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 think that we agree on quite a few things, but Manchester and Springfield are not Rust Belt cities. They're just old New England mill/manufacturing towns that lost much of their business in the first half of the 20th century to less-expensive southern cities.These cities were never manufacturing giants like Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Chicago.
The Rust Belt, I believe, also refers to a more specified part of the country, and cities like these two are just too far to the northeast to be included.
I think that we agree on quite a few things, but Manchester and Springfield are not Rust Belt cities. They're just old New England mill/manufacturing towns that lost much of their business in the first half of the 20th century to less-expensive southern cities.These cities were never manufacturing giants like Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Chicago.
The Rust Belt, I believe, also refers to a more specified part of the country, and cities like these two are just too far to the northeast to be included.
To clarify, I agree that those cities I mentioned did not have an economy completely derived from manufacturing or mills in the early 20th century, but they were significant economic contributors in terms of local jobs. However, many people would include the western NY cities. However, upstate NY suffers from the extreme regulatory and taxation burdens of NYC. Upstate has diversified over the past few decades, but out-migration, a high tax burden, and stagnation in many areas continue to be a problem.
Buffalo would always be considered a Rust Belt city.
Rochester, Syracuse and Utica, less so. (Rochester particularly not, because it was corporate HQ for Kodak and Xerox, more emphasis on white collar jobs than blue collar)
Albany, not at all.
Troy is closer in industrial past to the mill towns of Massachusetts which are not "Rust Belt."
Based on political leanings and coalitions, not to mention, the degree to which losses of high paid manufacturing jobs and the ravages of outsourcing have been incurred, California is now part of the Rust Belt. More properly, it is part of a second Rust Belt along the West Coast. From LA to Seattle, empty factories and vacant sites conjure images of Detroit and Youngstown.
I think that we agree on quite a few things, but Manchester and Springfield are not Rust Belt cities. They're just old New England mill/manufacturing towns that lost much of their business in the first half of the 20th century to less-expensive southern cities.These cities were never manufacturing giants like Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Chicago.
The Rust Belt, I believe, also refers to a more specified part of the country, and cities like these two are just too far to the northeast to be included.
Rust Belt is a specific selection of cities that tend to be in the Midwest. It's not really a region of the country like "the great lakes" or "central valley".
A majority of people who live in what everyone calls "the rust belt" areas of the Midwest and up into the Northeast would be surprised if you told them they live in the rust belt....because they don't.
Columbus, Indy, most areas of Chicago, even large portions of metro Cleveland and Pittsburgh, college towns, small towns, suburban areas. These places are far removed from "rust belt", they just happen to be in the midwest. Rust Belt is a selection of hard hit cities/urban areas and portions of metro areas that lost their industry and are distressed.
For the most part rust belt was much more pronounced and an issue in this region during the 70's through early 90's. By now a lot of it faded away decades ago and newer and or smaller economies have taken the place of the manufacturing giants.
A city is not considered "rust-belt" just because of urban decay and declining population. Rust belt cities were once-thriving cities that fell into decline because of a collapse of manufacturing industries, which were typically the main economic driver of the city/region. Philly has a pretty diverse economy, and doesn't rely solely on heavy industry to thrive.
Buffalo would always be considered a Rust Belt city.
Rochester, Syracuse and Utica, less so. (Rochester particularly not, because it was corporate HQ for Kodak and Xerox, more emphasis on white collar jobs than blue collar)
Albany, not at all.
Troy is closer in industrial past to the mill towns of Massachusetts which are not "Rust Belt."
What would the map of the Rust Belt would be like as of 2018?
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.
