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.
That was the case for many Midwestern cities in the late 19th/early 20th centuries; that was their boom period. For various reasons (including federal investment during WWII as Iconographer noted), they began leveling off right when Sunbelt cities began to boom. But at least they boomed during a time when the U.S. wasn't afraid to make big investments in its cities.
Well I dont think that was unique to Midwestern cities back then like it is with sunbelt cities today,
That was an American attiitude.It was almost evey U.S. expercing huge investment in there cities.Especially during the industrial Age of the late 1800s.
Atlanta's biggest boom was from 1900-10.It grew from 89,000 to over 154,00
What happened in St.Louis from 1970-1980 that it would loose nearly 300,000 people!
I assume the same what happened in most American cities,Crime,civil rights,disinvestment in the cities?
Thats probably second to Detroit in that regard.
This is a very honest, succinct and thoughtful post. I’m lucky enough to have been in St Louis and Kansas City many times, they’re great towns and they couldn’t be more different. Lots of history, too. But you do have to spend time in a place before you are able to criticize and you can’t watch the nightly news and make your bets.
I think Missouri isn’t a destination like some places so it falls off the radar sometimes. Then when you visit you are happily surprised. If you don’t have an ocean, desert or mountains or huge amusement park no one visits. Just keep spending on tourism and infrastructure and stressing the history, people love history. Just my .02!
How huge does the amusement park have to be?
Keep in mind that only a handful of them - principally the Disney, Busch and Universal parks - are beyond-regional draws. The others may attract tourists, but usually those tourists have come for other reasons and go to the theme park because it's close by.
Mountains we don't have, but nice hills and lakes we do, and those are regional attractions for people in the Central States.
Missouri's history may not quite stretch back as far as that of the East Coast or Southwest, but it does have some good historical attractions, including one Presidential library.
Edited to add: BUT - and this is a big but - the No. 1 tour bus destination in the country is the Ozarks resort community of Branson, which attracts people with its family-friendly music theaters and honky-tonk shows.
Well I dont think that was unique to Midwestern cities back then like it is with sunbelt cities today,
That was an American attiitude.It was almost evey U.S. expercing huge investment in there cities.Especially during the industrial Age of the late 1800s.
Atlanta's biggest boom was from 1900-10.It grew from 89,000 to over 154,00
The difference is that Midwestern (and Northeastern) cities became major cities during that time and were getting major city investment. As you noted, Atlanta had just over 150K people at the end of the first decade of the 20th century. Compare that with St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Cincinnati, etc.--all of which had at least 350K people.
Funny: Kansas City also hit its peak population in 1970:
507,330.
I posted the 2017 estimates upthread. KC and Atlanta are next-door neighbors on that list, with Kansas City a little larger than Atlanta.
Yet Metro Atlanta is three times Metro KC's size.
I still credit skillful image-building during the Civil Rights era as the source of the difference in trajectory.
I agree. I can remember riding through Atlanta in the 80s and see all of the Black contractors working on the freeway. I recall a few women out there as well. We just didn't see that type of inclusion in northern cities. In many cases we still don't.
I can also remember seeing a huge Black professional class in suit with briefcases walking around DT Atlanta. Atlanta just seemed to be a such a progressive and prosperous city in the 80s and 90s. For some reason I don't see it that way today. Maybe I am a little older and have experienced more places and have grown personally and professionally. I don't know. It seems different.
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.
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.
