Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-20-2011, 01:51 PM
 
Location: One of the 13 original colonies.
10,189 posts, read 7,912,362 times
Reputation: 8114

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsboy View Post
The "poorest states" don't rank low on health care, education, mobility, etc. because they are poor. They are poor because they rank low on health care, education, mobility, etc. BIG difference. Also, while it is true that the "deep South" states of Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina and Louisiana largely rank poor because of their large black populations, the same cannot be said for Kentucky and West Virginia, which have very small black populations but horrific povertry among whites in Appalachia. In both Texas and New Mexico, I belive it is safe to assume the large hispanic / Native American populations, respectively, trend the poverty numbers higher. Interestingly, when you remove minority populations from these states the income levels of middle / upper class whites are on par with the rest of the country.
Thank you! It is amazing how ignorant people are about the South. Good post.

 
Old 08-20-2011, 01:52 PM
 
37,796 posts, read 41,518,596 times
Reputation: 27063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotty011 View Post
Speaking of the 2008 Presidential election. How do you feel about your selection for President now?? Hmmmmmm
This is not the politics thread, but the current president is still better than what the alternative was. I shudder at the thought of Palin being next in line for the presidency.
 
Old 08-20-2011, 02:17 PM
 
Location: One of the 13 original colonies.
10,189 posts, read 7,912,362 times
Reputation: 8114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77 View Post
This is not the politics thread, but the current president is still better than what the alternative was. I shudder at the thought of Palin being next in line for the presidency.
I shudder to think what this Country will be if this man is reelected. Maybe third world???
 
Old 08-20-2011, 02:22 PM
 
37,796 posts, read 41,518,596 times
Reputation: 27063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotty011 View Post
I shudder to think what this Country will be if this man is reelected. Maybe third world???
We'd be fifth world already with McCain at the helm. Lesser of two evils bro.

At any rate, I'm not sure what politics has to do with the topic at hand. The poorest states in the U.S. tend to be underdeveloped, underindustrialized, and undereducated. Too many times, it's a case of the "haves" wanting to keep the "have nots" in their place. This continually plays out in my own home state which tends to be among the poorest states. Many of the Southern states recovered late in the game in the aftermath of the Civil War and Reconstruction.
 
Old 08-21-2011, 06:49 PM
 
19 posts, read 37,478 times
Reputation: 11
I wonder if this is like the Imperialism the European countries imposed on what is now the Third World at all... Of course, the lack of quality education in poorer states is a BIG problem, and I'm sure the No Child Left Behind Act didn't help; after all, the states that needs the money aren't getting it because they're already failing and lack the resources to improve their situation.
 
Old 08-21-2011, 07:46 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC NoVA
1,103 posts, read 2,252,011 times
Reputation: 777
Quote:
Originally Posted by sacramento916 View Post
Uh... No. Mississippi's just ****ed up.
coming from someone in california, that must mean a lot to them.

geniuses like you need to take into account that the cost of living is lower down south. so while the average income in mississippi may be around 35-40k, the cost of living is multiple times lower than these places like philadelphia or new york. to judge a place by poverty rate is flawed because the poverty line was created by the federal government, it is not adjusted to fit the cost of living in certain areas.

in reality, someone in mississippi is living more comfortably $1,000 below the poverty line than someone in san francisco who is $1,000 above the poverty line. i heard somewhere that $35k in birmingham, al is equivalent to over $100,000 in san francisco.
 
Old 08-21-2011, 10:15 PM
 
72,816 posts, read 62,127,610 times
Reputation: 21770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galounger View Post
It's not just slavery. Southern states in the old days had a very agrarian minded aristocrat leadership. They like the old aristocrats of Europe felt that there was something wrong with gaining wealth through heavy industry and trade opting instead almost entirely for agriculture and land ownership. This lack of Industry and manufacturing is the reason they lost the Civil War because they couldn't produce most weapons and had to have them imported from Britain whose ships the North blockaded. The Souths armies were much better lead and were winning before they were stretched thin and began running out of supplies.

After the Civil War and slavery ended most Southern States still depended almost entirely on agriculture. Georgia was the first of the Deep South States to really get into commerce and manufacturing and still fares economically better today. Also, States in the South have like said earlier much higher Black populations than most northern States and blacks in this country still fare worse than whites economically. Take for instance Wisconsin and Minnesota. Blacks in those two states are known for being poorer than Blacks in the U.S. on average but those two states have very low black percentages. If those States were 36% Black like Mississippi they would be ranked among the poorest also.
It also depends on where you go and the migration patters. African-Americans who have migrated to Texas and Georgia have been middle-class and aren't as poor. In Wisconsin and Minnesota, the migration of African-Americans has included middle class people. With that said, poorer African-Americans are more likely to migrate to Minnesota and Wisconsin than to Georgia or Texas. To make another connection, alot of poor African-Americans from Mississippi moved to the North for many years, including Wisconsin.

I also notice a strong correlation between poverty,education levels, and the slave system. There are a higher concentration of African-Americans in the South. Always has been this way. This is BECAUSE of slavery. Black people were the slaves. Under the slave system, education was neglected at best, and prohibited for many. For poor White people, the slave system was not helpful for them. If you are poor and White, you are free, but you can't work easily. Why? Slaves did the work for free, because the slaves didn't have a choice. They were slaves. Slavery in the USA was basically a feudalistic system. The people who owned the land didn't work the land. The people who worked the land didn't own it. With this feudalistic system, education was neglected because the persons who had the power(very few of them I may add) didn't invest in it. The poor didn't really have much power. Slaves by default could not vote. The wealthiest citizens made up the largest number of voters. The power is concentrated in very few people. No education system was set up because the people who could do that sent their children to private school or hired tutors, hence, no reason for investing in a public school system. The feudalistic way of doing things has historically kept the South very poor, especially Missisippi, where more people were enslaved than free, where most of the population was illiterate. It is no coincidence that Mississippi only has one city with 100,000 or more people.
 
Old 08-23-2011, 05:32 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC NoVA
1,103 posts, read 2,252,011 times
Reputation: 777
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotty011 View Post
I shudder to think what this Country will be if this man is reelected. Maybe third world???
no, not yet. everything will look all good. everybody will be happy, open borders, life's all good, everything will look clean and new paid for by taxpayers for a while with this great endless supply of money we think we have.... and then we run out of money (like europe and canada are beginning to)... that is when liberals turn us into a 3rd world country.
 
Old 08-23-2011, 05:48 AM
 
16,433 posts, read 22,112,075 times
Reputation: 9622
It would have to be California since they are so deep in debt they'll never get out.
 
Old 08-23-2011, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Fishers, IN
6,485 posts, read 12,480,695 times
Reputation: 4125
Quote:
Originally Posted by CelticGermanicPride View Post
.... and then we run out of money (like europe and canada are beginning to)...
Huh?? (underlined)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top