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.
Has anyone ever noticed the regions of many states that the Mississippi River flows between are the poorest and most isolated in their respective state? Perfect examples include southwest Wisconsin, southeast Iowa, southern Illinois, the Missouri bootheel, eastern Arkansas, northeast Louisiana, and the infamous Mississippi delta region in the great state of Mississippi. The only state where this doesn't really appears to be true is Minnesota.
While west-central Illinois, northeast Missouri, extreme western Kentucky, and northwest Tennessee aren't the poorest sections of thoses states, they're definitely the most isolated. With the Mississippi River being the largest river in the country, providing rich soil and beautiful views from river bluff hills, why are these regions in such decline?
I'll take a stab at this, as far as your comparison of southwest Wisconsin and Minnesota. For anyone who knows Minnesota, it's largest, and only large metro, is on the Mississippi River. Most of the counties to the south of the Twin Cities, are included (or next to) the metro. In Wisconsin, we have no large metropolitan area on the Mississippi River. Our largest metro is on Lake Michigan. SO, that's a start. In comparing the four southernmost counties of Wisconsin and Minnesota, the average incomes are:
Grant County - $46,963, Crawford - $42,235, Vernon - $45,488 and LaCrosse - $51,339 (Wisconsin)
Houston County - $50,855, Winona County - $44,217, Wabasha - $51,112, and Goodhue - $56,366 (Minnesota)
So, there is a difference, but remember, Wisconsin counties stand alone, without a metro, and the Minnesota Counties are between Rochester and the Twin Cities metro. Actually, Goodue may even be in the metro.
I'll take a stab at this, as far as your comparison of southwest Wisconsin and Minnesota. For anyone who knows Minnesota, it's largest, and only large metro, is on the Mississippi River. Most of the counties to the south of the Twin Cities, are included (or next to) the metro. In Wisconsin, we have no large metropolitan area on the Mississippi River. Our largest metro is on Lake Michigan. SO, that's a start. In comparing the four southernmost counties of Wisconsin and Minnesota, the average incomes are:
Grant County - $46,963, Crawford - $42,235, Vernon - $45,488 and LaCrosse - $51,339 (Wisconsin)
Houston County - $50,855, Winona County - $44,217, Wabasha - $51,112, and Goodhue - $56,366 (Minnesota)
So, there is a difference, but remember, Wisconsin counties stand alone, without a metro, and the Minnesota Counties are between Rochester and the Twin Cities metro. Actually, Goodue may even be in the metro.
Even metros that line the river, with the exception of the twin cities, are or have declined. The eastern Iowa cities, the quad cities, Alton, E.St Louis, Cairo, and numerous small towns in Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana from Baton Rouge and points north are extremely depressed.
Larger river city metros like St. Louis and Memphis seem to suffer as well. Why is it that Minnesota/ Twin Cities are exempt from the poverty and isolation while other states aren't?
Low lands are also prone to flooding and much of the area you describe has a very high Black population that has a history of socio-historical challenges. It is also an area that has had industrial challenges, whether if it is related to agriculture or manufacturing.
Even metros that line the river, with the exception of the twin cities, are or have declined. The eastern Iowa cities, the quad cities, Alton, E.St Louis, Cairo, and numerous small towns in Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana from Baton Rouge and points north are extremely depressed.
Larger river city metros like St. Louis and Memphis seem to suffer as well. Why is it that Minnesota/ Twin Cities are exempt from the poverty and isolation while other states aren't?
You can read the history of the cities you listed, and then figure out why they are depressed. Please don't include the counties in WI, because they are not depressed. The poster above also explains it well.
I would not call Dubuque, Davenport or Bettendorf Iowa depressed or particularly poverty stricken at this point in time.
Yes, they took it on the chin badly during the 1980's farm crisis economic meltdown but have diversified their economies in the interim & spruced themselves up nicely.
Bettendorf being a small city that largely came into being post 1960, has a pleasant & mature suburban look throughout much of it's area.
Davenport & Bettendorf actually seem considerably more vibrant than their across-the-river Illinois counterparts in the Quad Cities.
Dubuque is also a vibrant & charming city that makes the most of it's gorgeous river side & bluff top geography.
The old river cities in far southeastern Iowa, consisting of Fort Madision, Keokuk & Burlington however do fit in with the basic thrust of the op's theme here as they have fared much more poorly over the last several decades & seem to be slowly fading.
Simple answer: Because they were established when great wealth could be gained from a riverside location at the frontier of industrial growth, but the characteristics of industry and transport have changed, so now they have all the disadvantages of the river, but there are no longer any advantages. Many of the families are still descended from the original land owners and businessmen, so they have remained there where their roots are, but the families no longer have a livelihood.
My dad was born in a Mississippi River town in 1900. At the time, it was an important and influential city, which was the junction point of a north-south river and an east-west railway. Now, the city is smaller than it was then, and struggling to stay alive, depending largely on tourism.
I've lived in the area described my whole life and the simple answer is that there just isn't much here to begin with. Jobs can be hard to come by in certain parts of the Mississippi Valley. I grew up in SE Missouri and the only halfway prosperous towns in the area were/are Cape Girardeau MO and Jonesboro AR. Most people moved to St. Louis or Memphis if they went to college and wanted to get a good job. Also, it isn't uncommon for people to commute 80 miles one way to work.
I'd also say the south central Ozarks in Missouri are more isolated than NE Missouri. There aren't that many highways so it can take a long time to get somewhere that isn't far away in a straight line. But the Ozarks are another story altogether. It is definitely one of the most isolated areas in the eastern U.S.
Changes in the way we transport goods and people. After the advent of the railroad and then the automobile, riverine transportation was rendered obsolete.
First of all, SW Wisconsin isn't the poorest area of the state, it's one of them, along with the northwoods.
What they both have in common is isolation and no real metros. SW WI is farming and little else, northern WI is tourism and little else, in terms of job opportunity. I don't believe it has anything to do with the Mississippi River itself. Once you get past Illinois, the issue becomes a racial one.
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.
