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.
I'll go for the west, as it has a lot of economic diversity, considerable food production year-round, access to Pacific Rim trading routes, and more than one world-class city.
Water would be an ongoing problem, but it's already an ongoing problem while it's part of the union.
Certainly not the west, they have no water. But I can see any of the other regions doing just fine. I'd have to say no for the NE because its too corrupt and not united enough. I think it's a tie between the south and midwest. Probably the south. They've historically out-produced sustainable items since before the civil war.
Probably the Midwest. They'd probably barter access to the St. Lawrence and/or access to the gulf via the Mississippi with staple grains. They also have the largest deposits of fresh water and the largest overall region for agriculture (even if it isn't that significantly varied by comparison to CA).
Why is Delaware, DC, and Maryland considered the South? I think to accurately describe the South, it would be anything below Virginia. And Kentucky should be considered the Midwest rather than the South.
I agree, but also, then Missouri or Kentucky belong to the south. They're more culturally similar. Kentucky use to be part of greater Virginia.
I'll go for the west, as it has a lot of economic diversity, considerable food production year-round, access to Pacific Rim trading routes, and more than one world-class city.
Water would be an ongoing problem, but it's already an ongoing problem while it's part of the union.
With Hawaii and Alaska it could have tourism and oil. But with globalization these days and multinational corporations who knows if it makes a difference.
I don't know how the south has one vote (me). Look at the above oil they produce. Beats me. Before I voted I though they would be 1st or 2nd. Are people just voting on where they live?
I don't know how the south has one vote (me). Look at the above oil they produce. Beats me. Before I voted I though they would be 1st or 2nd. Are people just voting on where they live?
Well, I havent voted yet.
Although I would agree that the South is a very strong region economically.
wow. surprised that California produces more oil than all of the midwest and the northeast combined. And Texas producing more oil than all of the other states in the lower 48 combined.
It depends, as the NE is probably the most walkable/less car dependant region
It has plenty of water, food sources, major cities, natural harbors, 4 seasons, solid educational infrastructure and a diversified economy. All of the regions have great strengths and could work in their own way.
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.
