Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [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)
View Poll Results: Which Region of America would do best as an it's own country?
Cascadia (Pacific Northwest, WA, OR, ID, MT) 11 8.33%
California Region (Southwest, CA, AZ, NM, NV) 23 17.42%
Frontier Region (Inland West States, UT, CO, OK, WY, ND, SD, NE, KS) 3 2.27%
Confederate States (Texas and the South) 45 34.09%
Old America (Northeastern States) 37 28.03%
Great Plains (Mid western States, MN, IL, MI, IN, OH, IA, WV, MO) 13 9.85%
Voters: 132. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-01-2013, 02:03 AM
 
Location: PNW
2,011 posts, read 3,460,459 times
Reputation: 1403

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
Things have changed since the civil war.

The South is more industrialized now and still a major food producer.

I would say

1. South
2. North East
3. Midwest based on resources
4. California area based on industry and agriculture
The rest

The South has over 100 million people, it would certainly be a force to reckon with.
I would put Cascadia over the Midwest. Washington and Idaho produce by far the most potatoes in america. The Northwest has one of the world's best wine industries. Amazing fishing industry. Large producer of hydroelectric energy. Pristine landscape. Strong economy based on technology. Cascadia (or the northwest) could easily support itself. It actually compares well to places like Switzerland, even similar GDP's. I think they would prosper, Alot better then California atleast. The fact that the population is well contained is also a bonus while most of the other regions are densely populated, especially the northeast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-01-2013, 07:26 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,993 posts, read 10,187,810 times
Reputation: 4407
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevanXL View Post
I would put Cascadia over the Midwest. Washington and Idaho produce by far the most potatoes in america. The Northwest has one of the world's best wine industries. Amazing fishing industry. Large producer of hydroelectric energy. Pristine landscape. Strong economy based on technology. Cascadia (or the northwest) could easily support itself. It actually compares well to places like Switzerland, even similar GDP's. I think they would prosper, Alot better then California atleast. The fact that the population is well contained is also a bonus while most of the other regions are densely populated, especially the northeast.
Wow! And I'd put the Midwest over just about all of them, because most of the food on Planet Earth is derived from the Midwest in some way, shape or form. Who needs potatoes when you have every other type of food commodity?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2013, 07:35 AM
 
Location: Sunbelt
798 posts, read 1,034,146 times
Reputation: 708
Texas easily. And I'm not including Texas in the South because other than Atlanta and NC (maybe Florida), the rest of the South would kinda bog Texas down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2013, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,495 posts, read 32,943,565 times
Reputation: 7752
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevanXL View Post
I would put Cascadia over the Midwest. Washington and Idaho produce by far the most potatoes in america. The Northwest has one of the world's best wine industries. Amazing fishing industry. Large producer of hydroelectric energy. Pristine landscape. Strong economy based on technology. Cascadia (or the northwest) could easily support itself. It actually compares well to places like Switzerland, even similar GDP's. I think they would prosper, Alot better then California atleast. The fact that the population is well contained is also a bonus while most of the other regions are densely populated, especially the northeast.
I agree that the NW would be a strong contender but I think the great plain states would still edge it out. The Midwest has heavy hitting industries that they are strong in. The ones I am thinking about are Finance, Manufacturing, Trade, Energy, Agriculture....

I still think it would be

1. South
2. North east
3. Midwest
4. California /SW
5. Cascadia

If trade with Asia continues to boom, then that may change things
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2013, 01:06 PM
 
Location: PNW
2,011 posts, read 3,460,459 times
Reputation: 1403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
Wow! And I'd put the Midwest over just about all of them, because most of the food on Planet Earth is derived from the Midwest in some way, shape or form. Who needs potatoes when you have every other type of food commodity?
Thats was just a small example. Washington State farm lands produce almost every type of vegetation, protein, and fruit that you can eat in america. Yes even corn though not at the producing of the midwest. Google the states for highest producing states in google for different vegetables and fruits and you may be suprised!

My only concern with the south is how much they rely on Texas. Without Texas they would have a tough time supporting itself. The any southern states rely greatly of teh federal government for support and actually recieve more back then then spend. This is opposite in place like the Northwest were they receive less back then they spend. I think thats a true testament to how it can function by it's self.

-Economy: NE wins this one, but if trade with asia stays the same or even gets better with less restrictions, California or Cascadia could take over as the "Healthiest" economy. More money doesn't always mean it's better.

-Energy: South for the moment because of oil indistries but Cascadia is growing into a leader in alternative energy.

-Natural Resources: Tie between Midwest and Cascadia. Though Cascadia would not suffer through unexpected droughts like the Midwest can suffer through. Both major producers or produces and fruits. Both have alot of access to Fresh Water. Both have phenomenal fishing. But the fact that less people live in the Northwest gives them more of an advantage down the road.

-Cities: 1.NE 2.California 3.Confederate States 4.Great Plains 5.Cascadia 6.Frontier states

-Quality of life: Cascadia wins this one in my opinion as there is a shared political belief in the region and this area has always been livable. Follow that by the south and frontier states. California isn't high because there un-certain economic future.

-Politics: South wins this one many because they now have political freedom. Cascadia secondwith being liberal progressives. The NE and Great plains always have a changing political opinion to I would rank them near the bottom at the moment.

-X-Factor: California has trade with Asia and Mexico and Natural Resources. NE had the political capital, more dominate cities, and diverse economies. The South has Energy potential for growth. The Great plains has a manufacturing background with great natural resources. Cascadia has Great natural resources, trade with Asia, and a Technology capital. The Frontier states have great Natural resources and a smaller population to support.


In conclusion all these states could take off but I would rank them 1. NE 2. Cascadia 3. Confederate State (Because without the federal government no one knows how they could support there services) 4. Great Plains (Uncertainty of a bad crop year could do damage, and the ever growing destruction of ecosystems like the Illinois river they you need for fishing) 5. California (High cost of living, massive amount of debt, and availability of clean water) 6. Frontier state (no real diverse economy, differing political views from the Urban areas to the country)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2013, 01:10 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,993 posts, read 10,187,810 times
Reputation: 4407
Time to take off those rose-colored glasses! According to you the Illinois River is the Midwest's bastion for the fishing industry, and a drought could destroy the crops of the entire region, yet you don't talk about how any of this could hinder the 2 states that make up the Pacific Northwest, or how Technology is often the most speculated (bubble) industry in this country and "Cascadia" is incredibly reliant on the Tech industry. Very short-sighted IMO!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2013, 01:13 PM
 
Location: PNW
2,011 posts, read 3,460,459 times
Reputation: 1403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
Time to take off those rose-colored glasses! According to you the Illinois River is the Midwest's bastion for the fishing industry, and a drought could destroy the crops of the entire region, yet you don't talk about how any of this could hinder the 2 states that make up the Pacific Northwest, or how Technology is often a bubble that gets burst in this country. Very short-sighted IMO!
Thats refering to whom?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2013, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,330 posts, read 3,810,480 times
Reputation: 4029
We have this thing called trade. It doesn't matter what is grown or taken out of the ground in a given place. Developed world economies are driven by value added activities not resource extraction. Japan is resource poor but it is still a very viable nation.

This is why I think any individual state could work as a country. If Luxembourg can do it, so could Rhode Island or Mississippi.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2013, 03:00 PM
 
177 posts, read 431,115 times
Reputation: 177
I didn't vote but here's me say,

Ohio. No outside the state gives three straws for it, save only during the general election. The state has plenty of resources, wealth, creativity, stability, etc. to go for along time as its own sovereignty. Just sayin'...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2013, 04:38 PM
 
Location: PNW
2,011 posts, read 3,460,459 times
Reputation: 1403
Quote:
Originally Posted by foreverdublin21 View Post
I didn't vote but here's me say,

Ohio. No outside the state gives three straws for it, save only during the general election. The state has plenty of resources, wealth, creativity, stability, etc. to go for along time as its own sovereignty. Just sayin'...
Does Ohio have enough reesources to support 10 million people though?
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. > City vs. City
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