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.
That's what people have been saying. But the point has to be made that not only is CA's economy stronger, it's stronger by a looooooooooot.
The former is the country's strongest while the latter barely keeps its head above water and can't retain local talent.
Well yeah, everyone can agree that California has a "stronger"/bigger economy. But there are certain factors where California does not shine, such as poverty rate. The state needs to work on its wealth gap.
The point is that just because Maine has the problem of losing some young talent, depends on tourism, seasonal residents, remote workers, lacks big corporate $, etc., does not qualify the state as an economic wasteland. If you guys don't care about "semantics" or the wording choice, I don't know why you care to reply to me about it or defend its status as an economic wasteland. I was never out here trying to say Maine has a diversified economy, oodles of 6-digit salary jobs, etc.
Well yeah, everyone can agree that California has a "stronger"/bigger economy. But there are certain factors where California does not shine, such as poverty rate. The state needs to work on its wealth gap.
CA's poverty rate is 11.8% compared to 10.9% in Maine and 10.5% nationwide. It's not especially bad.
Quote:
The point is that just because Maine has the problem of losing some young talent
"Some" is a bit of an understatement.
Quote:
If you guys don't care about "semantics" or the wording choice, I don't know why you care to reply to me about it or defend its status as an economic wasteland.
What word would be better? Economic "backwater"? Economic "desert"? I don't know if there's a nice way to articulate this. Wish there was.
Why are you so defensive about this? I know plenty of people from ME, who love the state and still would call it an economic wasteland. It’s not even a BosWash elitist projection, it’s just true. There are very few jobs outside of tourism and the brain drain is horrendous.
Because wasteland isnt “a few people in restaurant jobs and a few people in agriculture.’ Or whatever is up there.
Wasteland is like apocalyptic. Its like Beirut after the explosion or a country after a really bad war. It just sounds stupif to call Maine an economic wasteland just because theres not a lot of white collar jobs. Its mass unemployment, most making under federal poverty, no tourism, poor quality of life, life expectancy <65, etc. the fictional, “No Mans Land” of Gotham City… is an economic wasteland. That was like the first inception of what one would be like.
Really very very few places in North America would MAYBE get the pass on economic wasteland. Not a state that is slightly above average. Northern Maine is just desolute, its uninhabited. Uninhabited=/=economic wasteland lmao, because there was nothing ever there. Backwater? Yeah wayyy different meaning
So yes, someone from Boston calling Maine an economic wasteland is pretty rich and expected. Especially when the county in Maine with the highest poverty rate is at the national average of 16%
Last edited by masssachoicetts; 08-08-2021 at 07:35 AM..
CA's poverty rate is 11.8% compared to 10.9% in Maine and 10.5% nationwide. It's not especially bad.
I don't know, for such a "strong" economy, it is definitely concerning. We all know California has a homelessness problem as well.
Quote:
"Some" is a bit of an understatement.
That's too bad, but the problem certainly isn't unique to Maine. The area in which I grew up has a very similar problem. I wouldn't really call that area an economic wasteland, though.
Quote:
What word would be better? Economic "backwater"? Economic "desert"? I don't know if there's a nice way to articulate this. Wish there was.
I don't know that I'd use any of these simplistic terms. Maine's economy is surely more nuanced than any of these "good/bad" qualifiers. The lack of diversification, aging population, etc. are all negatives. The robust tourist industry, relatively low poverty rate, "artificial" boosts to the economy from out-of-staters and seasonal residents, etc. are all positives. So I wouldn't really need to simplify it down to a "good/bad" dichotomy.
Backwater, wasteland, desert...
For people smitten by Maine's lure, I don't know that economics is a concern if they want to live there bad enough.
Some people might take minimum wage in Maine over six figures in California. I probably would.
Maine is still a solid state with minimal baggage.
Backwater, wasteland, desert...
For people smitten by Maine's lure, I don't know that economics is a concern if they want to live there bad enough.
Some people might take minimum wage in Maine over six figures in California. I probably would.
Maine is still a solid state with minimal baggage.
Yeah, my best friend and I joke that if we're still single by 40, we're moving to Maine and opening a B&B. I am sure I over-romanticize the state a bit, but I always agree when I see that slogan, "The way life should be."
Yeah, my best friend and I joke that if we're still single by 40, we're moving to Maine and opening a B&B. I am sure I over-romanticize the state a bit, but I always agree when I see that slogan, "The way life should be."
When I lived in Portsmouth, NH, a friend of mine was commuting down was commuting 30 miles down I-95 from lower cost Maine. He described the dating scene there as BMW. Huh? "Big Maine Women". The dating scene in a place where the top-10% of every High School graduating class flees the can be pretty grim.
Because wasteland isnt “a few people in restaurant jobs and a few people in agriculture.’ Or whatever is up there.
Wasteland is like apocalyptic. Backwater? Yeah wayyy different meaning
Pedantic.
Quote:
Especially when the county in Maine with the highest poverty rate is at the national average of 16%
That's not true. Washington County, Piscataquis County, and Somerset County all have overall poverty rates higher than 16%. While I'm at it, let's break it down by age. I'll only list groups >16% per (this source). I think >85 rates are elevated because the census has a harder time tracking retirement money?
Adroscoggin:
17.3% < 6 years
Aroostook:
25.5% <6 years
21.6% 6 to 11 years
16.5% 18 to 59 years
20.0% >85 years
Franklin:
18.9% <6 years
25.7% >85 years
Hancock:
21.8% >85 years
Kennebec:
19.4% <6 years
20.5% 6 to 11 years
Knox:
24.9% <6 years
Lincoln:
25.6% <6 years
16.1% 6 to 11 years
18.3% 12 to 17 years
Oxford:
32.1% <6 years
25.0% 6 to 11 years
20.7% 12 to 17 years
Penobscot:
19.1% <6 years
19.3% 6 to 11 years
16.3% 18 to 59 years
Piscataquis:
27.8% <6 years
23.2% 6 to 11 years
24.8% 12 to 17 years
21.3% 18 to 59 years
Sagadahoc:
18.0% 6 to 11 years
Somerset:
38.1% <6 years
35.8% 6 to 11 years
17.2% 12 to 17 years
19.7% 18 to 59 years
18.7% 75 to 84 years
Waldo:
25.0% <6 years
16.1% 6 to 11 years
Washington:
28.7% <6 years
26.6% 6 to 11 years
23.7% 12 to 17 years
19.2% 18 to 59 years
Using the same table and calculations for the US as a whole I'm seeing:
United States:
13.4% total
20.2% <6 years
19.0% 6 to 11 years
16.5% 12 to 17 years
12.8% 18 to 59 years
9.3% 60 to 74 years
9.9% 75 to 84 years
11.7% >85 years
I'm not exactly sure why the number I calculate for my total isn't 16%. If I'm using the wrong data or looking at it incorrectly, feel free to call me out and reference the right data.
tl;dr - call it an "economic wasteland" or call it an "economic pancake". I don't care. Maine is not an economically healthy state.
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.