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.
The main regions of the US and their populations, according to US Census Bureau:
Midwest- roughly 67 million
Northeast- roughly 55 million
South- roughly 115 million
West- roughly 72 million
So there are basically double as many Southerners as Northeasterners..more Midwesterns than Northeasterners.. yet the rural-urban; friendly-non-friendly etc etc stereotypes and the implications surrounding population numbers really exist
Albeit, population density is another thing all together, but does knowing these regional population numbers affect perspective?
If you were dividing the US into 4 regions which one would you consider Florida to be a part of? The Northeast?
Or is to be just included as the northernmost part of Cuba?
I'm not saying I would divide things any differently. I'm just trying to offer some logical background before people come on here saying "see, the South is more populous than you think it is".
Well, even with Maryland and Delaware as part of the north, that's about 6 million people moved from one category to another--a decent amount, but the South would still firmly be at the top in population.
Well, even with Maryland and Delaware as part of the north, that's about 6 million people moved from one category to another--a decent amount, but the South would still firmly be at the top in population.
hence my other comment
Quote:
Originally Posted by j_cat
It's easily misleading if you don't consider land area as well. Even then, you still won't quite have a good picture of settlement patterns.
The main regions of the US and their populations, according to US Census Bureau:
Midwest- roughly 67 million
Northeast- roughly 55 million
South- roughly 115 million
West- roughly 72 million
So there are basically double as many Southerners as Northeasterners..more Midwesterns than Northeasterners.. yet the rural-urban; friendly-non-friendly etc etc stereotypes and the implications surrounding population numbers really exist
Albeit, population density is another thing all together, but does knowing these regional population numbers affect perspective?
Compared to the Northeast, the Midwest still has a vast amount of rural areas (one of the Midwest's best attributes) and so does the South.
But yes you say, they both have more people than the Northeast. So why do they have a rural sterotype and the Northeast has a urban one? Well, the sterotypes of the South and Midwest are of course outdated. Especially the Great Lake cities and the booming parts of the South.
But also do you see the size difference in these regions? Of course these regions have more people than the Northeast.
You can fit the entire Northeast, all 9 to 11 states, lock stock and barrel, into just the great State of Texas. Which is just part of the South. Even the largest states in the NE, New York, Pennsylvania and Maine, are still in the smaller 50% of the states.
At the same time, the Northeast has a urban sterotype because people only think of the Boston-Washington corridor when they think of the Northeast. But anyone who has traveled around New York State or New England, knows there is a whole different world up there outside the 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.
