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)
 
Old 07-01-2013, 07:48 PM
 
5,368 posts, read 5,152,116 times
Reputation: 3308

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
I wonder if the invention of deet used to ward off mosquitos also helped? I know Gulf states have lots of mosquitos which tend to have encephilitis and malaria, especially as you get closer to the equator.
The tropical and sub-tropical diseases were definitely a deterrent too. When you go to old graves here in Florida (there aren't many) you can see the demographic effects that malaria had on the population. Particularly the babies and children. Sun screen invention also helped a lot. Without sunscreen every white person in Florida would be getting skin cancer!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-01-2013, 10:11 PM
 
29,919 posts, read 27,365,450 times
Reputation: 18455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Why is the lowest regional unemployment rate in the Midwest? I keep hearing how great the South is, but I'm thinking the South takes a lot of credit just because of Texas. Ohio had the #1 job growth in May.
It's because the Midwest isn't experiencing high migration rates. And we're talking about the Sunbelt, not the South. Parts of the Sunbelt aren't in the South, and not all of the South is in the Sunbelt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
For representing more than half the nation in area size and population, that's not really that many metros... Maybe you SHOULD include Texas.
Since when does the Sunbelt represent more than half the nation in size and population? I need a reference on that. Apparently you're confusing the South with the Sunbelt. Furthermore, the list would expand a good bit if I listed all Sunbelt metros with unemployment rates lower than the national average overall.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 01:45 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
5,302 posts, read 8,095,346 times
Reputation: 2136
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
Lower cost of living is not true unless you're comparing it to say, parts of the Northeast or West Coast. The Midwest is cheaper. Almost all of the 10 cheapest states to live are in the North.

Heat may be the most overrated weather phenomenon ever.

60 years ago, how many of those "rust belt" states were thinking they would never experience significant decline? All booms end, and declines are inevitable. It doesn't have to be from similar circumstances, but sooner or later, even places like Texas are going to hit a wall. Places like Ohio and PA are on the rise again. Confidence in an outcome is the quickest way to completely wrong.
I do not think most people want heat or the hotter Southern summers, just mild weather, particularly sunny and mostly dry with winters that lack snowfall and cold.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 08:47 AM
 
Location: Sunbelt
801 posts, read 859,312 times
Reputation: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
You remind me why I wouldn't want to ever live in Florida. Too hot, too old, too suburban.

Is it inevitable that the South declines? As an entire region, no, just as the entire Great Lakes/Midwest did not decline, though some seem to believe that. You certainly cannot sustain boom growth forever. Growth, maybe, but likely far more in line with other regions. And you will definitely have some places that will see actual decline.

I'm not sure I would agree that the South is doing better economically than the Midwest. The states with the lowest unemployment in the nation are in the Midwest. Lowest cost of living of the two regions: Midwest. Higher education levels: Midwest. Greater upward mobility: Midwest. Higher incomes: Midwest. What people don't know is the Midwest's greatest problem.
I don't understand the bold part. Most US cities are very suburban outside of the Northeast. Minneapolis, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit...all suburban cities.

And I'm not sure where you got your information on cost of living, but the Midwest is not cheaper than the Sunbelt. If anything, they are even; the list that I found alternated between a Midwestern and Sunbelt state.

And I think that the unemployment rate can be explained by the influx of people to the Sunbelt away from the Midwest and North. What seems to have happened is that all the people from the Midwest that were unemployed moved to the Sunbelt in hopes of obtaining a job. Some got here and were successful, others weren't. These "others" added to the South's unemployment rate. Meanwhile, the Midwest lost its unemployed. Less people without jobs in the Midwest = lower unemployment.

Also, just looked up the numbers on the unemployment rates for both regions at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Both regions are at 7.2% unemployment.

Looking at the education numbers, the only states that truly stand above the Sunbelt in terms of education are Minnesota, Kansas, and Illinois. The rest pretty much fall in line with top performing Sunbelt states, with Georgia, Arizona, Florida, and New Mexico ahead of several.

I concede that the Midwest is better for income per capita and upward mobility, but let's be real here. The Midwest does not trump the South in anyway. When all the facts are laid on the table, the Sunbelt and Midwest are fairly even. It looks like there are two main reasons why the Sunbelt continues to grow and the Midwest does not: weather and marketing. The weather seems to more desirable in the South to a larger number of people; this does not mean it is better, just that more people prefer it. And if the Midwest's greatest problem is what people don't know, then that is the Midwestern states' fault. The Sunbelt has shown to new and future residents that it is an attractive and great place to live; if the Midwest wants to attract residents, it will have to do the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 08:51 AM
 
Location: Milwaukee
1,314 posts, read 1,737,758 times
Reputation: 946
^ Same dude that absolutely busted a gasket when the Chicago vs. NYC poll showed that people thought Chicago was "more beautiful" than NYC. He hates the Midwest for some reason from his Florida perch. I'm assuming he used to live here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 08:53 AM
NCN
 
Location: NC/SC Border Patrol
21,135 posts, read 21,883,976 times
Reputation: 23217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smtchll View Post
the Sunblet may be gaining population but its population isn't gaining wealth for some reason.

Personal Income in the 2000s: Top and Bottom Ten Metropolitan Areas | Newgeography.com

I was very surprised about Atlanta & Phoenix. Very low per capita income, and it's still falling.
Are you thinking there is some reason this matters. When the income is less, the cost of living is usually lower too. The North can just keep on making more money and paying more income taxes to the Federal government. We get it; why don't you realize how that gives us an advantage too?

I live in a normal sized home that takes little upkeep but I see HGTV selling homes smaller than mine at about three to four times the cost. So is it more important to pay more for a home on a postage stamp or is it more important to live on more than an acre and have a good life?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 08:55 AM
 
Location: Sunbelt
801 posts, read 859,312 times
Reputation: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by CowsAndBeer View Post
^ Same dude that absolutely busted a gasket when the Chicago vs. NYC poll showed that people thought Chicago was "more beautiful" than NYC. He hates the Midwest for some reason from his Florida perch. I'm assuming he used to live here.
Are you talking about me? And I hate the Midwest? What Chicago vs. NYC poll? The only thing I said I don't like about the Midwest is the winter because I detest cold weather. That's it. And the only place I have a generally negative opinion of is Florida. I think you got me confused with someone else, bro.

Name one thing in my last post that was negative about the Midwest.

I'll wait...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,991 posts, read 8,315,951 times
Reputation: 4270
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaySwelly View Post
Are you talking about me? And I hate the Midwest? What Chicago vs. NYC poll? The only thing I said I don't like about the Midwest is the winter because I detest cold weather. That's it. And the only place I have a generally negative opinion of is Florida. I think you got me confused with someone else, bro.

Name one thing in my last post that was negative about the Midwest.

I'll wait...
You compared us to the South (shudders)!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,097 posts, read 13,485,805 times
Reputation: 5776
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77 View Post
It's because the Midwest isn't experiencing high migration rates. And we're talking about the Sunbelt, not the South. Parts of the Sunbelt aren't in the South, and not all of the South is in the Sunbelt.

Since when does the Sunbelt represent more than half the nation in size and population? I need a reference on that. Apparently you're confusing the South with the Sunbelt. Furthermore, the list would expand a good bit if I listed all Sunbelt metros with unemployment rates lower than the national average overall.
All you're saying with the migration stuff is that Sun Belt does not produce enough jobs to keep up with the migration levels, meaning no matter how you look at it, unemployment is higher. All that in-migration has negative consequences over time as well, and not just with unemployment rates. A good one is to gradually remove the economic advantage of cost of living. More people demanding more stuff means everything becomes more expensive. And what does in-migration have to do with job creation? Texas, for example, is clearly doing well, but it is a unique example and produces more jobs than much of the Sun Belt combined. Lumping the entire region together is a little bit disingenuous when one state is doing most of the work, but we hear all the time how awesome the Sun Belt is doing economically. That case cannot be made so easily as it was 5-10 years ago.

Here are the states I've always seen referenced as the Sun Belt: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia. These states in 2012 represented 160,654,710, for a % of US population of about 51.17%.

The states I've always seen references as the North include: Connecticut, Delaware, DC, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont and Wisconsin. These states represent 130,501,366, for a % of US population of about 41.57%.

The states that aren't traditionally included in either area are: Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming, representing 22,747,964 or about 7.25% of the US population. Even if you included all of these with the North, the population would still be below that of the Sun Belt.

So when you give a rather short list of metros with below national average unemployment, it's not that impressive. Here is the unemployment rate breakdown of all metros in the North and Sun Belt.

BTW, the national unemployment rate is 7.6%, not 7.1%.

3% and Below
North: 1
Sun Belt: 0

3.5% and Below
North: 8
Sun Belt: 1

4% and Below
North: 10
Sun Belt: 2

4.5% and Below
North: 17
Sun Belt: 4

5% and Below
North: 23
Sun Belt: 10

5.5% and Below
North: 27
Sun Belt: 22

6% and Below
North: 38
Sun Belt: 34

6.5% and Below
North: 58
Sun Belt: 62

7% and Below
North: 75
Sun Belt: 89

7.5% and Below
North: 98
Sun Belt: 105

This represents all the metros below the national rate in May. The North clearly dominates with the metros with the lowest unemployment rates. The Sun Belt gradually catches up and then has more metros in the 6% to 7.5% range, but considering the much larger population of the region, the balance seems pretty even. And certainly, this doesn't indicate that the Sun Belt is the dominating force for economics that people love to claim... at least not currently.

If we went by state-level unemployment, the picture is similar.

States with unemployment rates of...

3.5% and Below
North: 1
Sun Belt: 0

4% and Below
North: 3
Sun Belt: 0

4.5% and Below
North: 4
Sun Belt: 0

5% and Below
North: 5
Sun Belt: 2

5.5% and Below
North: 7
Sun Belt: 3

6% and Below
North: 8
Sun Belt: 3

6.5% and Below
North: 8
Sun Belt: 5

7% and Below
North: 14
Sun Belt: 8

7.5% and Below
North: 16
Sun Belt: 10
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 11:23 AM
 
29,919 posts, read 27,365,450 times
Reputation: 18455
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
All you're saying with the migration stuff is that Sun Belt does not produce enough jobs to keep up with the migration levels, meaning no matter how you look at it, unemployment is higher. All that in-migration has negative consequences over time as well, and not just with unemployment rates. A good one is to gradually remove the economic advantage of cost of living. More people demanding more stuff means everything becomes more expensive. And what does in-migration have to do with job creation? Texas, for example, is clearly doing well, but it is a unique example and produces more jobs than much of the Sun Belt combined. Lumping the entire region together is a little bit disingenuous when one state is doing most of the work, but we hear all the time how awesome the Sun Belt is doing economically. That case cannot be made so easily as it was 5-10 years ago.
I think it's a matter of perspective. Actually living in the Sunbelt, in one of the major metros that was hit disproportionately hard by the recession (Atlanta), we're always seeing and hearing reminders of how things here aren't as good as they used to be. Things are gradually improving and we're not pessimistic about our prospects long-term, but if you're hearing "all the time how awesome the Sunbelt is doing economically," then it's probably a case of "the grass is always greener" in your part of the country. So the "we" you're talking about isn't inclusive of everyone.

Furthermore, I prefer to take the longer view here as opposed to just a year or two at a time. With that in mind, the Sunbelt has been doing quite well although it remains to be seen when job creation rates will return to former levels or exceed them.

Quote:
Here are the states I've always seen referenced as the Sun Belt: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia. These states in 2012 represented 160,654,710, for a % of US population of about 51.17%.
I've not seen all of those states referred to as Sunbelt states. I've NEVER seen WV and KY included. For some others, I've seen only portions of them referred to as Sunbelt states.

Quote:
So when you give a rather short list of metros with below national average unemployment, it's not that impressive. Here is the unemployment rate breakdown of all metros in the North and Sun Belt.
I'm guessing you didn't read. I listed Sunbelt metros with unemployment rates that were 0.5% lower and below than the national rate, so it wasn't exhaustive.

Quote:
BTW, the national unemployment rate is 7.6%, not 7.1%.
The rate for May is 7.3%, at least as far as metro areas go. http://www.bls.gov/web/metro/laummtrk.htm

Quote:
This represents all the metros below the national rate in May. The North clearly dominates with the metros with the lowest unemployment rates. The Sun Belt gradually catches up and then has more metros in the 6% to 7.5% range, but considering the much larger population of the region, the balance seems pretty even. And certainly, this doesn't indicate that the Sun Belt is the dominating force for economics that people love to claim... at least not currently.
I don't really see people making that claim currently, outside of places reliant on energy jobs. I think you're arguing against something that nobody in this thread really ever said.
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.
Similar Threads
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