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 07-02-2013, 11:25 AM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,105 posts, read 13,499,729 times
Reputation: 5783

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JaySwelly View Post
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.
I'm sorry, but while all those cities have suburbs, they are all built more like Northeast cities than Southern cities. You really need to look at the average densities again.

The 10 cheapest states to live at last check in 2011, according to the BLS, were:

1. South Dakota
2. North Dakota
3. Mississippi
4. Missouri
5. Arkansas
6. Iowa
7. Kentucky
8. Nebraska
9. West Virginia
10. Ohio

7 of 10 were not Sun Belt states. If you include WV in the Sun Belt, you still only have 4 of 10. Texas, the Sun Belt's current shining star, doesn't even crack the top half at 28th. Florida, 34th. So much for retirement going further, seniors.

Top 10 most educated states.

1. Vermont
2. Connecticut
3. Massachusetts
4. New Jersey
5. Maine
6. Minnesota
7. Virginia
8. Wisconsin
9. Montana
10. New York

Bottom 10 educated states.

41. Tennessee
42. Hawaii
43. Alabama
44. Alaska
45. Louisiana
46. California
47. Nevada
48. New Mexico
49. Mississippi
50. Arizona

Average state rank North: 14.7
Average state rank Sun Belt: 38.4

The Midwest doesn't trump the Sun Belt in any way? And yet it clearly does in many areas. Perhaps not in hours of sunshine per year or # of 90 degree days, but in education, employment, income (which you even just admitted), it certainly does. Personally, I value 4 seasons. I like snow, and would take it over stifling heat any day. Senior citizens... I concede they love Florida... so long as the A/C is blasting in their condos.

The Midwest continues to grow in population. Not booming is also not declining. I actually think steady growth is better than boom growth. It comes with less problems and the population can be much more easily absorbed. If people don't know it's a great place to live, shame on them for not bothering to do any research, but in the meantime, they seem to be reaping the rewards of staying relatively under the radar.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-02-2013, 11:39 AM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,105 posts, read 13,499,729 times
Reputation: 5783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutiny77 View Post
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.

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.

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.

The rate for May is 7.3%, at least as far as metro areas go. Unemployment Rates for Metropolitan Areas

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.
It seems entirely media driven and then people repeat it everywhere. I don't currently live in the states, but when I did, the #1 source for telling us how great things were down south was the media. It was certainly not something that residents sat around and talked about.

I do think that the recession shook things up a bit and I would not expect everything to return to how it was. The North is clearly doing better now than it has for a long time, and with the Sun Belt increasingly losing its cost of living advantage and the North improving its business climate, at some point the boom is going to end. Growth likely won't, but double-digit growth rates for decades at a time are likely over. One of the ominous signs for this comes from my home state of Ohio. It was recently reported that the population of those aged 20-34 has grown since 2010. This is a demographic that has not seen growth in the state for decades. If Ohio can reverse such loss of college-age population, how are other Northern states doing? And what implications does this have for the Sun Belt when domestic migration starts slowing down and the North becomes more competitive? Seems like a recipe for and end to the boom, but it will take more time to sort out all the new trends happening.

You could give WV and KY to the North and it wouldn't really change much.

I know what you posted, but it still wasn't the long list I was expecting given the hype. People have been claiming in this very thread that the Sun Belt is doing better economically than the North, and it's definitely an idea that's seen on this forum and in the media constantly: North declining, Sun Belt booming.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 01:16 PM
 
Location: Sunbelt
801 posts, read 860,004 times
Reputation: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
I'm sorry, but while all those cities have suburbs, they are all built more like Northeast cities than Southern cities. You really need to look at the average densities again.

The 10 cheapest states to live at last check in 2011, according to the BLS, were:

1. South Dakota
2. North Dakota
3. Mississippi
4. Missouri
5. Arkansas
6. Iowa
7. Kentucky
8. Nebraska
9. West Virginia
10. Ohio

7 of 10 were not Sun Belt states. If you include WV in the Sun Belt, you still only have 4 of 10. Texas, the Sun Belt's current shining star, doesn't even crack the top half at 28th. Florida, 34th. So much for retirement going further, seniors.

Top 10 most educated states.

1. Vermont
2. Connecticut
3. Massachusetts
4. New Jersey
5. Maine
6. Minnesota
7. Virginia
8. Wisconsin
9. Montana
10. New York

Bottom 10 educated states.

41. Tennessee
42. Hawaii
43. Alabama
44. Alaska
45. Louisiana
46. California
47. Nevada
48. New Mexico
49. Mississippi
50. Arizona

Average state rank North: 14.7
Average state rank Sun Belt: 38.4

The Midwest doesn't trump the Sun Belt in any way? And yet it clearly does in many areas. Perhaps not in hours of sunshine per year or # of 90 degree days, but in education, employment, income (which you even just admitted), it certainly does. Personally, I value 4 seasons. I like snow, and would take it over stifling heat any day. Senior citizens... I concede they love Florida... so long as the A/C is blasting in their condos.

The Midwest continues to grow in population. Not booming is also not declining. I actually think steady growth is better than boom growth. It comes with less problems and the population can be much more easily absorbed. If people don't know it's a great place to live, shame on them for not bothering to do any research, but in the meantime, they seem to be reaping the rewards of staying relatively under the radar.
I found some conflicting charts on the density of the metros in question. DFW, New Orleans, Miami-Ft. Lauderdale, and Las Vegas were all listed to be more dense than Minneapolis-St. Paul, Cleveland or Indianapolis. Minneapolis and Indianapolis are really not built like the cites of Boston, NYC, or Philly.

And are we talking about cheapest states or lowest cost of living states? The chart that I found on the missourieconomy.org site, which they got from another company called ACCRA, showed these as the top 10 states for lowest cost of living:

1. Oklahoma
2. Tennessee
3. Kentucky
4. Idaho
5. Nebraska
6. Indiana
7. Arkansas
8. Kansas
9. Texas
10. Mississippi

3 of those are Midwestern states. 5 of those are Sunbelt states (not counting Kentucky).

And again, the employment numbers for May 2013 show that the average rate of unemployment for both regions is 7.2%.

So the only plusses that Midwest has are education and income. But we know that with higher education come higher income, so if a person moving to a Sunbelt city relocated to an area with a higher average income, then chances are, he/she will be surrounded by higher educated people. The education point seems kinda silly to me, just like the crime statistic for an entire city. If someone told me that they wouldn't move to Chicago because it experiences high crime, I would tell them to look closer. They obviously don't plan to live on the Southside, and there are several areas in Chicago that are relatively safe. Same with education. There are areas of higher-educated citizens and areas with lower educated citizens.

So what does it boil down to? Really it's personal preference. As you said you value 4 seasons. I value it not being cold (for too long). And it seems that the Sunbelt states have marketed themselves better than the Midwestern states. Let's face it: there isn't a large interest in the general American public to move to places like Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Nebraska, SC, ND, SD, etc. We are truly talking about a few states: Texas, Florida, Georgia, NC, Arizona, Nevada, Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Ohio, and maybe Indiana and Michigan. All things even (which they pretty much are), it looks like weather and marketing may be the deciding factor that is causing many individuals to move to the Sunbelt.

Is this a knock against the Midwest? No. The Midwest is still one of the US's great region, although it was economically stronger in the past. But right now, the Sunbelt is shining as one of if not the most attractive region in the US right now. Of course, this will end someday in the future, and who knows who will rise up then.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 01:31 PM
 
Location: Sunbelt
801 posts, read 860,004 times
Reputation: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbcmh81 View Post
It seems entirely media driven and then people repeat it everywhere. I don't currently live in the states, but when I did, the #1 source for telling us how great things were down south was the media. It was certainly not something that residents sat around and talked about.

I do think that the recession shook things up a bit and I would not expect everything to return to how it was. The North is clearly doing better now than it has for a long time, and with the Sun Belt increasingly losing its cost of living advantage and the North improving its business climate, at some point the boom is going to end. Growth likely won't, but double-digit growth rates for decades at a time are likely over. One of the ominous signs for this comes from my home state of Ohio. It was recently reported that the population of those aged 20-34 has grown since 2010. This is a demographic that has not seen growth in the state for decades. If Ohio can reverse such loss of college-age population, how are other Northern states doing? And what implications does this have for the Sun Belt when domestic migration starts slowing down and the North becomes more competitive? Seems like a recipe for and end to the boom, but it will take more time to sort out all the new trends happening.

You could give WV and KY to the North and it wouldn't really change much.

I know what you posted, but it still wasn't the long list I was expecting given the hype. People have been claiming in this very thread that the Sun Belt is doing better economically than the North, and it's definitely an idea that's seen on this forum and in the media constantly: North declining, Sun Belt booming.
Not to dispute what you said or prove you wrong, but my experiences have shown me that many people from the North are quick to discredit the South, as it was struggling for a long period of time while the North/Midwest flourished. I can understand why Southerners are excited about the new trend, because for a long time, Northerners have been shoving it in our face that we will never be as good as Boston, Philly, NYC, DC. Some still do. In general, the only Northern state I have seen pegged as declining is Michigan. Other than that, most are ignored or praised. Meanwhile, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana can never catch a break, and any strides made in the positive direction are overshadowed by any negative event that occurs. The Sunbelt was doing better than the Midwest before the recession at least, but now things seem to be slowing down. Things are still moving in the positive direction and people should be happy about the results.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 02:21 PM
 
Location: Reading PA
174 posts, read 204,532 times
Reputation: 217
I think fresh water issues and the growing heat due to global warming will curtail sun-belt growth. Not to mention rising sea levels
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,105 posts, read 13,499,729 times
Reputation: 5783
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaySwelly View Post
I found some conflicting charts on the density of the metros in question. DFW, New Orleans, Miami-Ft. Lauderdale, and Las Vegas were all listed to be more dense than Minneapolis-St. Paul, Cleveland or Indianapolis. Minneapolis and Indianapolis are really not built like the cites of Boston, NYC, or Philly.

And are we talking about cheapest states or lowest cost of living states? The chart that I found on the missourieconomy.org site, which they got from another company called ACCRA, showed these as the top 10 states for lowest cost of living:

1. Oklahoma
2. Tennessee
3. Kentucky
4. Idaho
5. Nebraska
6. Indiana
7. Arkansas
8. Kansas
9. Texas
10. Mississippi

3 of those are Midwestern states. 5 of those are Sunbelt states (not counting Kentucky).

And again, the employment numbers for May 2013 show that the average rate of unemployment for both regions is 7.2%.

So the only plusses that Midwest has are education and income. But we know that with higher education come higher income, so if a person moving to a Sunbelt city relocated to an area with a higher average income, then chances are, he/she will be surrounded by higher educated people. The education point seems kinda silly to me, just like the crime statistic for an entire city. If someone told me that they wouldn't move to Chicago because it experiences high crime, I would tell them to look closer. They obviously don't plan to live on the Southside, and there are several areas in Chicago that are relatively safe. Same with education. There are areas of higher-educated citizens and areas with lower educated citizens.

So what does it boil down to? Really it's personal preference. As you said you value 4 seasons. I value it not being cold (for too long). And it seems that the Sunbelt states have marketed themselves better than the Midwestern states. Let's face it: there isn't a large interest in the general American public to move to places like Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Nebraska, SC, ND, SD, etc. We are truly talking about a few states: Texas, Florida, Georgia, NC, Arizona, Nevada, Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Ohio, and maybe Indiana and Michigan. All things even (which they pretty much are), it looks like weather and marketing may be the deciding factor that is causing many individuals to move to the Sunbelt.

Is this a knock against the Midwest? No. The Midwest is still one of the US's great region, although it was economically stronger in the past. But right now, the Sunbelt is shining as one of if not the most attractive region in the US right now. Of course, this will end someday in the future, and who knows who will rise up then.
I didn't say that there were no Southern cities with some density, but the cities you mentioned, aside from Indianapolis which has extremely low density for a major city, are definitely NOT suburban-built.

I got mine from the Census and the BLS, both of which measure cost of living. For the BLS, they use price parity, which measures the prices of goods and services compared to the national average. In any case, there is clearly some disagreement based on what's being measured. Let's look at it another way. Since where you live, even within a single state, changes the cost of living, maybe a better way is to look at individual places. I'll do the 3 largest metros from each state in both regions (if there are 3) and post that later.

You're correct about the South vs. the Midwest unemployment rate being the same in May. However, this was a negative for the South as that was actually a small rise from April and represented no change from May 2012. For the Midwest, it was a drop since May 2012 and the same as April 2013. Also, the Midwest maintains the lowest regional unemployment at 5.4% for the West North Central area. The South's lowest is 6.5% for West South Central... or basically Texas. Still don't see how this supports the idea of the South's economic domination.

Education and income are hugely important, but they're not the only ones and we've already been over a few others. Since we're discussing entire regions, why are you now dismissing regional information as not that important? Is the fact that the data makes the South look extremely bad on education, for example, be the reason it's being deemed unimportant now?

Weather is the most useless factor for making people move outside of retirees. You Southern folks love to pat yourselves on the back for having more sun and heat, but there is a reason the region didn't start booming until long after A/C came about AND the North experienced long-term decline. If you want to attract people, it's economics. The fact is that the South has had the advantage for the past few decades as the North experienced decline, especially in traditional manufacturing and blue collar jobs. The question is, is that picture still true? From the data, not really. The South just doesn't have the clear economic advantage anymore. Time will tell whether that hurts the boom, but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't.

Last edited by jbcmh81; 07-02-2013 at 04:40 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Mexico City, formerly Columbus, Ohio
13,105 posts, read 13,499,729 times
Reputation: 5783
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaySwelly View Post
Not to dispute what you said or prove you wrong, but my experiences have shown me that many people from the North are quick to discredit the South, as it was struggling for a long period of time while the North/Midwest flourished. I can understand why Southerners are excited about the new trend, because for a long time, Northerners have been shoving it in our face that we will never be as good as Boston, Philly, NYC, DC. Some still do. In general, the only Northern state I have seen pegged as declining is Michigan. Other than that, most are ignored or praised. Meanwhile, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana can never catch a break, and any strides made in the positive direction are overshadowed by any negative event that occurs. The Sunbelt was doing better than the Midwest before the recession at least, but now things seem to be slowing down. Things are still moving in the positive direction and people should be happy about the results.
The North's boom ended in the 1960s, and the South eventually took over with its own boom. I think over the next few decades, the 2000s will likely go down as the peak of that boom. These things go in cycles, and the South's has been running for a good 40+ years. I'm not going to discredit how far the South has come, because it's been significant. My issue mostly lies with the complete hype that has come with this boom while ignoring realities there and in other regions.

I'm a native of Ohio and don't think for a minute that Michigan alone faced the claims of decline. Ohio has fully been included in the "Rust Belt" moniker, along with others. Some of it has been true, some of it not at all, but the same can be said about the South. It has been doing better than much of the nation, but many of its long-term problems remain.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 07:17 PM
 
Location: Richmond/Philadelphia/Brooklyn
1,263 posts, read 1,274,095 times
Reputation: 741
Northeast megalopolis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I must point out that the sun belt growth seems quite inflated, and that some of these boom "cities" could bust in the future. I must add though that the Northeastern megalopolis is still showing steady 5% growth per decade.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 11:16 PM
 
5,368 posts, read 5,157,139 times
Reputation: 3308
Quote:
Originally Posted by pantin23 View Post
Northeast megalopolis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I must point out that the sun belt growth seems quite inflated, and that some of these boom "cities" could bust in the future. I must add though that the Northeastern megalopolis is still showing steady 5% growth per decade.
No way. The only metros that broke 5% last decade were Washington DC and Baltimore (Baltimore barely passed it). New York, Philly, and Boston barely grew.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-03-2013, 01:20 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
5,302 posts, read 8,103,902 times
Reputation: 2136
Quote:
Originally Posted by chocisful View Post
I think fresh water issues and the growing heat due to global warming will curtail sun-belt growth. Not to mention rising sea levels
These are issues for the entire country. The Northeast and Midwest keep having these smoggy heatwaves and drier weather than usual nearly every summer for the past few years. Much of the Southeast, which has a summer monsoon season, saw a drought, well as Texas and the center of the country, where a lot of farmland was turned to crap due to dry and extremely hot weather. That ended after this wet winter but summer has just begun, so there is no telling. In 2010, SoCal has a cool and overcast summer followed by a scorching fall, and in summer of 2012 and this year is much warmer and ore humid than normal. Look at Alaska and the Pacific Northwest; also has hotter than normal summer weather right now. Global Wrming is not just affecting the Sunbelt, but the whole country.
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.


 
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