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.
3. Massachusettes
12. Wisconsin
14. New York
19. Minnesota
22. Connecticut
25. Iowa
26. Indiana
29. Missouri (though I feel you can place this state in both categories for different cities/regions)
30. Michigan
36. Illinois
37. New Jersey
39. Pennsylvania
41. Ohio (my home state is a hot mess. But I'd be happy to live in Cleveland)
Sun Belt rankings
4. Texas
15. Georgia
17. Florida
21. Arizona
28. South Carolina
31. Alabama
32. Nevada
33. North Carolina (Isn't this the one people love to brag about?)
38. Virginia
42. Tennessee
43. Arkansas
46. Mississippi
50. Louisiana
I don't see a huge difference between the two but if you want to get technical the average of Rust Belt states would be 6.66 and Sun Belt states 7.7 if added up and divided by 50. Of course this is my opinion on what constitutes a Rust Belt and Sun Belt state and of course using states is overly simplistic. But the fact of the matter is, the Midwest/Rust Belt isn't in such dire straits as some would like to believe.
Give me the Rust Belt. I like the urbanity of the legacy cities. I prefer the climate, the culture, the density of major cities, among many other reasons.
3. Massachusettes
12. Wisconsin
14. New York
19. Minnesota
22. Connecticut
25. Iowa
26. Indiana
29. Missouri (though I feel you can place this state in both categories for different cities/regions)
30. Michigan
36. Illinois
37. New Jersey
39. Pennsylvania
41. Ohio (my home state is a hot mess. But I'd be happy to live in Cleveland)
Sun Belt rankings
4. Texas
15. Georgia
17. Florida
21. Arizona
28. South Carolina
31. Alabama
32. Nevada
33. North Carolina (Isn't this the one people love to brag about?)
38. Virginia
42. Tennessee
43. Arkansas
46. Mississippi
50. Louisiana
I don't see a huge difference between the two but if you want to get technical the average of Rust Belt states would be 6.66 and Sun Belt states 7.7 if added up and divided by 50. Of course this is my opinion on what constitutes a Rust Belt and Sun Belt state and of course using states is overly simplistic. But the fact of the matter is, the Midwest/Rust Belt isn't in such dire straits as some would like to believe.
Give me the Rust Belt. I like the urbanity of the legacy cities. I prefer the climate, the culture, the density of major cities, among many other reasons.
It's tough to know what kind of methodology was used for these rankings. Did they weigh the GDP by cost of living?
I think there are strong economies in the midwest and in the south. And weak economies in both. The south tends to suffer from unfavorable wage/col metrics and the midwest is seeing many legacy industries pack up and move to the south for more favorable labor laws and lower taxes.
The only people who favor midwestern cities seem to be city data users. The general population seems to favor southern cities. I like Minneapolis, Madison WI, and Ann Arbor MI. But there are a lot of cities in the midwest I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole.
If I move somewhere it wouldn't be based on the sunbelt vs midwest, it would be based on the specific city or metro area.
I think it’s just about what you are used to. I grew up with air conditioning and outdoor pools and I knew how to use them and therefore never minded humidity. Then again I don’t have an outdoor job. But snow that doesn’t melt in 24-hours is not my idea of fun, and neither is bundling up in layers. Maybe if I’d grown up that way, I’d see things differently.
Exactly.
My brother grew up in Georgia, but moved to Ohio 30 years ago. He is sick to DEATH of the long, wet, cold, icy, gray, dark winters and so is his native Ohioan wife. Now I've lived in Texas for 25 or so years, and he and his wife are interested in moving here. He'd probably be ok with the heat after awhile, but I have told both of them to please come spend some time here in August before making a decision. I mean, I'd love for them to live here but southern heat and humidity can be just as distressing to some people as midwest winters can be to others.
Personally, having grown up mostly in the south and with long, hot, and humid summers, I love this weather down here and the heat in the summer is a more than satisfactory trade off for the beautiful, mild winters and gorgeous springs. We still may be raking leaves in December but that beats the heck out of shoveling snow in March in my opinion. But it's just my opinion - worth exactly what you and everyone else paid for it!
3. Massachusettes
12. Wisconsin
14. New York
19. Minnesota
22. Connecticut
25. Iowa
26. Indiana
29. Missouri (though I feel you can place this state in both categories for different cities/regions)
30. Michigan
36. Illinois
37. New Jersey
39. Pennsylvania
41. Ohio (my home state is a hot mess. But I'd be happy to live in Cleveland)
Sun Belt rankings
4. Texas
15. Georgia
17. Florida
21. Arizona
28. South Carolina
31. Alabama
32. Nevada
33. North Carolina (Isn't this the one people love to brag about?)
38. Virginia
42. Tennessee
43. Arkansas
46. Mississippi
50. Louisiana
I don't see a huge difference between the two but if you want to get technical the average of Rust Belt states would be 6.66 and Sun Belt states 7.7 if added up and divided by 50. Of course this is my opinion on what constitutes a Rust Belt and Sun Belt state and of course using states is overly simplistic. But the fact of the matter is, the Midwest/Rust Belt isn't in such dire straits as some would like to believe.
Give me the Rust Belt. I like the urbanity of the legacy cities. I prefer the climate, the culture, the density of major cities, among many other reasons.
New England isn't the Rust Belt. Also, somehow Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama, with slow growth, is part of your Sunbelt but not California? If you are including Virginia, then you mind as well include Oregon, Utah, and Washington, since they, like Virginia, are too far north to be part of the Sunbelt but experience rapid growth in the past few decades.
New England isn't the Rust Belt. Also, somehow Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama, with slow growth, is part of your Sunbelt but not California? If you are including Virginia, then you mind as well include Oregon, Utah, and Washington, since they, like Virginia, are too far north to be part of the Sunbelt but experience rapid growth in the past few decades.
California thru Washington. Is West Coast as a region and though Southern Cali is Sunbelt and with Florida its earliest booms as the Sunbelt. They are not lumped with the South as a Sunbelt region. The whole Gulf Coast s clearly Sunbelt too. So it adds their states.
One could push it to Arizona and include Southern Cali. But Northern Cali thru the Pacific Northwest isn't the Sunbelt. Mildest is Coastal in the Northwest the rest in the mountains no.
The Rust-Belt has a defined area. Though kinda outdated and excluding some Eastern cities as never included in the same industrial declines. Clearly has them show much too. Might have had less Steel and such for many. But plenty of other old mills lost and rusting too.
If one wants to restrict the to only states technically with large parts in the Rust-belt alone. You still get Southeast Coastal states and the Gulf states included for the Sunbelt. Just not the whole South.
Sorry that stat did not show the South as a totally booming region and the Midwest just nothing to compare to .... by what it has left to you.
But if Winters are the main reason to claim a region sucks vs the Sunbelt. No doubt the Sunbelt wins.
There are old Industrial cities in the South and Sunbelt too. They also have the abandoned mills and more, also still visible.
California thru Washington. Is West Coast as a region and though Southern Cali is Sunbelt and with Florida its earliest booms as the Sunbelt. They are not lumped with the South as a Sunbelt region. The whole Gulf Coast s clearly Sunbelt too. So it adds their states.
One could push it to Arizona and include Southern Cali. But Northern Cali thru the Pacific Northwest isn't the Sunbelt. Mildest is Coastal in the Northwest the rest in the mountains no.
The Rust-Belt has a defined area. Though kinda outdated and excluding some Eastern cities as never included in the same industrial declines. Clearly has them show much too. Might have had less Steel and such for many. But plenty of other old mills lost and rusting too.
If one wants to restrict the to only states technically with large parts in the Rust-belt alone. You still get Southeast Coastal states and the Gulf states included for the Sunbelt. Just not the whole South.
Sorry that stat did not show the South as a totally booming region and the Midwest just nothing to compare to .... by what it has left to you.
But if Winters are the main reason to claim a region sucks vs the Sunbelt. No doubt the Sunbelt wins.
There are old Industrial cities in the South and Sunbelt too. They also have the abandoned mills and more, also still visible.
I will respond to the entire thing later, but, like I've made clear multiple times on the forums, I do not care about the South and I don't know why you think I would. Regions often overlap, Sunbelt isn't the same as the South and Rust Belt is not the same as the North. Most of California's population is in Southern California.
The Rust Belt is defined by its history of manufacturing and major decline, which may or may not have reversed depending on the area. Hence why Vermont and Main are not considered part of it despite being in the same area. The Sunbelt is defined by its major population and economic growth post WW2, hence why Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama are not considered part if it despite being in the same area
I will respond to the entire thing later, but, like I've made clear multiple times on the forums, I do not care about the South and I don't know why you think I would. Regions often overlap, Sunbelt isn't the same as the South and Rust Belt is not the same as the North. Most of California's population is in Southern California.
The Rust Belt is defined by its history of manufacturing and major decline, which may or may not have reversed depending on the area. Hence why Vermont and Main are not considered part of it despite being in the same area. The Sunbelt is defined by its major population and economic growth post WW2, hence why Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama are not considered part if it despite being in the same area
Well most links to maps here ... show ALL the Gulf states as "The Sunbelt"
Some included all Cali ..... most just Southern Cali. Even some here if the Rust Belt. But for the thread. Its apparently the whole States. My point on the Rust-Belt. Was merely Eastern cities excluded. But many certainly had characteristics and remnant looks and Also found in older Sunbelt Industrial and Mill cities.
Maybe further refinement to Specific portions of what is the Sunbelt to Retirees? Might exclude more parts. But I never meant adding New England to any Rust-Belt map.
3. Massachusettes
12. Wisconsin
14. New York
19. Minnesota
22. Connecticut
25. Iowa
26. Indiana
29. Missouri (though I feel you can place this state in both categories for different cities/regions)
30. Michigan
36. Illinois
37. New Jersey
39. Pennsylvania
41. Ohio (my home state is a hot mess. But I'd be happy to live in Cleveland)
Sun Belt rankings
4. Texas
15. Georgia
17. Florida
21. Arizona
28. South Carolina
31. Alabama
32. Nevada
33. North Carolina (Isn't this the one people love to brag about?)
38. Virginia
42. Tennessee
43. Arkansas
46. Mississippi
50. Louisiana
I don't see a huge difference between the two but if you want to get technical the average of Rust Belt states would be 6.66 and Sun Belt states 7.7 if added up and divided by 50. Of course this is my opinion on what constitutes a Rust Belt and Sun Belt state and of course using states is overly simplistic. But the fact of the matter is, the Midwest/Rust Belt isn't in such dire straits as some would like to believe.
Give me the Rust Belt. I like the urbanity of the legacy cities. I prefer the climate, the culture, the density of major cities, among many other reasons.
As someone who uses statistical data to rank metros almost daily, this article uses bad metrics.
Unemployment Rate: The unemployment rate only takes into account individuals who are actively looking for work, not adults who choose not to work.
GDP: This can give false "positives". New Orleans had a big upshot of GDP after Katrina due to the rebuilding efforts. But clearly this wasn't a sign of "prosperity". It's called the "Broken Window Fallacy" in Economics. Its data/metrics do not take into consideration many important metrics.
Average Weekly Earnings: There is simply no way to get an accurate reading on earnings without factoring in cost of living (which this article clearly doesn't do).
The Rust Belt has suffered greatly from job and population loss over the years. The Sunbelt, in general, has had great job expansion and growth over the last few decades (including NC), much more so than the Rust Belt. These are just facts. Just off of the top of my head in the last couple of month, here in Charlotte we got 1500 new jobs at the Amazon facility here. Honeywell Electronics just announced it's moving its world headquarters from NJ to Charlotte, adding 750 new jobs. Fortune 500 Sonic Automotive is adding 500 new jobs to its customer service center here. Sprizzi Corp. High Tech facility 250 new jobs. Charlotte's airport is in the middle of a $2.5 billion dollar expansion. Charlotte's downtown is exploding with growth. The same can be said for Atlanta, Nashville, Dallas, and Houston. So it's important to use a good number of stats and be able to interpret them properly to get an accurate picture.
Feel free to compare the pros and cons of living in places like Detroit, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Cleveland, St. Louis, Chicago, and Cincinnati to living in places like Nashville, Louisville, Richmond, Charlotte, Miami, Houston, Atlanta, New Orleans, Dallas, etc.
Specifically, discuss what the advantages of living in the Rust Belt are over living in the Sun Belt. Statistics to support your views would greatly be appreciated.
I prefer the Sunbelt because of the Bible Belt mentality of parts of it and warmer climate and other reasons.The Rustbelt is too cold for me.
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.
