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.
Kansas City hid a bunch of core city decline with massive annexation. It's current land area is nearly 400% larger than it was in 1950, It's population has only increased 11% in that time frame. It's definitely had some rustbelt problems.
Minneapolis has declined in population after the 50s but is still not considered rust belt.
Clinically the term "Rust Belt" originated from a 1986 book. It defines as economies that have less manufacturing jobs in 1986 than they did in the 1960s. From the actual definition, pretty much all legacy cities went through some kind of rust belt transition. It's neither positive or negative, but rather a definition of an economic transition that had an impact on all cities that had population booms out of the industrial revolution. Many cities including the Twin Cities went through the economic transition into knowledge based/corporate economies that turned them into the modern cosmopolitan metros we know them to be now.
On City-Data the term Rustbelt has defaulted to mean core cities that have been in a perpetual state of population decline since the 1950's, or basically Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, and then all the midsize to small satellite cities around them that grew out of one industry and have been unable to replace their outdated economic models, that sustain populations at their pre-1980 levels. It is a pejorative. Hence why a Minneapolis homer is so quick to point out that it's not Rust Belt even though no one claimed otherwise.
To the post you were responding to, I would say Kansas City would be more similar to Cincinnati than it is to Indy. Growth at a metropolitan level, but core city declines until recently. The only difference is Kansas City was able to annex it's fleeing tax base back, and hide it's core city struggles, and Cincinnati was not able to do the same. Whether Cincinatti, or Kansas City are actually considered rust belt would depend on each individual's personal definition of such since there isn't a true definition of what Rust Belt is.
There are also cities like Grand Rapids, which grew out of the industrial revolution, struggled with manufacturing declines, but were able to economically transition and pivot away from the obsolete Rust Belt economic model. Where do "recovered" Rust Belt cities fit in this discussion?
Clinically the term "Rust Belt" originated from a 1986 book. It defines as economies that have less manufacturing jobs in 1986 than they did in the 1960s. From the actual definition, pretty much all legacy cities went through some kind of rust belt transition. It's neither positive or negative, but rather a definition of an economic transition that had an impact on all cities that had population booms out of the industrial revolution. Many cities including the Twin Cities went through the economic transition into knowledge based/corporate economies that turned them into the modern cosmopolitan metros we know them to be now.
On City-Data the term Rustbelt has defaulted to mean core cities that have been in a perpetual state of population decline since the 1950's, or basically Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, and then all the midsize to small satellite cities around them that grew out of one industry and have been unable to replace their outdated economic models, that sustain populations at their pre-1980 levels. It is a pejorative. Hence why a Minneapolis homer is so quick to point out that it's not Rust Belt even though no one claimed otherwise.
To the post you were responding to, I would say Kansas City would be more similar to Cincinnati than it is to Indy. Growth at a metropolitan level, but core city declines until recently. The only difference is Kansas City was able to annex it's fleeing tax base back, and hide it's core city struggles, and Cincinnati was not able to do the same. Whether Cincinatti, or Kansas City are actually considered rust belt would depend on each individual's personal definition of such since there isn't a true definition of what Rust Belt is.
There are also cities like Grand Rapids, which grew out of the industrial revolution, struggled with manufacturing declines, but were able to economically transition and pivot away from the obsolete Rust Belt economic model. Where do "recovered" Rust Belt cities fit in this discussion?
I'm not sure if you were referring to me but I was just stating that Minneapolis also has lost population but is that enough to call a city rust belt or a city with rust belt problems? I've never heard Kansas City referred to as a rust belt city either.
I'm not sure if you were referring to me but I was just stating that Minneapolis also has lost population but is that enough to call a city rust belt? I've never heard Kansas City referred to as a rust belt city either.
Kansas City, MO and Kansas City, KS have Rust Belt problems- the latter more so. There were rather extreme issues with urban decline and flight out of the city into Johnson County, KS for most of the 20th century. Johnson County, KS is extremely white collar and very well educated. The state line literally divides the metro area in half between Missouri and Kansas. There are many other problems with Kansas City in general, but that is a topic for another thread.
To the post you were responding to, I would say Kansas City would be more similar to Cincinnati than it is to Indy. Growth at a metropolitan level, but core city declines until recently.
FWIW: the Center Township of Indy (similar-ish to the old core city boundaries) did experience a lot of decline; it's at less than 1/2 of its 1950 population.
FWIW: the Center Township of Indy (similar-ish to the old core city boundaries) did experience a lot of decline; it's at less than 1/2 of its 1950 population.
Another factor is broader growth within the metro area. Indy’s core has declined since its peak, but greater Indianapolis has has a lot of growth while metro Detroit for example has stagnated.
Another factor is broader growth within the metro area. Indy’s core has declined since its peak, but greater Indianapolis has has a lot of growth while metro Detroit for example has stagnated.
Most of the population growth in Indy is very low density suburban sprawl. The level of land consumed by development in Hamilton County (Carmel, Fishers, Westfield, Noblesville, etc. is notable).
Most of the population growth in Indy is very low density suburban sprawl. The level of land consumed by development in Hamilton County (Carmel, Fishers, Westfield, Noblesville, etc. is notable).
Well that statement applies to most of the growth that happened in the country during the post war era. My point is that the Indianapolis area has a million more people than it did in 1970 while metro Detroit has had a slight net loss of population since then. Imo Rust Belt = stagnant metro and declining city, while Midwest = growing metro and stagnant city.
FWIW: the Center Township of Indy (similar-ish to the old core city boundaries) did experience a lot of decline; it's at less than 1/2 of its 1950 population.
The key point about Center Township in the post you responded to is "core city declines until recently." Center Township saw an increase in the 2020 census, the first since 1950.
Most of the population growth in Indy is very low density suburban sprawl. The level of land consumed by development in Hamilton County (Carmel, Fishers, Westfield, Noblesville, etc. is notable).
That's still growth, is it not? Are there metro areas that are growing with no low density sprawl? I don't love the sprawl, just seems like a strange call out here. Carmel, while still mostly suburban, have themselves done a good job of shoring up some level of density at it's core. Fishers is developing the Nickel Plate District to try playing catch up. In fact, this youtube video suggests Carmel is the best designed suburb in the USA.
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.
