I feel like I see more plates from further away than I'd expect everywhere these days. I think the pandemic changed something and more people take road trips now (probably due to remote work). I certainly see way more plates from southern states and Texas in MA in the summer months these days than I ever used to.

I would guess it's because though Boston has some (relatively) lower density areas than Somerville which drag its overall average down, places like Back Bay are denser than anywhere in Somerville due to the higher density of higher-rise housing. Somerville doesn't really have any neighborhood that is entirely 4-5 story brownstones plus high rise condo buildings. There are a lot more three-deckers in Somerville, which don't house quite as many people.

I also find it kind of funny how reddit always gets outraged about government employees making a decent salary for their level of responsibility, but then turns around and talks about how private sector workers deserve to get paid more.

And as you point out, for the level of experience and responsibility involved here, this salary isn't actually that crazy. He could certainly make more in the private sector for a similar level role.

Someone with this much responsibility in the private sector (essentially the CEO of a company with $2.55 billion annual budget and 2,700+ employees) would almost certainly make much more than that. For that reason, I tend to have a hard time getting outraged about paying very high level government employees with lots of responsibility a reasonable salary for that level of position (and still way below what someone similar in the private sector would get).

If you want a decent candidate with enough relevant experience to actually take these sort of jobs, you have to pay well. There aren't that many people out there who have experience leading a large transit organization.

I mean, I agree it's a massive issue, but I don't really understand how you are coming to the conclusion that building more housing is a bad thing in this context.

Not building more housing just makes the huge problem even worse. Waiting 25 years until the Baby Boom generation dies off while not building any housing right now isn't really a "solution."

Obviously developers build to make money. Building more housing is still preferable to not building more housing when there is a severe housing supply/demand mismatch.

I think the whole "asshole" part of Massholes is overblown. It mostly refers to the aggressive driving (which is definitely a real thing).

But otherwise I think what the other user is more referring to is the fact that New Englanders are reserved compared to the rest of the US (this isn't just a MA thing, it applies in most parts of New England). We don't really feel comfortable having small talk with strangers and we may treat a stranger coming up to us and trying to strike up conversation without a specific reason with some suspicion. This can be uncomfortable for people from other parts of the US where small talk is the norm, but for many New Englanders, having a stranger get into a long conversation with us makes us a bit uncomfortable, it's a cultural difference. My experience is that many Northern European countries are similar in this regard.

But it's not like everyone is going to swear and scream at you just because you said "hi." It can take a while to get to know people around here, but the people are generally perfectly kind and helpful if you have a specific reason to engage them in conversation. For instance, asking for directions, people will certainly help you. They may look at you weird if you just walk up to them and go "how's it going?" with no specific reason to talk to them.

Once you get to know New Englanders, they tend to be loyal friends, it just takes a while to get them to open up.

While in general this is true, there is one hotel I know of right in downtown Beverly. The Cabot Lodge right on Cabot St, it's only about a block from the theater.

It's $141 for the night this Wednesday so if I were OP I'd probably just do that. The Salem hotels look to all be around that price or more anyways, so might as well save the need for the uber ride.

Thanks for clarifying.

OP said they aren’t commuting.

There really aren't that many North Shore cities/towns where the downtown is "decrepit and falling apart."

I think to say local politics are "very conservative" is pretty misleading. It is true that local politics are very NIMBY in many Massachusetts communities (not all, the city I live in is building quite a bit, though there is a vocally opposed minority), but it's not like there are widespread local movements to ban acknowledging the existence of LBGTQ people in schools or things like that. Which are unfortunately things happening in some parts of the country.

The sort of "conservatism"/resistance to change you are talking about is primarily a housing/development thing (and I don't like that this resistance exists myself), it largely doesn't extend to other aspects politically.

Shouldn't it be Medicaid/MassHealth for All if it's a Massachusetts bill?

Medicare is federal, the state has no control over it.

Neither.

Broadly generalizing about tens of thousands of people sure is fun.

TBF, they are in disarray whether they are in debt or not.

This is the party that decided to run a Trump supporter for governor in a state that voted against Trump by a 66-32 margin. And they actively disliked a very popular governor from their own party by the end of his term.

Sure, I am not saying otherwise. But the bridge will need to be replaced with at least a standard bridge at a minimum, and the article and some of the comments here did not seem to be considering that.

Well, that and the fact that the bridge needs to be replaced no matter what since it is part of Morrissey Boulevard, unless the plan is to shut down Morrissey Boulevard indefinitely.

I feel like people are interpreting this as $122 million of "unnecessary" spending that could be completely avoided, but there's no way to completely avoid this spending. Some portion of that spending would need to happen anyways even if the plan was to rebuild it as a standard bridge. Standard bridges do cost quite a bit of money themselves.

Edit: for reference, this is where the bridge is located, it's not a bridge specifically in place to access the yacht club (in fact, from what I can tell it isn't a good way to access the yacht club at all), it's part of a main road: https://goo.gl/maps/R2VNgSHWE6erXyqV6

The bridge is for cars driving on Morrissey Boulevard, it does not provide access to the yacht club.

The bridge needs to be replaced no matter what as otherwise there will be a break in Morrissey Boulevard, I am guessing the complaint is that it has to be rebuilt as a more expensive drawbridge so the boats can leave the inlet as opposed to a less expensive standard bridge.

But there would need to be a bridge there either way, even if the yacht club didn't exist. So it's pretty misleading to present this as a cost that could be completely avoided, the bridge does need to be replaced. Yes, part of the cost could be avoided if it weren't drawbridge, but standard bridges still cost significant money to replace as well.

Sure, that said I do think in such a crazy housing market you have to consider the opportunity cost of delaying your home purchase to save up the necessary down payment to hit 20%. But yes, if you can already afford 20% then there's no reason not to just put down the 20%.

We bought three years ago and put down around 10%. If we had waited to save up for 20%, we'd still be saving and wouldn't be able to buy yet. Meanwhile, the value of our house has increased by $100,000 in that same timeframe and the interest rates have skyrocketed. We simply wouldn't be able to buy this house today, whereas we could three years ago.

Paying $840 per year for ~6 years to be locked into a sub 3% interest rate mortgage on a house that cost $100,000 less than it would today is absolutely worth it. The difference in list price and interest rates if we bought today would easily exceed the $70 per month we are paying in PMI.

PMI is not nearly as big of a deal as people make it out to be. Mine is like $70 per month, I pay more for my cable/internet bill. That's hardly a big deal when you consider what your mortgage will be in most parts of MA anyways.

I don't think there are many situations in a high housing cost state like MA where someone could otherwise afford the mortgage on a house but can't because of the PMI amount.

This is a confusing topic, but this comment is a bit misleading. MassHealth (which is the same thing as Medicaid, just the MA name for it) can only recover assets via estate recovery for two categories of members:

• Any members who received care after age 55 or older, or

• Members of any age who were permanently in a long-term care or other medical facility (like a nursing home).

MassHealth will also not pursue any estate recovery if the value of the member’s estate is $25,000 or less and there are various ways to get a hardship waiver as described here: https://www.mass.gov/info-details/massachusetts-medicaid-estate-recovery

It does not sound like OP is in permanent nursing care given they are actively in school and working. If they are under 55 they do not have anything to worry about at this point either.

My understanding is that the reason for the 55 cut off (though personally I think it should be 65) is that everyone over 65 is eligible for the federal >65 healthcare program Medicare anyways, so they really shouldn't be on MassHealth after 65 except in very specific circumstances, which generally pertain to accessing long-term care because for some reason Medicare doesn't cover long-term care. Which is ridiculous considering Medicare is the healthcare program for 65+, and most people in long-term care are 65+. I am not sure why the cutoff for estate recovery is 55 however, this is a federal cutoff that the state follows along with.

The 2nd group of people who were permanently in a long-term care facility are primarily over 65 anyways, there are very, very few people under 65, or especially under 55, who are permanently in long-term care facilities.

Ah, I see, thanks. I can see why they thought they could make that argument based on a narrow reading of the law even if logically it would be pretty ridiculous to tell the Wampanoag they aren't a tribe.

But yeah, feels like a stretch even so considering how they were treated by the government.

Imagine trying to argue that an Indian tribe isn't "Indian." What lawyer thought that argument was going to go anywhere?

I really wouldn’t pay too much attention to those school rating sites that assign numbers to schools. They tend to be heavily based on standardized test scores, which means they are essentially just a proxy for the wealth of a town.

Remember that MA has the best public schools in the US. Even an “average” or above average school district in MA is quite good by US standards.

The other reality is that even in towns with a big income range (and therefore lower average standardized test scores), the middle and higher income kids still have good outcomes. It’s the lower income kids that unfortunately tend to be more likely to struggle, in large part due to reasons outside of school.

I am not saying we should add more tolls. I am simply saying that tolls are not really the reason MA is expensive, that’s housing costs. Tolls here are pretty typical by the standards of a lot of east coast states.