How do you define the Rust Belt?

[webny99]

This is a question I have been thinking about a bit recently. In particular, I am wondering what characteristics determine whether an area is part of the Rust Belt, and what the general boundaries of the region are thought to be. My home city of Rochester itself is interesting, in that it is split in many ways, with the eastern half being more white collar and containing a lot of the richer suburbs, while the western half is more blue collar, has a flatter landscape, and more in common with Buffalo (very clearly part of the Rust Belt).

My personal feeling is that the Rust Belt is roughly diamond-shaped, with Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Detroit being the four corners, while I would not consider Chicago to be part of it. Of course, that is just my opinion and a very approximated one at that, so I am interested to see what others think.

[Tonytone]

This is a question I have been thinking about a bit recently. In particular, I am wondering what characteristics determine whether an area is part of the Rust Belt, and what the general boundaries of the region are thought to be. My home city of Rochester itself is interesting, in that it is split in many ways, with the eastern half being more white collar and containing a lot of the richer suburbs, while the western half is more blue collar, has a flatter landscape, and more in common with Buffalo (very clearly part of the Rust Belt).

My personal feeling is that the Rust Belt is roughly diamond-shaped, with Buffalo, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and Detroit being the four corners, while I would not consider Chicago to be part of it. Of course, that is just my opinion and a very approximated one at that, so I am interested to see what others think.

Towns & small cities that were booming during the Factory & Construction era. But are now left withering in the same way they once were. Some places have tried to defeat the past, but the future is in the cities.


iPhone

[hotdogPi]

My definition is much larger than yours.

[deleted first part]

EDIT: Alternatively, any place that is at least 5% more Republican now than in 2010, excluding regions that everyone agrees are in the South such as Tennessee and Arkansas.

[Beltway]

I have used Wikipedia's definition before, and it is pretty accurate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust_Belt
Quotes:

The Rust Belt begins in central New York and traverses west through Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, and the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, ending in northern Illinois, eastern Iowa, and southeastern Wisconsin.  New England was also hard hit by industrial decline during the same era.

Rust refers to the deindustrialization, or economic decline, population loss, and urban decay due to the shrinking of its once-powerful industrial sector.  The term gained popularity in the U.S. in the 1980s.

Industry has been declining in the region, which was previously known as the industrial heartland of America, since the mid-20th century due to a variety of economic factors, such as the transfer of manufacturing overseas, increased automation, and the decline of the US steel and coal industries.  While some cities and towns have managed to adapt by shifting focus towards services and high-tech industries, others have not fared as well, witnessing rising poverty and declining populations.

[Brandon]

This is a question I have been thinking about a bit recently. In particular, I am wondering what characteristics determine whether an area is part of the Rust Belt, and what the general boundaries of the region are thought to be. My home city of Rochester itself is interesting, in that it is split in many ways, with the eastern half being more white collar and containing a lot of the richer suburbs, while the western half is more blue collar, has a flatter landscape, and more in common with Buffalo (very clearly part of the Rust Belt).

My personal feeling is that the Rust Belt is roughly diamond-shaped, with Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Detroit being the four corners, while I would not consider Chicago to be part of it. Of course, that is just my opinion and a very approximated one at that, so I am interested to see what others think.

Chicago is very much is a part of it.  The city has lost almost as many people (numerically) as Detroit (albeit starting from a higher base).  I would also include Saint Louis in the definition as well, as an extension along I-55 from Chicago.

[DandyDan]

This is a question I have been thinking about a bit recently. In particular, I am wondering what characteristics determine whether an area is part of the Rust Belt, and what the general boundaries of the region are thought to be. My home city of Rochester itself is interesting, in that it is split in many ways, with the eastern half being more white collar and containing a lot of the richer suburbs, while the western half is more blue collar, has a flatter landscape, and more in common with Buffalo (very clearly part of the Rust Belt).

My personal feeling is that the Rust Belt is roughly diamond-shaped, with Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Detroit being the four corners, while I would not consider Chicago to be part of it. Of course, that is just my opinion and a very approximated one at that, so I am interested to see what others think.

Not sure how you can not consider Chicago a part of the Rust Belt when Gary, only 20 miles away, clearly is. Gary is essentially a mini-Detroit.

One area not traditionally considered the Rust Belt, but I think should be, is Duluth-Superior and the Iron Range of Minnesota. Apart from the fact iron degrades into rust, that general area has had to retool its economy in much the same way as the traditional Rust Belt.

[thspfc]

I would say it includes Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland/Akron, Toledo, NW Indiana and the rest of Chicagoland, Milwaukee, and all of Michigan.

[Max Rockatansky]

Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburg.

[Verlanka]

Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburgh.

FIFY. 

[PAHighways]

Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburgh.

FIFY. 

Thank you

It has had the "h" back since 1911.

[Max Rockatansky]

Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburgh.

FIFY. 

Thank you

It has had the "h" back since 1911.

I'm surprised the auto correct on my phone didn't catch it. 

[jeffandnicole]

Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburgh.

FIFY. 

Thank you

It has had the "h" back since 1911.

I'm surprised the auto correct on my phone didn't catch it. 

Because Pittsburg is a correct spelling. Just not for the city you were referring to.

[SP Cook]

The Wikipedia version is pretty accurate.  Really it is cities, both major and mid-sized, where the basic lifestyle has declined from about 1965 - date, leading to the ambitious and able leaving. 

[jon daly]

The Wikipedia version is pretty accurate.  Really it is cities, both major and mid-sized, where the basic lifestyle has declined from about 1965 - date, leading to the ambitious and able leaving. 

There's also some New England mill towns that would fit that description, but they are not Rust Belt. That said, the textile industry may've declined earlier.

[webny99]

Chicago is very much is a part of it.  The city has lost almost as many people (numerically) as Detroit (albeit starting from a higher base).  I would also include Saint Louis in the definition as well, as an extension along I-55 from Chicago.

Chicago has certainly lost population, but the city center is notably much busier and more thriving than places like Detroit or Buffalo. It seems to have been less dependent on the traditional declining industries and more adaptable, thus never getting to as low of a point as other Rust Belt cities. I actually believe St. Louis to be a better fit with the Rust Belt than Chicago, as far as urban decay, percentage of population decline, dependence on declining industries, and inability to adapt.

Not sure how you can not consider Chicago a part of the Rust Belt when Gary, only 20 miles away, clearly is. Gary is essentially a mini-Detroit.

As you approach Chicago on I-90, it does feel very much like the traditional Rust Belt. Other parts of the Chicago region, including downtown Chicago, much less so. Gary is probably actually one of Indiana's only areas that has a significant Rust Belt "feel" to it. Indy, being slightly larger than Columbus, is probably the largest city in the region that has the *least* characteristics of a Rust Belt city.

[webny99]

EDIT: Alternatively, any place that is at least 5% more Republican now than in 2010, excluding regions that everyone agrees are in the South such as Tennessee and Arkansas.

I believe this mostly just includes rural areas, while excluding many cities.
There is an interesting map here which shows the counties that flipped Republican in 2016. Gray counties voted more Republican (but didn't flip), while red counties actually flipped. Iowa had the most dramatic shift, yet I generally wouldn't have considered it as a state to be part of the Rust Belt.

For anyone interested, the map came from this page. I don't want this thread to turn into politics, but I post it anyways because I find it so interesting - surprising, even - as it relates to America's changing demographics.

[hbelkins]

No part of Kentucky, including Louisville, is what I would consider to be part of the Rust Belt.

EDIT: I take that back. Ashland is definitely part of the Rust Belt, given its declining steel industry.

To me, it's a meandering area that includes Gary, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland/Akron/Youngstown, Weirton, Wheeling, Pittsburgh and Buffalo. I don't think of Rochester or Syracuse when I think of the Rust Belt.

[kphoger]

Iowa had the most dramatic shift, yet I generally wouldn't have considered it as a state to be part of the Rust Belt.

If there's such a thing as the Pork Belt, I bet Iowa is the buckle!

(BTW, politics in Iowa are interesting.)

[Brandon]

Chicago has certainly lost population, but the city center is notably much busier and more thriving than places like Detroit or Buffalo. It seems to have been less dependent on the traditional declining industries and more adaptable, thus never getting to as low of a point as other Rust Belt cities. I actually believe St. Louis to be a better fit with the Rust Belt than Chicago, as far as urban decay, percentage of population decline, dependence on declining industries, and inability to adapt.

Chicago's not doing all that well, even in the central core (Loop).  If all you ever visited in Chicago was the Loop, and downtown in Detroit, you'd say both cities are doing well.  Ditto for the Arch area in St Louis.  I think you need to get out of New York more.

[kphoger]

Chicago's not doing all that well, even in the central core (Loop).

If all you ever visited in Chicago was the Loop ... you'd say [it is] doing well.

Those two statements are contradictory, aren't they?

[DandyDan]

Iowa had the most dramatic shift, yet I generally wouldn't have considered it as a state to be part of the Rust Belt.

If there's such a thing as the Pork Belt, I bet Iowa is the buckle!

(BTW, politics in Iowa are interesting.)

The consolidation of the agriculture industry into fewer and fewer producers has probably had the same impact on Iowa as the decline and departure of industry has on the Rust Belt. Also, while I am not an expert about it, I believe a number of John Deere plants have left Iowa, which would probably make those communities feel like they are in the Rust Belt.

[webny99]

If all you ever visited in Chicago was the Loop, and downtown in Detroit, you'd say both cities are doing well.

Eeeh. I'm not convinced. Downtown Chicago is bustling, crowded, contains some major tourist attractions, feels like a major commercial hub/world-class city to at least some degree. Downtown Detroit is OK, and improving, but it was almost eerily empty when I was there (on a Saturday about a year ago). I kept wondering where all the people were; it felt like any other modern large city, but with hardly anybody on the streets. I know better than to think either city is doing great per se, but I think Chicago is in a significantly better position than Detroit.

I think you need to get out of New York more.

I think so too, but not because I'm not well traveled, just because I like traveling! 

[webny99]

No part of Kentucky, including Louisville, is what I would consider to be part of the Rust Belt.

I would certainly consider far northern Kentucky / Cincinnati suburbs to be part of the Rust Belt.

To me, it's a meandering area that includes Gary, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland/Akron/Youngstown, Weirton, Wheeling, Pittsburgh and Buffalo. I don't think of Rochester or Syracuse when I think of the Rust Belt.

I agree; Rochester in particular never had the manufacturing base like the traditional Rust Belt, so didn't suffer as badly through the second half of the 20th century. There are, however, areas to my east that have significant Rust Belt characteristics; Binghamton, NY and Scranton, PA come to mind. Syracuse has more Rust Belt characteristics than Rochester (at least IMO), but it still isn't what I would consider a Rust Belt city.

[hbelkins]

No part of Kentucky, including Louisville, is what I would consider to be part of the Rust Belt.

I would certainly consider far northern Kentucky / Cincinnati suburbs to be part of the Rust Belt.

See my edit. I would not consider that area to be part of the Rust Belt, but definitely Ashland.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

This is a question I have been thinking about a bit recently. In particular, I am wondering what characteristics determine whether an area is part of the Rust Belt, and what the general boundaries of the region are thought to be. My home city of Rochester itself is interesting, in that it is split in many ways, with the eastern half being more white collar and containing a lot of the richer suburbs, while the western half is more blue collar, has a flatter landscape, and more in common with Buffalo (very clearly part of the Rust Belt).

My personal feeling is that the Rust Belt is roughly diamond-shaped, with Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Detroit being the four corners, while I would not consider Chicago to be part of it. Of course, that is just my opinion and a very approximated one at that, so I am interested to see what others think.

Not sure how you can not consider Chicago a part of the Rust Belt when Gary, only 20 miles away, clearly is. Gary is essentially a mini-Detroit.

One area not traditionally considered the Rust Belt, but I think should be, is Duluth-Superior and the Iron Range of Minnesota. Apart from the fact iron degrades into rust, that general area has had to retool its economy in much the same way as the traditional Rust Belt.

Duluth is really the only one of the group with any kind of success in diversifying their economy with slow but steady growth in aerospace, tech, and healthcare. Superior had a much lauded deal with Kestrel Aircraft that fell apart, and the Range cities are still struggling to move away from the infamous 3 Ts (tourism, timber, taconite).