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.
You obviously have never been to Michigan, or at sharp odds with everybody there I have talked to. Detroit has a lot in common with Flint, Port Huron, and Lansing. Not to mention, your trying to read my mind doesn't make sense on any rational level, because you are dead wrong. If the population is continuous, it causes a city to retain cultural similarities over a much greater distance. If that doesn't make sense to you, I guess you're just not worth the effort. Chicago, unlike Detroit, is barely in its state, and it forms a continuous urban area with Milwaukee. Not to mention, the accents are similar, and so is the culture. The rest of Illinois does not share these same characteristics, especially Downstate Illinois. Chicago is essentially an Upper Midwest city within a lower Midwest state. Detroit is not the same thing...Detroit is an Upper Midwest city in an Upper Midwest state...the speech patterns and culture of Detroit fit in better with Michigan than Chicago does with Illinois.
I have yet to hear one argument about why Chicago and Northern Illinois don't fit in with southern Wisconsin better than the rest of Illinois. Christ...Downstate Illinois doesn't identify with Chicago AT ALL. if Detroit is as different from Michigan as Chicago is from Illinois, explain it. All you've done is attack me. Goodbye and good riddance.
I can't believe that I'm from downstate Illinois and the other poster is located in Michigan, and we're voicing our views about our respective states and you're telling us we're wrong.
Chicago isn't any more "barely" in its state than Detroit is (or the twin cities or St. Louis for that matter!). Ties that are created between Chicago and downstate include the fact that 1) the capital and a number of the historical sites are in downstate 2) the flagship University of Illinois is in downstate 3) a large number in the state root for Chicago-based teams 4) a large number of people in the state travel (car or by train) to Chicago for cultural amenities, shows, work, flights, travel etc. Sure, downstate is more rural and sparsely populated, but it isn't as if we were all farmers and river people. I grew up and lived in an average middle-class suburb in downstate Illinois; how does that make it so impossible for me to identify with suburban Chicago? Most days you heard something about Chicago, and that was where we went when we wanted big city atmosphere! On the flip side, of course there are ties between Chicago and the urban area that goes up north near Milwaukee, but that's because the urban area is shared. But there are differences, too. For example, the simple fact that people in Wisconsin have the term "FIB," or the different sports teams, or that people travel to Milwaukee for cultural amenities rather than Chicago, or differences in political views. A person living in Chicago may identify with someone living in Milwaukee, but that doesn't mean they identify with all of southern Wisconsin like Platteville or Janesville. Just like you argue not to make too much out of state boundaries, I think you are making too much out of the I-80 boundary.
Last edited by Maintainschaos; 02-27-2012 at 05:15 PM..
I'm dealing with somebody who only reads what they want to. I did not say that Detroit or Minneapolis were centrally located. I said they were more centrally located than Chicago, and specifically the capitals. Chicago is over 200 miles away from the capital of the state. It's enormous size also politically overwhelms the rest of the state. Chicago's location in the state plus its size serves to severely distort the political image of it. Central Illinois has some things in common with Northern Illinois, but the accents and weather are not the same. Detroit and Minneapolis are closer to the central parts of their states than Chicago is to central illinois. Not to mention, the state capitals. In addition, these cities aren't sized enough that politically they can overwhelm the rest of the state politically like Chicago can. Chicago is 9 million people....the biggest cities in the Midwest outside of there are 4 million. As to parts of Downstate Illinois being similar, I agree about the manufacturing part, but the accents and politics are different.
It's just fact that state lines are not good maps of cultural boundaries. Northern Illinois has so much in common with southern wisconsin that really, it's like saying the bootheel of Missouri can't in good sense be like Arkansas or Tennessee. And Omaha IMO is more tied to Iowa than it is to Nebraska. People on this forum can disagree, but I seem to have invoked the wrath of God. Especially the OP...you wanted opinions, now you're attacking me?
FYI, I started this thread...not Maintainchaos. Everyone is entitled to their opinions so don't take attacks seriously.
Chicago is in Illinois as Detroit is in Michigan. I know there are parts of both states that do not identify with the largest city in their respective states such as Downstate Illinois and Michigan's U.P. IMO, the Upper Midwest starts with Chicagoland. End of discussion on this topic!
Last edited by UTVols865; 02-27-2012 at 07:31 PM..
Missouri is only southern south of U.S. 60 in my opinion except for a few places here and there. Missouri is definitely a unique experience however. I grew up dang near on the border between the Midwest and the South in Missouri (Cape Girardeau County). I consider myself to be southern but others in the area do not. Pretty interesting situation.
It is definitely very southern in Missouri south of Cape Girardeau/Scott City. People in Cape Girardeau consider themselves Midwestern while people in the Bootheel consider themselves southern.
Like I said, MO is a mixture of everything: Midwesterners in northern tier and urban areas, rednecks/Southerners in the Bootheel, and rednecks/hillbillies in the Ozark region.
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,873 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by UTVols865
It is definitely very southern in Missouri south of Cape Girardeau/Scott City. People in Cape Girardeau consider themselves Midwestern while people in the Bootheel consider themselves southern.
Like I said, MO is a mixture of everything: Midwesterners in northern tier and urban areas, rednecks/Southerners in the Bootheel, and rednecks/hillbillies in the Ozark region.
Rednecks and hillbillies do not make southerners...and the Midwest has a bunch of those...S/E Ohio for example. And not all Ozarkers are rednecks and hillbillies. You also left out the rest of the northern half of the state, which is Midwestern. The Ozarks only comprise about 3/4 of the southern half of the state, and are a mix of Midwest and Southern. The southern quarter of the state is undeniably southern. Overall, Missouri is about 75% Midwestern, 25% southern. Parts of Southern Illinois, Southern indiana, and Southern Ohio could also be considered the south. Either way, all four states, (most of IL, IN, and OH) comprise the lower Midwest. As to those who attacked me earlier, I didn't realize I needed to get so in depth to explain my logic. The Upper Peninsula of Michigan is very different from the Mitten. as far as the mitten is concerned, Detroit has a lot in common with Michigan. Chicago and the rest of Northern Illinois are more Upper Midwest and central Midwest/Great Lakes, which features different speech patterns and culture from the rest of Illinois. Anybody who thinks otherwise hasn't been to these states or is in the minority. That's just pure fact. These are the first people I've met on here who believe Chicago has a lot in common with the rest of Illinois, enough that it is less like Wisconsin, and that Detroit has little in common with Michigan.
It's true that Missouri has characteristics of both the midwest and south. However, it's Midwestern characteristics outweigh the Southern ones. Illinois, indiana, and Ohio have noticeable southern elements to them as well...parts of Southern Illinois, Southern Indiana, and Southern Ohio are basically identifiable as part of the south. All four of these states touch the south.
Last edited by stlouisan; 02-27-2012 at 07:23 PM..
Don't the twin cities actually have a relatively high cost of living? After Chicago, the MSP area has the highest COL in the Midwest.
Twin Cities does have second or third highest COL after Chicago but it's only 8% above the national average. The COL is approaching 16% above average in Chicago. It's cheaper living in the Midwestern cities compared to bigger cities of San Francisco, D.C., and Boston hands down! Of course, the cities in the South is cheaper if you don't mind relocating there.
Last edited by UTVols865; 02-27-2012 at 07:44 PM..
It is definitely very southern in Missouri south of Cape Girardeau/Scott City. People in Cape Girardeau consider themselves Midwestern while people in the Bootheel consider themselves southern.
Like I said, MO is a mixture of everything: Midwesterners in northern tier and urban areas, rednecks/Southerners in the Bootheel, and rednecks/hillbillies in the Ozark region.
I know many people from the city of Cape that consider themselves to be southern. Hell I grew up 10 miles north of Cape and as I said I consider myself to be southern. I would say it is half and half. Cape reminds me alot more of Sikeston which is definitely southern than Perryville which is definitely midwestern. I don't consider Cape Girardeau County to be decisively Midwestern or Southern, but it sure feels alot more like extreme southern Illinois (South of 146), Western KY and Western TN than it does most of the rest of Missouri.
Anyways I voted for Missouri because it's my home state. If that angers some people too bad. I love the geographical diversity and Missouri has the most favorable climate of the entire list in my opinion. But I am one of the few people who aren't bothered by a 100 degree day with 70% humidity. I'm used to it.
I know many people from the city of Cape that consider themselves to be southern. Hell I grew up 10 miles north of Cape and as I said I consider myself to be southern. I would say it is half and half. Cape reminds me alot more of Sikeston which is definitely southern than Perryville which is definitely midwestern. I don't consider Cape Girardeau County to be decisively Midwestern or Southern, but it sure feels alot more like extreme southern Illinois (South of 146), Western KY and Western TN than it does most of the rest of Missouri.
Anyways I voted for Missouri because it's my home state. If that angers some people too bad. I love the geographical diversity and Missouri has the most favorable climate of the entire list in my opinion. But I am one of the few people who aren't bothered by a 100 degree day with 70% humidity. I'm used to it.
That's true about Cape Girardeau. Cape doesn't remind me of Sikeston at all; Scott City does though. Anyway, I have family living in Cape. Half of the population consider themselves as southern with other half as midwestern. My family there consider themselves Midwesterners.
I used to live in MO so I know all about the climate. Although all of the Midwest has humidity, I prefer less humid, mild summers and cold winters in Minnesota over Missouri anytime!
Location: Jefferson City 4 days a week, St. Louis 3 days a week
2,709 posts, read 5,094,873 times
Reputation: 1028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maintainschaos
I can't believe that I'm from downstate Illinois and the other poster is located in Michigan, and we're voicing our views about our respective states and you're telling us we're wrong.
Chicago isn't any more "barely" in its state than Detroit is (or the twin cities or St. Louis for that matter!). Ties that are created between Chicago and downstate include the fact that 1) the capital and a number of the historical sites are in downstate 2) the flagship University of Illinois is in downstate 3) a large number in the state root for Chicago-based teams 4) a large number of people in the state travel (car or by train) to Chicago for cultural amenities, shows, work, flights, travel etc. Sure, downstate is more rural and sparsely populated, but it isn't as if we were all farmers and river people. I grew up and lived in an average middle-class suburb in downstate Illinois; how does that make it so impossible for me to identify with suburban Chicago? Most days you heard something about Chicago, and that was where we went when we wanted big city atmosphere! On the flip side, of course there are ties between Chicago and the urban area that goes up north near Milwaukee, but that's because the urban area is shared. But there are differences, too. For example, the simple fact that people in Wisconsin have the term "FIB," or the different sports teams, or that people travel to Milwaukee for cultural amenities rather than Chicago, or differences in political views. A person living in Chicago may identify with someone living in Milwaukee, but that doesn't mean they identify with all of southern Wisconsin like Platteville or Janesville. Just like you argue not to make too much out of state boundaries, I think you are making too much out of the I-80 boundary.
Whatever. I'm sticking to my opinions, and you should stick to your's. Let's just call it a truce and end the debate. Picking apart your statement, it's quite clear the argument can go both ways. As far as people rooting for Chicago-based sports teams, I never said anything about that. Chicago is certainly considered part of Illinois, but as you mentioned, Chicago, Milwaukee, and Rockford all share affinities with each other. And as far as downstate Illinois is concerned, both St. Louis and Chicago exert strong pulls. Central Illinois has split loyalties between the two. Northern Illinois identifies with Chicago. Southern Illinois tends to identify with St. Louis.
...most of the people I've talked to in Illinois look at Chicago as if it doesn't belong in their state...
Yet another commonality between Chicago and Philadelphia: a cohort of residents who turn their backs on the states they're located in.
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.
I love the geographical diversity and Missouri has the most favorable climate of the entire list in my opinion. But I am one of the few people who aren't bothered by a 100 degree day with 70% humidity. I'm used to it.
