Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 01-22-2014, 10:24 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,993 posts, read 10,128,499 times
Reputation: 4401

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by michigan83 View Post
If you want to talk about truly bleeding population, take a look at the Great Plains. The industrial Midwest has relatively healthy rural areas by comparison. It really isn't any worse than the rural South or rural Northeast. There isn't a truly dramatic population loss (or gain) in the rural core Midwestern states (Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin).

Also, this map is old. But it's a cool map. So it will be used and you all will like it.
The population in most/all of those Plains counties are miniscule to begin with, so any change is going to show as a great change, percentage-wise. Similarly, counties that aren't shaded in red may have half a million people and they may have shed 50K of them and not shown up on this map.

Something to consider, I guess. The maps is a bit telling but it's also equally as misleading.

Last edited by Min-Chi-Cbus; 01-22-2014 at 10:32 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2014, 10:26 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,993 posts, read 10,128,499 times
Reputation: 4401
Quote:
Originally Posted by STLgasm View Post
Outside of those glitzy 'hoods of the Loop and the Near North Side, Chicago is more of a Rustbelt city than anything else.
The core maybe, but certainly not the suburbs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2014, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,993 posts, read 10,128,499 times
Reputation: 4401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnutella View Post
Columbus, Indianapolis, Kansas City and Minneapolis/St. Paul were never very industrial in the first place, so they never dealt with the economic misfortune that other nearby cities did. .
They may not have been as concentrated in heavy industry, but just about all of them are pretty manufacturing-centric cities, especially Minneapolis -- just a different form of manufacturing (then and now). Plus, all four cities have very much dealt with economic misfortune, and are all below their peak populations from the 1950's (for the same land area the city encompassed back then, for all but Mpls).

The one thing these four places may have in common in contrast to the rest of the Midwest/Rust Belt is that their plight and downfall weren't as extreme.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2014, 12:20 PM
 
1,150 posts, read 1,639,214 times
Reputation: 1582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
The core maybe, but certainly not the suburbs.
You could say that about pretty much every hardcore Rustbelt city though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2014, 12:24 PM
 
11,289 posts, read 26,057,256 times
Reputation: 11353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
The core maybe, but certainly not the suburbs.
70% of the population lives in the suburbs, and I'd say 80% of the burbs have nothing to do with anything "rust belt". The north side vs areas of the south side and the west side are huge divides. I would agree that areas on the west side and south side look and feel rust belt, although when you're living here you realize that most of those rich and middle class areas around downtown and the north/northwest side along with areas of the southwest/Hyde Park have population densities around 20,000 to over 30,000 per square mile. Much of the bombed out areas of the south and west sides are below 10,000.


There are areas of the metro where the rust belt still exists, but for a majority of people in the city and the suburbs it's out of sight and out of mind. The new economy is what's driving the city and making the news, it stopped trying to cling to its past years ago - which in my mind is how I see many current rust belt cities. Struggling cities whos identity is of their past and who are still living in that image every day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2014, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Somewhere below Mason/Dixon
9,436 posts, read 10,705,996 times
Reputation: 15902
Quote:
Originally Posted by michigan83 View Post
If you want to talk about truly bleeding population, take a look at the Great Plains. The industrial Midwest has relatively healthy rural areas by comparison. It really isn't any worse than the rural South or rural Northeast. There isn't a truly dramatic population loss (or gain) in the rural core Midwestern states (Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin).

Also, this map is old. But it's a cool map. So it will be used and you all will like it.

This has been going on in the great plains for a long time. Once the family farms become corporate farms and fewer people are needed to work them the economies of these areas fall apart. Those of working age leave for cities leaving only the few who work for the corporate farm and the elderly. Whole towns are in danger of extinction. I remember seeing a special on this issue on a network TV channel 10 or 15 years ago. Ironically the cities in those states are doing well, and growing at a rapid pace in some cases. Its the rural areas that suffer. The industrial Midwest states are the opposite, they have economically deprived cities and nicer rural areas. Michigan for example has great small towns, but some of its cities are where the problems are. I agree the level of population decline is a lot more in those rural great plains areas. Also the exodus out of the industrial Midwest has slowed some, maybe some stabilization may be on the horizon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2014, 02:21 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
46,011 posts, read 53,160,760 times
Reputation: 15174
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschaton View Post
Chicago is definitely rust belt, even though it's partially recovered. Hell, Boston and NYC were originally part of the rust belt as well. Chicago has recovered less however, as it hasn't yet shifted to consistent population growth.
Chicago's MSA grew slightly faster by % than the NYC MSA, so it's hard to argue Chicago is less recovered by population growth alone. It also had somewhat less severe industrial job losses as well as similar income growth.

Chicago and NYC are more similar to each other than Chicago is to Rust Belt cities. Median Household income/year, MSA:

Chicago: $58k
Philadelphia: $58k
New York City: $61k
Boston: $67k
Detroit: $54k
Cleveland: $48k
Pittsburgh: $45k
Buffalo: $45k

Detroit is a weird, has it has the biggest suburb-city contrast of all of these. It also didn't experience metro-wide population decline until 2000, though its change was stagnant from 1970-2000. Chicago (I think?) never has, which is a clear indication that it's not a rust belt city. New York City actually had a large metro-wide population decline in the 70s, probably similar to Detroit metro levels in the last decade. Page 143:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/.../2010smadb.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2014, 02:43 PM
 
1,150 posts, read 1,639,214 times
Reputation: 1582
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Chicago's MSA grew slightly faster by % than the NYC MSA, so it's hard to argue Chicago is less recovered by population growth alone. It also had somewhat less severe industrial job losses as well as similar income growth.

Chicago and NYC are more similar to each other than Chicago is to Rust Belt cities. Median Household income/year, MSA:

Chicago: $58k
Philadelphia: $58k
New York City: $61k
Boston: $67k
Detroit: $54k
Cleveland: $48k
Pittsburgh: $45k
Buffalo: $45k

Detroit is a weird, has it has the biggest suburb-city contrast of all of these. It also didn't experience metro-wide population decline until 2000, though its change was stagnant from 1970-2000. Chicago (I think?) never has, which is a clear indication that it's not a rust belt city. New York City actually had a large metro-wide population decline in the 70s, probably similar to Detroit metro levels in the last decade. Page 143:

http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/.../2010smadb.pdf
No St. Louis?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2014, 03:11 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
46,011 posts, read 53,160,760 times
Reputation: 15174
Quote:
Originally Posted by STLgasm View Post
No St. Louis?
it's straight from the link, but St. Louis has a median household income of…

$52,000
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2014, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Tupelo, Mississippi
80 posts, read 204,629 times
Reputation: 59
I feel I have a better understanding of the term "Rust Belt".

Most have recovered with diversified economy while some are still behind, especially rural areas.

Traditional Rust Belt cities are St. Louis, Milwaukee, Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Buffalo.

Chicago's economy was the most diversified of all so it had less impact.

Minneapolis, Madison, Indianapolis, and Columbus were never considered to be heavy industrialized cities so they also had the least impact and are currently performing the best in the Midwest.

Again, I have better understanding about the Rust Belt so thank you for participating in this thread.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top