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 the more time that passes, the less important the 25-year gap between the fall of industry in the traditional Rust Belt vs New England is.
The demographic difference is a good point; New England's old mill cities tend to be white/Hispanic as opposed to the Midwest's white/black. But I don't think that's enough of a distinction, as I think economics are much more important in defining the Rust Belt than demographics. Not to mention, cities like Berlin, NH and Lewiston, ME are similarly downtrodden as their counterparts in the southern part of the region, but with very different demographics. I'd still call them "Rust Belt". Likewise, the cities in WV like Morgantown tend to be on the whiter side too; looking more like Lewiston (or Pittsfield) demographically than like Toledo.
Bethlehem, PA is also a widely-accepted Rust Belt city with demographics that are more similar to Fitchburg than to Flint.
There may be a simpler explanation: rust. Derelict steel works, coke plants, etc. get rusty. Some of it’s outdoors and visible to passersby. New England had looms and other machinery enclosed inside the brick mill buildings. No rust.
I'd disagree. Boston has more of a well-known racist past in the late 20th century (1965-1995) at least.
It also had a larger inner-city black population. Which created more fear/resentment and necessitated more intense and legal segregation than those newer cities. It also has more poverty, violence, gangs etc and poverty is tied to race. It's racist for some of the things Philadelphia or NYC or Chicago had been known fo at points-physical overt violence. In the modern-day, it may seem to share more of white imaging like those cities but not so much on the ground, the white population doesn't grow in Boston as it does in those more western cities.
You have to go to Boston. You have some comments and perceptions of Boston that are based in reality but I think you'd have to be there to see how it's very different than Seattle San Fran or Austin. In those cities, the black population never required as much suppression or outward violence and as a result there a bit more accepted into the city. This Scholarly essay talks about some of the differences in race relations between Denver and Boston- https://scholarworks.umb.edu/trotter.../vol20/iss1/5/
...add to this the sharp ethnic divisions and old boy networks aren't as deep out west.
I’ll take your word for it but let me explain some reasoning real quick. In Austin, the black population (also thee hispanic population) is experiencing a massive flight due to the COL. SF has a notorious racial wealth daodstribution. What do the three cities have in common? Improper funding. All the money in these cities notoriously go to benefit the white community more than the others. Which is the case everywhere, but some places more than others including the three cities we are talking about
Status:
""...I wrote it down, now I follow thru...""
(set 11 days ago)
Location: North Raleigh x North Sacramento
5,748 posts, read 5,506,702 times
Reputation: 7021
Raleigh: because of our explosive growth over the last 20 years, apparently we are in the same class of city as Cleveland, Austin, Pittsburgh, etc...
In reality the population here is growing substantially faster than the amenities it would take to reach that tier of cities. I will note this is more of an exaggeration you see on CD than you actually hear from locals in the city here...
I have a "yes and no" for Buffalo, and that's snow, cold, and cloudiness.
Yes it can be snowy, cloudy, and cold - but in most of the area not much different than other places in the Great Lakes and Northeast.
Lake Erie creates a microclimate in the area, and there is a wide, wide difference in snow and cloud cover depending on location near the lake. Lake effect snow bands can be as narrow as just a couple of miles, with clear blue skies on either side. The heaviest snow areas are south of the city where the hills rise up to 1500' higher than the lake, and get more clouds and 4x the snow than areas north of the city receive. Areas north of downtown usually average about the same snowfall as places like Milwaukee, Chicago, or Boston. The weather station at the airport sort of splits the difference, 2x what the Northtowns get, and half what the Southtowns and ski areas get.
The whole area gets the reputation of the heaviest snow places, even though it is predominately south of the city.
I can understand this.
People outside the Great Lakes in general tend lump all of it together, but there are a few places that get hit harder than others with snow.
I live not far from the Milwaukee area.
The snow really isn't that bad. 50 inches a year on average.
Seems like people down south assume we all wake up at 4 am to shovel a foot of fresh-fallen snow every morning and that school is basically canceled for 3 months straight every winter.
Or perhaps they think the daytime highs don't get above 0 degrees Fahrenheit for weeks on end and 40 below is a regular occurrence.
All time record low in Milwaukee: -26. All time record low in Nashville? -17.
Yeah, it's colder on average, sometimes much more so, but it's not the frozen wasteland it's portrayed to be and it would take an awful lot of snow to really slow things down.
I can understand this.
People outside the Great Lakes in general tend lump all of it together, but there are a few places that get hit harder than others with snow.
I live not far from the Milwaukee area.
The snow really isn't that bad. 50 inches a year on average.
Seems like people down south assume we all wake up at 4 am to shovel a foot of fresh-fallen snow every morning and that school is basically canceled for 3 months straight every winter.
Or perhaps they think the daytime highs don't get above 0 degrees Fahrenheit for weeks on end and 40 below is a regular occurrence.
All time record low in Milwaukee: -26. All time record low in Nashville? -17.
Yeah, it's colder on average, sometimes much more so, but it's not the frozen wasteland it's portrayed to be and it would take an awful lot of snow to really slow things down.
Agreed, people especially in more southern climates are typically only exposed to the cliche hyperboles about northern climates. Often the impression is that places like Detroit or Milwaukee are covered in snow from November to March. They don’t realize that these places are still south of the 45th parallel, and are therefore still closer to the equator than the north pole. Freeze/thaw cycles are the norm in northern winters. Big snow storms common in the winter are typically on the leading edge of a front and often accompanied by milder weather. 2-3 days later and the grass is green again. While it can get below freezing for a couple of weeks at a time, extended periods of temps in the high 30s/40s/50s are just as common.
The obvious one here in Chicago is that it's this stagnant, has-been city slowly bleeding out..
While it faces challenges - fiscal and violence related - the electricity in the city hasn't gone anywhere. It is as vibrant (pre COVID) as it's ever been. It's more of a destination city than ever before. It's still the mecca of the Midwest. It's still hosts as clean of a downtown as you'll see in any major city. And it still offers some of the most uniquely livable city neighborhoods in North America.
I’ll take your word for it but let me explain some reasoning real quick. In Austin, the black population (also thee hispanic population) is experiencing a massive flight due to the COL. SF has a notorious racial wealth daodstribution. What do the three cities have in common? Improper funding. All the money in these cities notoriously go to benefit the white community more than the others. Which is the case everywhere, but some places more than others including the three cities we are talking about
Yes, this is accurate. About wealth distribution. Boston just has that added layer that comes in part due to location, history, and demographics. Although I don't really get the point about Austin? It was never comparable in black population to Boston if that's what you're saying. At least not since the 1950s. On the metro level, it's probably much closer though.
I wouldn't say Boston has "improper funding" it's more so the systems in the area support white wealth accumulation way more than for other ethnicities. It's more of a private and systemic issue throughout the metro area than "the city gov't is treating black people poorly". It doesn't. Black people in Boston have some very attractive urban neighborhoods as a result of focused and community-oriented improvements since the 1990s.
What the city does do is create high barriers to entry into the business world via expensive and restrictive licensing and permitting which quelches the black entrepreneurial spirit to a high degree.
Last edited by BostonBornMassMade; 12-15-2020 at 02:16 PM..
I think the biggest thing that's been exaggerated for Louisville is it's "cool factor", at least on here. Louisville's meteoric rise into the next tier of cities has been a bit oversold. It definitely is underrated from a cool standpoint and has a surprising number of eclectic neighborhoods and restaurants. The amount of urban construction that has happened in the city isn't any more impressive than any number of similar sized cities that have gone through similar booms. That's not to downplay what has happened here because it is quite a bit of investment.
Still downtown feels more like an office park than a functional live/work/play center that other cities have built. The city itself feels a bit more run down, not as kept up as one might expect based on the hype. It's been double hit hard by both Covid, and the Breonna Taylor tragedy, which has put a significant dent in the existing vibrancy. A fair amount of people list it as a rising star on here but it's growth numbers don't support that. It definitely has a lot of potential, but more than a few things need to be aligned before it would take its place on the stage with the high growth New South cities.
I’ve never lived there, but on visits I’ve never met anyone, strangers or acquaintances or business contacts, who was less than fully welcoming and friendly, sometimes to a degree that almost frightened me. Almost. I remember one trip a few years back when a guy I met on the street offered to give me a tour of the city. Yeah, I took a chance. But he turned out to be totally above-board and we had a great time. I’ve had similar, but less extravagant experiences in the city. So it’s hard for me to imagine living there and being frozen out. Maybe it happens, but I think it’s really exaggerated a lot.
Totally. Moving from Boston to Seattle, my wife and I thought maybe we got lost and actually landed in Minneapolis or something. Where was this Seattle Freeze we were expecting? Our Seattle neighbors are super friendly, and our kids play with all the other kids in the neighborhood. The Freeze is way more tangible in southern New England.
Also, it doesn't rain that much here and there's plenty of respite from the grey in the winters.
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.
