the sand about what’s coming down the pipeline rather than having a plan in place to lessen the burden placed on your loved ones.
... if you’re past seventy and burying your head in the sand about what’s coming down the pipeline rather than having a plan in place to lessen the burden placed on your loved ones.
Yep, that's really it. Just had something come down the pipeline today :(
Thank you. It’s a perspective I understand and accept. I’ve seen those last sparks flare up unexpectedly on several occasions and it’s a true gift, honoring both giver and receiver.
Yep, that. Such feeble excuses. Ach, well, for our part we really tried hard to help them find a way, so at least we're not loaded down with guilt on top of all the sadness.
How's it fair to uproot people from their communities, and their other children, at the twilight of their life to fulfill the material greediness of your kids?
Not material greediness if your kids do not have the financial means to move to you or if they have skills that are industry and location specific. Not everyone is a programmer that can work remotely.
This is an absolutely ridiculous statement. Throughout history, people have moved where the jobs are. You don’t escape poverty by staying stuck in a place with no opportunities. If you went to university and studied filmmaking for example you’re probably going to find a lot of work in LA, New York and other metropolitan areas. You’re not going to find work in a small village in the middle of Alaska. And sometimes you’ve got to slum it for a while to achieve financial independence.
And that’s presuming the reason for the financial distress is work related. There are tons of other reasons why someone might be in a poor financial situation. Maybe their spouse left them or died and now they’re a single parent. Maybe they’re a victim of fraud. Maybe they lost their house in a wildfire. Literally thousands of reasons.
Or should children just be happy to not have their own interests in life and instead just be slaves to whatever their parents wish until the parents die and the children are finally released of their bonds?
Leaving the community you grew up in to live in a tiny rental home while your kid dodges junkies' used needles in the playground just so you cam afford to take a vacation in Aruba is a uniquely modern phenomenon.
Sure they could have, but in the thread, the author mentions a partner with parents also on the east coast, and while that person is not the focus of the thread, it's "just math" that it is easier to move one set of people than two, particularly if that one set doesn't have as deeply set roots as the other two parties do. That's all market notwithstanding.
My Aunt did just that a few years back to be closer to my Cousin and her two kids. Of course she was born in San Francisco so it is maybe less of a leap but she seems really happy with the move. As you get older it is harder to make such changes even though you have more than enough time/money to do it comfortably.
I was gonna say "not at these prices", but actually I'm feeling more optimistic about that...have even entertained the idea of moving back myself if current trends continue.
Loved this article. We live 10 minutes from my parents and see them several times a week. It makes life so much easier and more fulfilling. Our kids have a great time with “poppy and grandma” (and my wife and I can go on a date). And as they got older (early 70s) it’s nice to be around to chat about health concerns or have a little party for birthdays, etc.
Ironically, living near family is a privilege that wealthier and more educated people are less likely to enjoy. My wife’s family pretty much all lives within a 2 hour radius of the old family homestead on the Oregon coast. Holidays are great—we just rent an AirBnB and everyone comes and visits.
During COVID my wife and I decided to pack up our lives in NYC, move home, and bring work with us.
A few months later my parents _bought the house next to ours_, and our lives are incredible: We support each other and enrich each other's lives, we feel like we've made incredible leaps in our relationships. We now have a kid on the way and my parents are ecstatic to be so close to us as we start this next chapter of our lives. None of this would be possible without the ability to be remote.
Yeah, I’m not much of a lover of visiting myself; I’m a half hour from my sister’s family and my mother (who live together) and that’s just about perfect. It’s close enough that I can help if they need me, but not so close that it’s easy for them to ask me to watch kids for them all the time … ok, I’m a selfish bastard, I admit it.
We were neighbors for ~5 years and eventually decided it was working well enough that in 2020 (just before the start of the pandemic, as it turned out) we bought a house with an "in-law" apartment and now my parents live under the same roof. The two spaces are separate (only the laundry room and garage are shared), so we're not right on top of each other, and it's working quite well so far.
My kids are still young (10, 6, and 6), and my parents are in their early 60's. Barring any unforeseen circumstances, my kids will spend the majority of their childhood with nearly daily time spent with their grandparents. Similarly, a lot of end of life questions/complexities are already answered. My parents are in a home where they can age in place and we can provide care for them when their needs increase over the coming decades.
I had some reservations, if I'm being honest (it was my wife and my mom who were the primary drivers of the plan), but having spent ~2.5 years in this arrangement so far, I really wouldn't trade it for anything.
The biggest downside of moving out of state is being so far from my family. There is so much support I used to get. Now I don't have an automatic babysitter I can trust. I don't have someone to come help when I need to a hand for something.
I would elaborate a bit more by saying that I think that the amount of time that we spend with our parents and our relatives in general needs to change throughout our lives.
In our early years we see them a lot because we need them. Then we reach a point were to keep growing as people it is beneficial to see them only a little. Or at least this is my experience: I'm now studying abroad because I realized that I reached the maximum growth that I could reach by having my family around, and that I needed to stay away from them for a while to keep growing. After having new experiences and thus having (almost) completed my personal growth, I may consider seeing them more often in the future.
I moved from Germany to the US after college 30 years ago. My one regret is not having seen my parents and family as much. Now I only have a few visits left, sobering thought. Going there in a couple weeks though.
The flip side to this, are some of us who have had to move back in with parents as adults for various reasons. I might miss them when they’re gone, but I also feel like I’ve had enough interaction for one lifetime, especially when they’re also the person that causes me the most stress in life.
It is natural to fly the nest. The ridiculous housing market that is forcing generations to live together is not. In tribal cultures, when people come of age the tribe comes together to build them a hut. In modern societies, you come of age and it’s “Get lost, I don’t want any houses built round here or my house price will go down. You can get a house when you inherit one or earn one. Now get to work serving me and don’t complain that your earnings are far outstripped by house price, rent and utility inflation.”
Live close to your parents by all means, that’s probably the sweet spot for most. But what really is the point of modern societies if we can’t even replicate things our ancestors had long solved? For the love of god can someone sort the fucking house crisis out.
You are entirely correct that the housing situation is f'd up. However, careful what you wish for, because when I look at the recent data I see a high likelihood of a massive "correction" arriving soon.
It’s going to be painful but it’s also necessary. The economy needs to be based on productive work, not imaginary money from house price inflation. House prices cannot rise faster than salaries as they have done. It is unsustainable.
Yeah, I lost my father way back in the late nineties, when I was a teenager. I didn’t even get the chance to move far away and visit him only infrequently.
To make matters worse, I don’t even think I’ll get five more years with my mother, let alone fifteen. She’s 70 and has quite severe COPD that puts her in the hospital with some regularity (yay, smoking). So I probably should visit her more often, while I can.
And Port had said: "Death is always on the way, but the fact that you don't know when it will arrive seems to take away from the finiteness of life. It's that terrible precision that we hate so much. But because we don't know, we get to think of life as an inexhaustible well. Yet everything happens only a certain number of times, and a very small number, really. How many more times will you remember a certain afternoon of your childhood, some afternoon that's so deeply a part of your being that you can't even conceive of your life without it? Perhaps four or five times more. Perhaps not even that. How many more times will you watch the full moon rise? Perhaps twenty. And yet it all seems limitless." - The Sheltering Sky, Paul Bowles (1949).
Anyway, this makes me a bit sad considering I've recently moved a 15 hour drive away from my parents. Happy that they have a guest room and for remote work though.
It also makes me ponder the differences in western culture and other places. I know in some cultures family is much more integrated, e.g. the grandparents move-in instead of sending them to a home or something.
I love my city life but I do sometimes imagine living in a compound with my close family. I think it would be tolerable if everyone had their own space but was close in proximity.
I had an opportunity to work overseas. I told myself I'd save up to bring fortune and fame to my parents—at the cost of seeing them less.
Few months down, my father passed away. Complications that could have been prevented had he got treated early (he hid it because "didn't want to trouble us", typical asian parents).
My whole world turned upside down. I booked flights for the whole year to return home at least once a month. I treated my my mom and sisters family trips overseas. I didn't save up.
Few years forward, everyone's married and we can't travel together anymore, and my mom is very old. And now I'm saving up for my own family.
I'd probably richer had I saved up earlier, but I don't regret my decision.
This is something I think about semi-frequently. Not in these specific words, but how in an ideal world I'd love to live a half hour or so away from my parents, and my siblings. This just isn't possible. Not because of jobs, there are quite a few tech jobs in the area now, and if I lived in SLC I'd even have a decently urban life.
It isn't possible because my family is scattered to the four winds. Various siblings are all over the world. It also isn't possible because the world has grown so hostile. I'm trans so living near my parents would be at best uncomfortable for me, at worst it would be dangerous, and soon possibly illegal (banning access to hormones, etc).
It's a great example of how being candid, even rude, can turn out to be very beneficial to people. Unfortunately, most people, unlike the thread author, would just get defensive and perceive this insight as a personal attack.
You might disagree with how profound or surprising it is, but how is it not an insight of some sort? It was at least enough to get the author to make a drastic lifestyle change.
A better way to estimate life expectancy is to use an actuarial life table. SSA has a very simple one based only on age[1]. Those show an expected 18 years for someone 65 years old. It's interesting to see that life expectancy stays above one year until the age of 113. Of course these are just expected averages, they are useful at scale but individual experience will vary.
We decided to stay close to our parents. And yea we are "close." But some days I dream of moving far away from them. Of course i would write the same years later.
The contrived human condition is mainly torture.
This is all well and good if you actually like your parents. There are reasons people leave home and never come back. Not all relationships with them are going to be the loving fairy tales one sees on TV.
Yeah I’m in this situation. Parents are couple hours away by plane and we might see them once a year if that, mainly so the kids have some knowledge of their grandparents. The visits tend to get ugly, quickly, so they have to be carefully choreographed and usually the other party staying in a hotel. (Generally this is due to my dad’s behavior, which often will have him screaming profanities towards me or our kids.) Even the occasional Zoom calls are usually just them sitting there, nodding along, answering our forced questions. No real engagement there.
Fortunately we have my wife’s warm side of the family as a counterbalance.
For me moving farther away from my family has been key to spend more time with them.
They live about 150km away from me. Because it’s a relative long distance they will always sleep over when they come (and me when I go to them), and we get to spend the weekend together in one house.
My brother, who lives in the same city, meets them more often but for just an evening or afternoon. He always complains I get to spend more time with them even though he lives 10m away.
BTW, I realize that 150km would be “close” for US and other big countries. In the Netherlands that’s the difference between east and west. :-)
I mean, I get it, but for a lot of people their parents live in a place where professional and social opportunities are impossibly low. Living there, or even within a quick trip there, is just not reasonable IF you want more than (e.g.) the state you were born in can provide.
I grew up in Mississippi. I knew from childhood I would leave, because even in the pre-Trump era it was dominated by an ugly, reactionary, racist, homophobic, and sexist brand of conservatism -- blended with a side order of "Lost Cause" romanticism about the Civil War. It is, to be super super clear, a toxic place I yearned to escape from.
(It should probably tell you something that the more urbane, cosmopolitan, tolerant, and diverse city I've made my home in for nearly 30 years is in Texas. When Texas is trading up, you KNOW you started low.)
The author is privileged that his parents live in a reasonable place.
This is nonsense. I lived in Vicksburg throughout my formative years and yes it has its fair share of rednecks but it's also go more diversity than most places in the US, e.g. Austin, TX.
Yes, there is a poor standard of living in many areas, but there's also an amazingly rich cultural history (not just for whites).
The problem is you are choosing to view an entire state strictly through the lens of politics when there are different groups, viewpoints, and communities to be a part of outside of the "conservative" ones you despise.
You come across as the privileged one tbh in that you can afford to leave and move on to better opportunities in different regions. Many of the poorest people in the nation live in MS and they could use our help rather than our condemnations.
>got more diversity than most places in the US, e.g. Austin, TX.
You have a weird measure of diversity; I suspect what you really mean is "nonwhite people," but that's not a very good metric on its own. Per census.gov, Vicksburg and Austin are about equivalent in terms of racial demographic split.
Vicksburg is about 2/3 black and 1/3 white, with little else in the mix.
Austin is about 2/3 white and 1/3 hispanic, with little else in the mix.
Where I live -- Houston -- puts both to shame in terms of demographic mix. There is nowhere in Mississippi that approaches the makeup of a city like Houston.
I left on the strength of scholarships, so yeah, privilege in some ways, but probably not the way you meant.
I stand by my assessment of Mississippi. Does that mean there aren't pocket communities that are tolerant and progressive? Obviously not. But you have only to look at the fortunes of the state itself to see how little power those pockets have. Does Jackson have drinkable water yet?
>Many of the poorest people in the nation live in MS and they could use our help rather than our condemnations.
This part is true, but other than voting for Federal policies that constrain rogue, reactionary state governments there's little one can do. The Trumpist majority controls the Magnolia state, and is likely to keep doing so. I was unwilling to live my life under such conditions.
