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.
I wouldn't exclude Saint Louis or Milwaukee from the rust belt myself. Both are far more akin to a Cleveland than STL is to KC or Milwaukee is to Minneapolis. Conversely, Indy is not really a rust belt city at all.
I would agree St. Louis is definitely the Rust Belt. Geographically, it's different but culturally about the same.
MSP has Rust Belt elements but the metro area has evolved heavily into a corporate Fortune 500 company type metro zone. Culturally MSP is very different compared to even Milwaukee or Chicago.
Yes - it still has rural areas that heavily went for Trump, but when I think MSP I automatically think of consulting companies, General Mills, United Healthcare, 3M, Target Corporate, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25
I stopped reading after "Chicago declining".
It's not declining but they certainly have a lot of problems to sort out with political corruption and crime compared to the rest of the Midwest.
Minneapolis lost 30% of its population between 1950-1990. It could easily qualify for Rust Belt status.
So did pretty much every legacy city during the period of decentralization. The difference I think is in the fact that other legacy cities had diversified economies and recovered quicker to be come desirable again, in which I think Minneapolis did as well. Where as most Rust Belt cities have only showed signs of re-emergence really in the last 10 years.
So did pretty much every legacy city during the period of decentralization. The difference I think is in the fact that other legacy cities had diversified economies and recovered quicker to be come desirable again, in which I think Minneapolis did as well. Where as most Rust Belt cities have only showed signs of re-emergence really in the last 10 years.
Minneapolis has been expanding I believe in the last 20-25 years.
The 1950-1990 comparison is probably because many left and moved to other Western states like L.A., San Francisco, Phoenix, Seattle etc.
Minneapolis has been expanding I believe in the last 20-25 years.
The 1950-1990 comparison is probably because many left and moved to other Western states like L.A., San Francisco, Phoenix, Seattle etc.
I would think they mostly left for the suburbs like every where else. Agreed there was definite heavy migration to the west. Most declines between the 50s-90s were people getting out of the city as fast as they could for the newest open suburb of the time. They left the city not the regions.
My point was you can say Minneapolis lost 30% of it's population between 1950 and 1990 and it hasn't recovered to it's peak, but that doesn't make it Rust Belt, unless Boston, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Baltimore (and many others) that aren't now considered Rust Belt, also lost 30% from their peaks, and still have yet to fully regain it. Based on my experience MSP shares more in common with those Bos-Wash cities in terms of corporate culture and educational attainment, and arts, than it does with what are largely considered standard Rust Belt cities.
I would think they mostly left for the suburbs like every where else. Agreed there was definite heavy migration to the west. Most declines between the 50s-90s were people getting out of the city as fast as they could for the newest open suburb of the time. They left the city not the regions.
My point was you can say Minneapolis lost 30% of it's population between 1950 and 1990 and it hasn't recovered to it's peak, but that doesn't make it Rust Belt, unless Boston, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Baltimore (and many others) that aren't now considered Rust Belt, also lost 30% from their peaks, and still have yet to fully regain it. Based on my experience MSP shares more in common with those Bos-Wash cities in terms of corporate culture and educational attainment, and arts, than it does with what are largely considered standard Rust Belt cities.
It's really just a common trait of Northern States in general. New Jersey I believe has lost population in recent years as well.
I would think they mostly left for the suburbs like every where else. Agreed there was definite heavy migration to the west. Most declines between the 50s-90s were people getting out of the city as fast as they could for the newest open suburb of the time. They left the city not the regions.
My point was you can say Minneapolis lost 30% of it's population between 1950 and 1990 and it hasn't recovered to it's peak, but that doesn't make it Rust Belt, unless Boston, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Baltimore (and many others) that aren't now considered Rust Belt, also lost 30% from their peaks, and still have yet to fully regain it. Based on my experience MSP shares more in common with those Bos-Wash cities in terms of corporate culture and educational attainment, and arts, than it does with what are largely considered standard Rust Belt cities.
It sort of depends on if we’re talking about the Rust Belt more as a historic phenomenon or a current economic malaise. Certainly, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and Baltimore would fit as historically rust belt cities.
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.
