Income graph by region from 1890: Midwest has always been about average, West has decreased, South has increased (incomes)

[lovecrowds]

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dr...ll-that-badly/

Thought, this was interesting. Over the years, The west per-capita income since 1890 has declined over time. It is also by far the most cyclical

The Northeast is also cyclical, but other than around 1980 it has always had the highest per-capita incomes.

The West is extremely cyclical, but per-capita incomes have tended decrease over time.

The Midwest has basically been around average per-capita income since 1890, it has also been least cyclical

Interesting, how close to median the Midwest has been over it's entire existence.

[BlueChicago]

I really don't see any cyclical tendencies in these graphs...

Regardless, the story around the entire US for the past 15 years has been the intense growth of cities (economically) and the stagnation of rural areas.

I found it interesting that the South is over-performing common belief, but then again I'm guessing their numbers are propped up significantly by Dallas, Houston, Austin, Atlanta, Charlotte, etc. Places no one really thinks of as "The South". Go to rural Alabama, Louisiana, or Mississippi and I'm guessing it will appear to be FAR less prosperous than average.