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 04-30-2007, 01:27 AM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
3,742 posts, read 6,917,150 times
Reputation: 660

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plains10 View Post
Rural Missouri has higher percentages of poverty in rural counties than the Midwest does in terms of total percentages. Many of these rural counties have stagnant or even gaining populations without many jobs. This is similar trend that is observed in other areas of the mid-south. The percentages are from 2003 as that is the most recent data available.
Source: quickfacts.census.gov/qfd

Iowa:
Decatur County 14.4% of residents living below poverty (college town county)
(highest percentage of any county in Iowa)

Wisconsin:
Milwaukee County 16.2% of residents living below poverty (urban county)
(Highest percentage by far of any county in Wisconsin)

Kansas:
Crawford County 15.2% of residents living below poverty (college town county)
(Highest percentage of any county in Kansas)

Minnesota:
Beltrami County 15.2% of residents living below poverty
(Highest percentage of any county in Minnesota)

Ohio:
Athens County 18.3% of residents living below poverty (college town county)
(Highest percentage of any county in Ohio)

Illinois:
Alexander County 22.2% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
(a couple other rural counties in the high teens in far southern Illinois near the Mississippi River)

Missouri:
Pemiscot County 23.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Saint Louis County 21.3% of residents living below poverty (urban county)
Shannon County 21.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Dunklin County 20.5% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Mississippi County 20.5% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Wayne County 19.9% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Carter County 19.4% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Ripley County 19.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Wright County 18.7% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Oregon County 18.5% of residents living below povery (rural county)
Texas County 18.4% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Washington County 18.3% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Reynolds County 18.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Iron County 17.6% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Douglas County 17.0% of residents living below poverty (rural county)

(Compared to other states in the Midwest core, Missouri has far more rural counties with higher percentages of residents living below poverty.) The following counties I typed in were a good sampling, but I could have listed many others.

St. Louis County is not SOUTHERN!!!!! I am from there and if you are trying to tell me St. Louis County resembles the MIDSOUTH then you don't know crap. It is every bit as Midwestern as any county that possibly exists. Pretty much every county you have listed up there in no way is anything like the South. Without those statistics, I'd swear I was in the Midwest. Now quit trying to prove we are a Southern state. Just stop. Because you won't get me, someone who has lived in Missouri over 20 years, to change my mind. We are not like the Mid-South in any way, landscape-wise, speech-pattern wise, etc. And I'm pretty sure that you are holding back a lot of poverty rates about the Midwestern states too. And what if we are a little higher than poverty in the rest of the Midwest? It doesn't mean we aren't in the Midwest. Culture defines the Midwest and the South, and Missouri does not culturally meet the definition of a Southern state, and Southern speech patterns are not found in most of Missouri. THat ends the discussion right there. As mpope has said repeatedly, if a state does not meet every definition of the South, don't include it. missouri is no exception. I could give over 5,000 reasons why we are Midwestern today. You know how many definitions of the South Missouri really meets besides your arguments of poverty? ZERO. NADDA. It meets far many more Midwestern definitions than Southern ones. And I'm done arguing because you are beating a dead horse here. MISSOURI IS THE MIDWEST!!!!!!!! IT IS NOT THE SOUTH!!!!!!! I've never seen someone so determined to take a Midwestern state and place it in the South like you. Just leave it alone. You are in no way ever going to convince me that I am a Southerner. Most Missourians would laugh the idea of being Southern. Take a poll and I swear you would get a majority Midwest vote. Also, I actually have evidence to contradict your claims of Missouri more poverty-stricken than any other Midwest state. Illinois is the fifth most poverty stricken state in the country and the most in the Midwest. Poverty has increased by 85 percent taking into account all of its counties as of 2000. Your arguments are ludicrous. And Kansas has a smaller population than Missouri does. You're coming up with the most ridiculous ways to classify a state as Southern that I have ever heard of. Go on proclaiming we are the South because you're wasting your time. The people these days who say Missouri is Southern are in a minority. The argument of Missouri being Southern was a good argument in the pre-Civil War days...today it just is not a good argument. IF we are Southern, than why are most Midwesterners besides you accomodating of us compared to Southerners who don't accept us? I'll tell you why. Because we are Midwestern today. my father's whole family, my family, me, and everybody I know from Missouri (this is not just in St. Louis or Kansas City) thinks it's a Midwestern state. So if you want to stand up against us, feel free to. After I make this post your words fall on deaf ears. Missouri is considered Midwestern by every source out there practically today. I once tried to prove Kentucky was Midwestern and couldn't. Proving Missouri is Southern will lead to the same result ultimately. Also, indiana and Ohio show the same political patterns of conservatism as Missouri. They have voted Republican for the last three elections. The rural areas of indiana and Ohio are VERY conservative, conservative enough to overpower Columbus and Cleveland. St. Louis and Kansas City are liberal. Also, while rural Missouri may not be losing population, there's plenty of evidence that rural Missourians are moving into Kansas City and St. Louis just like the rest of the Midwest states to their big cities.

Last edited by ajf131; 04-30-2007 at 02:09 AM..

 
Old 04-30-2007, 02:32 AM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
3,742 posts, read 6,917,150 times
Reputation: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plains10 View Post
Rural Missouri has higher percentages of poverty in rural counties than the Midwest does in terms of total percentages. Many of these rural counties have stagnant or even gaining populations without many jobs. This is similar trend that is observed in other areas of the mid-south. The percentages are from 2003 as that is the most recent data available.
Source: quickfacts.census.gov/qfd

Iowa:
Decatur County 14.4% of residents living below poverty (college town county)
(highest percentage of any county in Iowa)

Wisconsin:
Milwaukee County 16.2% of residents living below poverty (urban county)
(Highest percentage by far of any county in Wisconsin)

Kansas:
Crawford County 15.2% of residents living below poverty (college town county)
(Highest percentage of any county in Kansas)

Minnesota:
Beltrami County 15.2% of residents living below poverty
(Highest percentage of any county in Minnesota)

Ohio:
Athens County 18.3% of residents living below poverty (college town county)
(Highest percentage of any county in Ohio)

Illinois:
Alexander County 22.2% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
(a couple other rural counties in the high teens in far southern Illinois near the Mississippi River)

Missouri:
Pemiscot County 23.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Saint Louis County 21.3% of residents living below poverty (urban county)
Shannon County 21.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Dunklin County 20.5% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Mississippi County 20.5% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Wayne County 19.9% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Carter County 19.4% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Ripley County 19.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Wright County 18.7% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Oregon County 18.5% of residents living below povery (rural county)
Texas County 18.4% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Washington County 18.3% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Reynolds County 18.1% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Iron County 17.6% of residents living below poverty (rural county)
Douglas County 17.0% of residents living below poverty (rural county)

(Compared to other states in the Midwest core, Missouri has far more rural counties with higher percentages of residents living below poverty.) The following counties I typed in were a good sampling, but I could have listed many others.

Pretty much every county in Missouri that you just listed is in extreme Southeastern Missouri or extreme Southern Missouri with the exception of Washington and St. Louis County....You blot out those counties, you get an overall Midwestern state. Southeastern Missouri is where the Southern culture is at. You essentially are meeting every aspect of my definition of parts of Missouri which are and aren't Southern. Compare this to the whole state and you get a far more Midwestern than Southern state. St. Louis County and Washington County are hardly Southern at all!!! Every other county you list is in the Bootheel or practically in Arkansas or in extreme Southern/Southeast Missouri. These counties are not representative of most of Missouri at all. Southeast Missouri I'm not even sure I would count as part of Missouri because it is so different from the rest of the state. Please stop playing games. This is overall no different from any types of patterns exhibited by Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. The southernmost counties tend to generally exhibit the highest poverty ratings. Thank you for verifying my point. THis argument is over. Also, you are wrong about St. Louis County. Under 10% of the population is below the poverty line. In Cole County, for Jefferson City, you get similar statistics. You also get 4.9% for St. Charles County. Those statistics are good only for Southeastern Missouri. I don't know where you are getting your sources, but wikipedia contradicts your findings for St. Louis County. It shows less than 10% being below the poverty line. Pike County reaches 15.50%. lincoln county is under 10%. Jefferson County is under 10%. Ralls County is under 10%. Boone County is under 10%. My own sampling vastly contradicts your's. you are being way too general about Missouri's rural areas. I'm getting more counties with low poverty rates like the rest of the Midwest in missouri than the ones you claim exist.

Last edited by ajf131; 04-30-2007 at 04:02 AM..
 
Old 04-30-2007, 12:10 PM
 
Location: IN
20,868 posts, read 36,011,334 times
Reputation: 13319
Default I never said Saint Louis was a southern city!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajf131 View Post
Pretty much every county in Missouri that you just listed is in extreme Southeastern Missouri or extreme Southern Missouri with the exception of Washington and St. Louis County....You blot out those counties, you get an overall Midwestern state. Southeastern Missouri is where the Southern culture is at. You essentially are meeting every aspect of my definition of parts of Missouri which are and aren't Southern. Compare this to the whole state and you get a far more Midwestern than Southern state. St. Louis County and Washington County are hardly Southern at all!!! Every other county you list is in the Bootheel or practically in Arkansas or in extreme Southern/Southeast Missouri. These counties are not representative of most of Missouri at all. Southeast Missouri I'm not even sure I would count as part of Missouri because it is so different from the rest of the state. Please stop playing games. This is overall no different from any types of patterns exhibited by Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. The southernmost counties tend to generally exhibit the highest poverty ratings. Thank you for verifying my point. THis argument is over. Also, you are wrong about St. Louis County. Under 10% of the population is below the poverty line. In Cole County, for Jefferson City, you get similar statistics. You also get 4.9% for St. Charles County. Those statistics are good only for Southeastern Missouri. I don't know where you are getting your sources, but wikipedia contradicts your findings for St. Louis County. It shows less than 10% being below the poverty line. Pike County reaches 15.50%. lincoln county is under 10%. Jefferson County is under 10%. Ralls County is under 10%. Boone County is under 10%. My own sampling vastly contradicts your's. you are being way too general about Missouri's rural areas. I'm getting more counties with low poverty rates like the rest of the Midwest in missouri than the ones you claim exist.
Based on my research Missouri has far more rural counties with poverty rates above 15% than any other state that is in the Midwest region. A lot of this DOES have to do with the fact that their are not as many farms in southern Missouri because more of the land is in National Forest or has rugged terrain. Indiana and Ohio may be more conservative than Missouri but they have have far fewer counties with over 15% poverty compared to Missouri. The point is, that rural Missouri residents have taken a much longer to move to urban areas than other states in the Midwest, even when their are few jobs in the rural counties. You say that their are only a few counties that are not "representative" of Missouri when in fact that many more counties have higher rates of poverty than other surrounding states.
Also I misquoted the percentage for Saint Louis. The 21% of residents living below poverty is only for the city itself, since it includes only around 70 square miles. Once again, I never said that St. Louis was a southern city, but what I am saying is that many counties in southern Missouri and southeast Missouri have larger concentrations of people living in rural areas with few jobs. Kentucky has the same problem of many residents living in rural counties that have very few jobs and high rates of poverty. Missouri is NOT DOING A GOOD JOB WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT in these counties, considering many of the residents who are living in these counties are not migrating to urban areas compared with surrounding states.
I ALREADY AGREED THAT THE FOODS in Missouri more CLOSELY represent those found in the Midwest. I am not debating the fact that you are mostly correct on that point. I will not, however, change my opinion regarding the southern accents I have listened to while I have been in Missouri.
Some rural counties are losing population in Missouri that lack jobs, but it does not even come close to comparing with the out-migration that is occuring in the rural plains and the rural Midwest core.
You can not really argue with my following statements.
 
Old 04-30-2007, 12:22 PM
 
Location: IN
20,868 posts, read 36,011,334 times
Reputation: 13319
Post Facts

You can not debate the fact that Missouri has far more rural counties with higher percentages of total residents living in poverty than the Midwest core. The counties with the highest poverty rates in Iowa, Ohio, and Kansas are all University or College towns. About 1/2 to 3/4 of all counties in the southern half of Missouri have poverty rates above the 15% level. This does not compare favorably to other states in the region at all considering that the 15% level and above covers so many counties. You can not argue that, unless you want to argue with the Census Bureau. (quickfacts.census.gov/qfd)- then click on any county you want to.
Does the fact that Missouri has greater concentrations of rural poverty make it more southern? NO, NOT NECESSARILY. I would agree that Kentucky has far more problems with rural poverty than even Missouri does because of the legacy of coal mining in the eastern half of the state along with an inadequete road infrastructure system. Missouri DOES NEED better policies to promote economic development in the more disadvantaged counties though!
 
Old 04-30-2007, 12:43 PM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
3,742 posts, read 6,917,150 times
Reputation: 660
Plains10, I'm not going to contest the facts ok? I never said that your data for Missouri was invalid. Missouri may be more impoverished than the average Midwestern state.....I just don't see it as a reason to group Missouri in with the South instead of the Midwest. Missouri may have differences from other Midwestern states but most of those differences distinguish Missouri from any state rather than group it within another region of states. THat's my take on it. For Southern speech patterns, we may disagree. Dialect maps show Missouri to predominantly Midwestern in speech patterns. you can feel free to disagree with me but that's the truth of the matter. Missourians in general do not have a Southern accent.
 
Old 04-30-2007, 12:45 PM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
3,742 posts, read 6,917,150 times
Reputation: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plains10 View Post
You can not debate the fact that Missouri has far more rural counties with higher percentages of total residents living in poverty than the Midwest core. The counties with the highest poverty rates in Iowa, Ohio, and Kansas are all University or College towns. About 1/2 to 3/4 of all counties in the southern half of Missouri have poverty rates above the 15% level. This does not compare favorably to other states in the region at all considering that the 15% level and above covers so many counties. You can not argue that, unless you want to argue with the Census Bureau. (quickfacts.census.gov/qfd)- then click on any county you want to.
Does the fact that Missouri has greater concentrations of rural poverty make it more southern? NO, NOT NECESSARILY. I would agree that Kentucky has far more problems with rural poverty than even Missouri does because of the legacy of coal mining in the eastern half of the state along with an inadequete road infrastructure system. Missouri DOES NEED better policies to promote economic development in the more disadvantaged counties though!

I definitely agree Missouri needs better policies for economic development. Matt Blunt being our governor hasn't really helped much at all.
 
Old 04-30-2007, 12:48 PM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
3,742 posts, read 6,917,150 times
Reputation: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plains10 View Post
Based on my research Missouri has far more rural counties with poverty rates above 15% than any other state that is in the Midwest region. A lot of this DOES have to do with the fact that their are not as many farms in southern Missouri because more of the land is in National Forest or has rugged terrain. Indiana and Ohio may be more conservative than Missouri but they have have far fewer counties with over 15% poverty compared to Missouri. The point is, that rural Missouri residents have taken a much longer to move to urban areas than other states in the Midwest, even when their are few jobs in the rural counties. You say that their are only a few counties that are not "representative" of Missouri when in fact that many more counties have higher rates of poverty than other surrounding states.
Also I misquoted the percentage for Saint Louis. The 21% of residents living below poverty is only for the city itself, since it includes only around 70 square miles. Once again, I never said that St. Louis was a southern city, but what I am saying is that many counties in southern Missouri and southeast Missouri have larger concentrations of people living in rural areas with few jobs. Kentucky has the same problem of many residents living in rural counties that have very few jobs and high rates of poverty. Missouri is NOT DOING A GOOD JOB WITH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT in these counties, considering many of the residents who are living in these counties are not migrating to urban areas compared with surrounding states.
I ALREADY AGREED THAT THE FOODS in Missouri more CLOSELY represent those found in the Midwest. I am not debating the fact that you are mostly correct on that point. I will not, however, change my opinion regarding the southern accents I have listened to while I have been in Missouri.
Some rural counties are losing population in Missouri that lack jobs, but it does not even come close to comparing with the out-migration that is occuring in the rural plains and the rural Midwest core.
You can not really argue with my following statements.

No I can't really. For the most part I actually agree with what you are saying. I never took into account the differences in the landscape affecting the poverty rates. That does make perfect sense actually now that I think about it because Missouri definitely has varying landscapes. Also, I was never argueing that Indiana and Ohio are more conservative than Missouri, but they are conservative overall and appear to be headed more and more towards the red zone as opposed to blue rurally speaking anyways.
 
Old 04-30-2007, 12:59 PM
 
Location: IN
20,868 posts, read 36,011,334 times
Reputation: 13319
Smile Finally some agreement

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajf131 View Post
No I can't really. For the most part I actually agree with what you are saying. I never took into account the differences in the landscape affecting the poverty rates. That does make perfect sense actually now that I think about it because Missouri definitely has varying landscapes. Also, I was never argueing that Indiana and Ohio are more conservative than Missouri, but they are conservative overall and appear to be headed more and more towards the red zone as opposed to blue rurally speaking anyways.
We have finally have found some common agreement regarding Missouri. To help out the rural disadvantaged counties in the state the Governor needs to find better solutions toward economic development in the rural counties considering that large amounts of people still live in those areas with few well paying jobs. One solution is to better develop the tourism industry in the counties in the southern half of Missouri that have the Mark Twain National included within the county boundaries.
 
Old 04-30-2007, 01:21 PM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
3,742 posts, read 6,917,150 times
Reputation: 660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plains10 View Post
We have finally have found some common agreement regarding Missouri. To help out the rural disadvantaged counties in the state the Governor needs to find better solutions toward economic development in the rural counties considering that large amounts of people still live in those areas with few well paying jobs. One solution is to better develop the tourism industry in the counties in the southern half of Missouri that have the Mark Twain National included within the county boundaries.
Agreed. They actually from what i've heard are trying to develop an OZark biking trail extending from St. Louis all the way to the Mark Twain national park or something like that. With the Katy Trail they are hoping to complete it to Kansas City. But far more needs to be done I think. Maybe once we get another governor we will start seeing improvements. I don't agree with much of Blunt's policies, I don't know about you but overall I think he has not done an incredible job with the state while he's be in office. I've heard far more complaints about him than appraisals.
 
Old 04-30-2007, 01:23 PM
 
Location: IN
20,868 posts, read 36,011,334 times
Reputation: 13319
Unhappy rural northern Missouri has very poor ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajf131 View Post
Pretty much every county in Missouri that you just listed is in extreme Southeastern Missouri or extreme Southern Missouri with the exception of Washington and St. Louis County....You blot out those counties, you get an overall Midwestern state. Southeastern Missouri is where the Southern culture is at. You essentially are meeting every aspect of my definition of parts of Missouri which are and aren't Southern. Compare this to the whole state and you get a far more Midwestern than Southern state. St. Louis County and Washington County are hardly Southern at all!!! Every other county you list is in the Bootheel or practically in Arkansas or in extreme Southern/Southeast Missouri. These counties are not representative of most of Missouri at all. Southeast Missouri I'm not even sure I would count as part of Missouri because it is so different from the rest of the state. Please stop playing games. This is overall no different from any types of patterns exhibited by Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. The southernmost counties tend to generally exhibit the highest poverty ratings. Thank you for verifying my point. THis argument is over. Also, you are wrong about St. Louis County. Under 10% of the population is below the poverty line. In Cole County, for Jefferson City, you get similar statistics. You also get 4.9% for St. Charles County. Those statistics are good only for Southeastern Missouri. I don't know where you are getting your sources, but wikipedia contradicts your findings for St. Louis County. It shows less than 10% being below the poverty line. Pike County reaches 15.50%. lincoln county is under 10%. Jefferson County is under 10%. Ralls County is under 10%. Boone County is under 10%. My own sampling vastly contradicts your's. you are being way too general about Missouri's rural areas. I'm getting more counties with low poverty rates like the rest of the Midwest in missouri than the ones you claim exist.
Actually many counties in northern Missouri have poverty rates above the 13% level as well, which is above average when you compare it to the Midwest core. The percentages are much higher because of the POOR levels of economic development that are occuring across many counties in rural Missouri. However, at least more of the residents of these counties seem to be moving to urban areas to find jobs as evidenced by some population declines in rural counties in northern Missouri.
(All of these counties are located in northern Missouri closer to the Midwest core)
Adair County 15.9% of residents living below poverty
Grundy County 14.2% of residents living below poverty
Knox County 14.5% of residents living below poverty
Sullivan County 14.7% of residents living below poverty
Daviess County 14.2% of residents living below poverty
Worth County- 13.2% of residents living below poverty
Harrison County 13.3% of residents living below poverty
Putnam County 13.8% of residents living below poverty
Schuyler County 13.6% of residents living below poverty
DeKalb County 13.5% of residents living below poverty
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.


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