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.
Whatever the case may be, the city of Pittsburgh as well as its surrounding suburban counties are continuing to lose population, which is never a good thing.
Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) just posted its first population gain in ages.
Yay, I got to be a dick and attack somebody else's city to make mine look good. Whaaaaa.
I been to Milwaukee and Pittsburgh. How many of you arguing can say that of the other city?
Nobody attacked anyone as far as I can tell. You Pittsburghers are just overly-sensitive when people decide to point out the truth to you. I took issue with the overwhelming response Pittsburgh was getting that was based on nothing but conjecture and hearsay. Milwaukee has a nearly identical unemployment rate, but we've been growing in the city for a decade and, unlike Pittsburgh, our suburbs have never stopped growing. You guys may have made some gains in the city, great, but overall it's still a net loss. Pittsburgh's metropolitan area is losing population faster than Cleveland and Detroit, despite having such a stellar economy according to you guys. Just because 8.5% unemployment is below the national average of 9.7%, doesn't mean you should be touting that statistic as a point of pride. Omaha and Des Moines are less than 5%, now that's something to be proud of IMO.
Nobody attacked anyone as far as I can tell. You Pittsburghers are just overly-sensitive when people decide to point out the truth to you. I took issue with the overwhelming response Pittsburgh was getting that was based on nothing but conjecture and hearsay. Milwaukee has a nearly identical unemployment rate, but we've been growing in the city for a decade and, unlike Pittsburgh, our suburbs have never stopped growing. You guys may have made some gains in the city, great, but overall it's still a net loss. Pittsburgh's metropolitan area is losing population faster than Cleveland and Detroit, despite having such a stellar economy according to you guys. Just because 8.5% unemployment is below the national average of 9.7%, doesn't mean you should be touting that statistic as a point of pride. Omaha and Des Moines are less than 5%, now that's something to be proud of IMO.
Spoken like someone who really has no clue what's going on in the Burgh....and hasn't been to the burgh to have really much of opinion to say the least....
Pittsburgh population has stablized, so how is it declining faster than Detroit and Cleveland...Last I heard the Burgh was taking alot of MI natives, which is why our unemployment shot up a tick...
Spoken like someone who really has no clue what's going on in the Burgh....and hasn't been to the burgh to have really much of opinion to say the least....
Pittsburgh population has stablized, so how is it declining faster than Detroit and Cleveland...Last I heard the Burgh was taking alot of MI natives, which is why our unemployment shot up a tick...
I don't know how many more times I have to post this information before you accept the truth, but here goes.
Dude, it doesn't take a genius to realize that statistics don't ever tell the whole story. It is simple to just base consclusions on statistics that don't share the reality of what is going on in a certain area. Quit acting like you are some sort of expert because you can conjure up stats off wikipedia.
I certainly wouldn't put Chicago in this argument. It's the only (true) major city in the region and even though it has had some very hard times like other Midwest cities, it's a cut above the rest. Choosing Chicago on this thread would be like picking teams in basketball and choosing the 7' black dude over the 5'5" Irish guy with no arms.
The two cities that come to mind for the title as "strongest rust belt city" are Milwaukee and Pittsburgh. Great undercard fight here on this thread BTW. They're two very evenly-matched cities in my opinion and the forumers from each city are showing that by providing some interesting facts.
IMHO Chicago definitely qualifies. Historically it fits the criteria of rust belt, ie a formerly industrial city with legacy problems due to loss of manufacturing jobs. Just because large parts of the city have successfully moved on should not obscure the fact that much of the south and west sides still are in long-term decline.
Anyways, my answer for this thread is: Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, & Cincinnati (In no particular order)
Sidenote:
Look a lot of people here are obviously taking a population loss as a big deal, there are large metros out there right now with 12.5% + unemployment rates like Las Vegas, Detroit, & Los Angeles to name a few. They would do anything to lose some of the unemployed people in their metro to stabilize faster, its not really a good thing to lose people, but in some cases it can be a beneficial thing too. Pittsburgh is doing fine, Milwaukee is doing fine, Cincinnati is doing fine. They're all improving on themselves, many of the larger metros right now wish they could say the same thing.
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.
