U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-13-2010, 11:29 PM
 
4,677 posts, read 8,061,865 times
Reputation: 1236

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
I was about about to say something similar. We underfund education, comparatively. Most of our growth in industry has been caused through lower taxes, incentives to move here, lower costs of living, and a higher quality of life.

We also, for better or worse, have newer infrastructure that forms our cities. It creates the city that more people want buy into now. In other words most people want a bigger house on a bigger lot and our newly built infrastructure is designed to give people that. Of course, our larger cities now have growing pains, because of this. (traffic)

I will say though... the child labor was pretty much a country-wide phenomena. That was legislated against country wide.

The south has come a long way to improve its education system. Many many people here have access to a decent education.

One of the biggest problems we have now comes down to race. Most people don't like to discuss it, because it is a touchy issue. But, black male students in particular are having trouble graduating high school by large margins, even when education funding is the same. I'm not exactly sure what we need to do to change this and reach out to that demographic, but if you remove the black race from the data the south becomes less poor and the education standards are more much more on par.

I think in the end of the day it takes more time to overcome the social problems created from a couple hundred years of slavery and another hundred years of discrimination laws. It was only 50 years ago that ended. It is also hard to grow academically and socially when your parents and other generations before you can't help you do it. Many do every year, but many many many more don't. The other issues are the populations that are more poor are also likely to have more kids and populate quicker. For better or worse and ignoring any ethics debates that is one reason people want to teach comprehensive sex education, proper use of birth control, and family planning. The general idea is if poorer families are more likely to have 2 kids and time when they have them instead of 4 or 5 unexpected they can put more resources and invest more time in making those kids more successful in life. However, in the south there is a large backlash against any of those programs.

The other issue is the in-migration of people from the midwest and northeast are generally only coming to major cities or wealthier rural areas in the south. This doesn't have much effect of diluting the poverty level in our most impoverished counties.

As far as our cities... we have done alot to remove our housing projects. Some people described them as warehouses for the poor. One of the major components of the removal was to invest resources into mixed-income housing programs where working poor have access to housing with different classes and kids are raised around different kinds of kids and end up in better schools. This is still at the early stages, but there is some evidence to show this helps.
You raise some interesting points and provide some great perspectives. I would like to comment on the black male comment. I think there is more to it than black male. The full statement should be black male lower SES. I think when you look at SES, that is essentially the biggest marker. Now, I agree with what you're saying, it happens to be that a larger percentage of black males happen to be. Lower SES but there is more to it than just black males. Example, I am a black middle class male who did graduate high school. I have some friends and family, lower SES (unfortunately) who didn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-13-2010, 11:33 PM
 
4,677 posts, read 8,061,865 times
Reputation: 1236
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
Basically, the vast percentage of in-migration into the South over the past several decades have been to counties that make up only a few percentage points of the total land area. Big metros are the obvious gainers in the region, with Virginia making the most economic progress of any state in the South. Coincidentally, Virginia also has the highest percentage of residents with a four year degree in the South as well.
This is interesting. Great job on the stats and a great topic. I guess the questions following this is how do we improve it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2010, 11:57 PM
 
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
7,913 posts, read 12,188,329 times
Reputation: 5707
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
For all the talk about the huge in-migration of people to the South over the past several decades as well as job growth, one would think that poverty rates would continue to lower. That is not the case in the vast majority of the South.
You are connecting the dots in a very odd way. First, you are assuming that by it's very nature, Southern states are overall poor. That is a distinction that hasn't been true for quite some time.

To your point however, the states that have received the lion share of migration from other regions of the country are Georgia, Florida, Maryland, Virginia, Texas, North Carolina, and Tennessee. On top of that, five cities in the first five states previously listed have populations nearly in excess of 6 million (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Miami and DC...30 million people all together). Accordingly, the states you posted with the highest number of counties with less than 10% of poverty are located in the first five. Contrastingly, there has not been much change in demographics of Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, or Louisiana where the population growth is much lower and the demographics are basically the same as they were in the mid-20th century and their levels of income growth are not equal to the states that have been altered of migration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 12:43 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,567 posts, read 7,690,359 times
Reputation: 4368
Quote:
Originally Posted by adavi215 View Post
You raise some interesting points and provide some great perspectives. I would like to comment on the black male comment. I think there is more to it than black male. The full statement should be black male lower SES. I think when you look at SES, that is essentially the biggest marker. Now, I agree with what you're saying, it happens to be that a larger percentage of black males happen to be. Lower SES but there is more to it than just black males. Example, I am a black middle class male who did graduate high school. I have some friends and family, lower SES (unfortunately) who didn't.
Forgive me, but what does SES mean?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 07:46 AM
 
4,677 posts, read 8,061,865 times
Reputation: 1236
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
Forgive me, but what does SES mean?
I'm sorry about that. SES is socioeconomic status. Basically poor, working poor, middle class, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 12:30 PM
 
Location: IN
20,868 posts, read 36,023,332 times
Reputation: 13324
Quote:
Originally Posted by adavi215 View Post
This is interesting. Great job on the stats and a great topic. I guess the questions following this is how do we improve it?
How do we improve it? Parental involvement is one of the biggest keys. The schools can often only do so much with regard to instilling discipline, motivation, and intellectual drive. Also, targeted to increased funding of local schools that delivers tangible numerical improvement in standardized test scores, high school graduation rates, and an increase in the percentage of students going on to a two or four year college.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 12:33 PM
 
Location: IN
20,868 posts, read 36,023,332 times
Reputation: 13324
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
You are connecting the dots in a very odd way. First, you are assuming that by it's very nature, Southern states are overall poor. That is a distinction that hasn't been true for quite some time.

To your point however, the states that have received the lion share of migration from other regions of the country are Georgia, Florida, Maryland, Virginia, Texas, North Carolina, and Tennessee. On top of that, five cities in the first five states previously listed have populations nearly in excess of 6 million (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Miami and DC...30 million people all together). Accordingly, the states you posted with the highest number of counties with less than 10% of poverty are located in the first five. Contrastingly, there has not been much change in demographics of Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, or Louisiana where the population growth is much lower and the demographics are basically the same as they were in the mid-20th century and their levels of income growth are not equal to the states that have been altered of migration.
I listed the stats on Georgia, Florida, Maryland, Virginia, Texas, North Carolina, and Tenessee. I considered Maryland, Texas, and Florida to be outliers as they are not in the core of the South.
Regardless of that, the big metros benefit the most with regard to in-migration internally and internationally. Job growth has benefited the biggest metros, and the greatest gains in household income have come from the metros. Rural areas have continued to very slowly change, and still face significant issues with job decline, out-migration, and undereducation. The two areas of most concern to me in the South that face the three above issues accutely are the Mississippi delta and eastern Kentucky.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 12:54 PM
 
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
7,913 posts, read 12,188,329 times
Reputation: 5707
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
Rural areas have continued to very slowly change, and still face significant issues with job decline, out-migration, and undereducation.
Really, this could be said for any rural area in the country. Hell, some places are far worse than the South in this regard (take a trip to an average, non-casino money fueled Indian reservation out West and prepare to have your mind blown) The South certainly has a lot of this, but in today's world the minority of people in the South actually live in rural areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 01:52 PM
 
13,620 posts, read 22,078,365 times
Reputation: 4628
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
You are connecting the dots in a very odd way. First, you are assuming that by it's very nature, Southern states are overall poor. That is a distinction that hasn't been true for quite some time.

To your point however, the states that have received the lion share of migration from other regions of the country are Georgia, Florida, Maryland, Virginia, Texas, North Carolina, and Tennessee. On top of that, five cities in the first five states previously listed have populations nearly in excess of 6 million (Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Miami and DC...30 million people all together). Accordingly, the states you posted with the highest number of counties with less than 10% of poverty are located in the first five. Contrastingly, there has not been much change in demographics of Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, or Louisiana where the population growth is much lower and the demographics are basically the same as they were in the mid-20th century and their levels of income growth are not equal to the states that have been altered of migration.
This.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2010, 05:28 PM
 
Location: IN
20,868 posts, read 36,023,332 times
Reputation: 13324
Quote:
Originally Posted by waronxmas View Post
Really, this could be said for any rural area in the country. Hell, some places are far worse than the South in this regard (take a trip to an average, non-casino money fueled Indian reservation out West and prepare to have your mind blown) The South certainly has a lot of this, but in today's world the minority of people in the South actually live in rural areas.
The state that has the highest percentage of the total population living in micropolitan cities or rural areas is Kentucky. The percentage is around 30%, making it the most "rural" state in the US with regard to a low percentage of population living in metros.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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.
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top