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.
Quote from: webny99 on April 25, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
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
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.
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.
Quote from: webny99 on April 25, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
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.
Quote from: webny99 on April 25, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
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.
I would say it includes Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland/Akron, Toledo, NW Indiana and the rest of Chicagoland, Milwaukee, and all of Michigan.
Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburg.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 25, 2019, 07:29:30 PM
Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburgh.
FIFY. :-|
Quote from: Verlanka on April 26, 2019, 07:09:27 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 25, 2019, 07:29:30 PM
Pretty much all the industrial cities surround the Great Lakes plus Pittsburgh.
FIFY. :-|
Thank you
It has had the "h" back since 1911.
Quote from: PAHighways on April 26, 2019, 07:24:22 AM
Quote from: Verlanka on April 26, 2019, 07:09:27 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 25, 2019, 07:29:30 PM
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.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 26, 2019, 09:07:40 AM
Quote from: PAHighways on April 26, 2019, 07:24:22 AM
Quote from: Verlanka on April 26, 2019, 07:09:27 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on April 25, 2019, 07:29:30 PM
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.
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.
Quote from: SP Cook on April 26, 2019, 10:44:04 AM
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 25, 2019, 04:04:14 PM
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.
Quote from: DandyDan on April 25, 2019, 04:42:38 PM
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.
Quote from: 1 on April 25, 2019, 02:56:00 PM
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 (https://apps.npr.org/dailygraphics/graphics/elex-map-county-flips-20161114/img/shift-R.png) 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 (https://www.npr.org/2016/11/15/502032052/lots-of-people-voted-for-obama-and-trump-heres-where-in-3-charts). 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.
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.
Quote from: webny99 on April 26, 2019, 01:32:08 PM
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.)
Quote from: webny99 on April 26, 2019, 01:12:10 PM
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2019, 02:00:58 PM
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?
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2019, 01:36:34 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 26, 2019, 01:32:08 PM
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2019, 02:00:58 PM
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2019, 02:00:58 PMI 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! :)
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2019, 01:36:08 PM
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.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2019, 01:36:08 PM
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.
Quote from: webny99 on April 26, 2019, 02:57:43 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 26, 2019, 01:36:08 PM
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.
Quote from: DandyDan on April 25, 2019, 04:42:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 25, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
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).
Quote from: webny99 on April 26, 2019, 02:45:36 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2019, 02:00:58 PM
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.
Agreed. When I think of cities that have a thriving downtown, Chicago is the first city that comes to mind.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 26, 2019, 03:12:04 PM
Quote from: DandyDan on April 25, 2019, 04:42:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 25, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
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).
Pittsburgh had to change career paths in the 80s to the "eds and meds" fields thanks in part to Pitt and CMU. Today there is only one steel mill within a 10 mile radius of downtown.
If they hadn't changed, a drive down PA 837 through the Mon Valley shows what happens when municipalities lack any back up plans.
SM-G965U
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 26, 2019, 03:12:04 PM
Quote from: DandyDan on April 25, 2019, 04:42:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 25, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
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).
If history has taught Duluth anything, it's that any growth can't be trusted up there. The boom-bust cycles have been traumatic in the Twin Ports over the last 150 years.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 26, 2019, 03:12:04 PM
Quote from: DandyDan on April 25, 2019, 04:42:38 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 25, 2019, 02:47:32 PM
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).
Yes, Duluth, Superior, and several towns in northern Minnesota are part of the rust belt. All of the UP is, too - its population peaked at 332k in the 20s and is down to 310k now.
Quote from: thspfc on April 26, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
All of the UP is, too - its population peaked at 332k in the 20s and is down to 310k now.
A 7% decline over the course of 100 years doesn't seem like a substantial loss to me.
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2019, 05:44:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 26, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
All of the UP is, too - its population peaked at 332k in the 20s and is down to 310k now.
A 7% decline over the course of 100 years doesn't seem like a substantial loss to me.
Depends on where you are. Houghton County, for example, dropped from 88,000 in 1910 to 36,000 in 2010 (and 34,000 in 1970!).
Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2019, 05:47:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2019, 05:44:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 26, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
All of the UP is, too - its population peaked at 332k in the 20s and is down to 310k now.
A 7% decline over the course of 100 years doesn't seem like a substantial loss to me.
Depends on where you are. Houghton County, for example, dropped from 88,000 in 1910 to 36,000 in 2010 (and 34,000 in 1970!).
Everything north of Houghton in the copper mining country is essentially in ruins. There are a surprisingly high concentration of places that could be considered ghost towns now.
I just take a simple definition: any city that once had a thriving manufacturing sector, is generally located around the Great Lakes (though I do include outliers - e.g. Harrisburg and Bethlehem PA), suffers severe crime, poverty, or depopulation issues ever since the stagflation crisis of the 1970s, and were hotbeds of racial violence in the 1960s is automatically part of the Rust Belt.
You could contest this definition by saying that these cities declined with the "white flight" of the 1950s, but I argue that unions and thus white blue collar workers were still strong in these cities even after white flight.
You could also argue that this definition is very black and white, and to that I can't contest. Defining regional boundaries is really down to semantics and historical interpretations, as statistical trends can overlap between regions - for example: where does the Rust Belt end and the Sun Belt begin?
Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2019, 05:47:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2019, 05:44:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 26, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
All of the UP is, too - its population peaked at 332k in the 20s and is down to 310k now.
A 7% decline over the course of 100 years doesn't seem like a substantial loss to me.
Depends on where you are. Houghton County, for example, dropped from 88,000 in 1910 to 36,000 in 2010 (and 34,000 in 1970!).
I started at MTU right after the Calumet & Hecla miners went on strike in 1968, and C&H shut down operations as a result. During my time there it was rather disconcerting to watch so many businesses close as people moved away to find work. Lake Linden (where a lot of my friends lived off-campus) turned into the proverbial ghost town.
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2019, 05:44:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 26, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
All of the UP is, too - its population peaked at 332k in the 20s and is down to 310k now.
A 7% decline over the course of 100 years doesn't seem like a substantial loss to me.
I guess not, but if you've ever been there there are dozens of ghost towns scattered around the peninsula. Take a drive on M-28 from Wakefield to Marquette, or US-41 from Houghton to Copper Harbor.
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 26, 2019, 07:42:40 PM
I just take a simple definition: any city that once had a thriving manufacturing sector, is generally located around the Great Lakes (though I do include outliers - e.g. Harrisburg and Bethlehem PA), suffers severe crime, poverty, or depopulation issues ever since the stagflation crisis of the 1970s, and were hotbeds of racial violence in the 1960s is automatically part of the Rust Belt.
You could contest this definition by saying that these cities declined with the "white flight" of the 1950s, but I argue that unions and thus white blue collar workers were still strong in these cities even after white flight.
You could also argue that this definition is very black and white, and to that I can't contest. Defining regional boundaries is really down to semantics and historical interpretations, as statistical trends can overlap between regions - for example: where does the Rust Belt end and the Sun Belt begin?
Sun Belt is also known as the Bible Belt in some (but not all) areas of the South. I'd say anywhere south and/or west of the Ohio River Valley and the Appalachian Mountains (Appalachia) and east of the Rocky Mountains (Mountain Time Zone). This would cover both the Central and Eastern Time Zones.
Quote from: thspfc on April 26, 2019, 09:43:41 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2019, 05:44:42 PM
Quote from: thspfc on April 26, 2019, 05:16:11 PM
All of the UP is, too - its population peaked at 332k in the 20s and is down to 310k now.
A 7% decline over the course of 100 years doesn't seem like a substantial loss to me.
I guess not, but if you've ever been there there are dozens of ghost towns scattered around the peninsula. Take a drive on M-28 from Wakefield to Marquette, or US-41 from Houghton to Copper Harbor.
M-26 from Houghton to Copper Harbor goes through more town sites. US 41 goes through the ruins of the Quincy Mine.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on April 26, 2019, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 26, 2019, 07:42:40 PM
You could also argue that this definition is very black and white, and to that I can't contest. Defining regional boundaries is really down to semantics and historical interpretations, as statistical trends can overlap between regions - for example: where does the Rust Belt end and the Sun Belt begin?
Sun Belt is also known as the Bible Belt in areas of the South. I'd say anywhere south and/or west of the Ohio River Valley and the Appalachian Mountains (Appalachia) and east of the Rocky Mountains (Mountain Time Zone). This would cover both the Central and Eastern Time Zones.
The Sun Belt stretches across the whole country from the Southeast to the Southwest, generally the 36th parallel and southward. Far south of the Rust Belt and questionable if it contains any part of Tennessee or North Carolina.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Belt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Belt#/media/File:Sun_belt.svg
I don't equate the Sun Belt with the Bible Belt. Sun Belt indicates growing southern cities rather than an abundance of conservative evangelical Christian sects.
Quote from: kphoger on April 26, 2019, 03:15:46 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 26, 2019, 02:45:36 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 26, 2019, 02:00:58 PM
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.
Agreed. When I think of cities that have a thriving downtown, Chicago is the first city that comes to mind.
Detroit's downtown was a wreck when I was growing up in the city. It has been surreal to see it rapidly reviving this past decades on trips back to visit family.
In Kentucky, the cities of Covington, Newport, Bellevue, and Dayton are very clearly in the Rust Belt.
Quote from: kevinb1994 on April 26, 2019, 09:44:52 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on April 26, 2019, 07:42:40 PM
I just take a simple definition: any city that once had a thriving manufacturing sector, is generally located around the Great Lakes (though I do include outliers - e.g. Harrisburg and Bethlehem PA), suffers severe crime, poverty, or depopulation issues ever since the stagflation crisis of the 1970s, and were hotbeds of racial violence in the 1960s is automatically part of the Rust Belt.
You could contest this definition by saying that these cities declined with the "white flight" of the 1950s, but I argue that unions and thus white blue collar workers were still strong in these cities even after white flight.
You could also argue that this definition is very black and white, and to that I can't contest. Defining regional boundaries is really down to semantics and historical interpretations, as statistical trends can overlap between regions - for example: where does the Rust Belt end and the Sun Belt begin?
Sun Belt is also known as the Bible Belt in some (but not all) areas of the South. I'd say anywhere south and/or west of the Ohio River Valley and the Appalachian Mountains (Appalachia) and east of the Rocky Mountains (Mountain Time Zone). This would cover both the Central and Eastern Time Zones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_belt_regions_of_the_United_States
Here is a list of belt regions of the USA
My criteria:
1. Industrial-based economy
2. Snow
3. Road salt
TIL that HL Mencken coin the term Bible Belt and political strategist came up with Sunbelt. I didn't see the etymology of Rust Belt on Wikipedia.
Personally, Sunbelt comes to my mind when I think of post WWII sports league expansions; even though Denver is not in that belt, but has since had the Broncos, Rockies, Nuggets and Avs.
Quote from: FightingIrish on April 28, 2019, 08:59:32 PM
My criteria:
1. Industrial-based economy
2. Snow
3. Road salt
That's pretty much it.
Quote from: Rothman on April 26, 2019, 11:36:39 PM
I don't equate the Sun Belt with the Bible Belt. Sun Belt indicates growing southern cities rather than an abundance of conservative evangelical Christian sects.
As belts can overlap, some of the Sun Belt is in the Bible Belt, some is not; and some of the Bible Belt is in the Sun Belt, and some is not.
The Sun Belt, a term coined by Kevin Phillips, is, to me, defined by places made pleasant to live in via the massive environment changing public works projects, which started under Hoover and were greatly expanded under FDR; and via the availability of affordable central air conditioning. While there are all sorts of people there, a large part of the term as Phillips used it was a place filling with people moving there just after finishing their education, seeking a nice place to live and wanting to be free of the old money elites "back home". These people, who were self-reliant and self-made, were thought by Phillips to be less receptive to an agenda based on helping the "less fortunate".
Ironically, these people's children and grand children, raised in the most man-made and artificial environment in the history of the world, are the ones most likely to be seduced by the cult of environmental extremism.
The Bible Belt is mostly places originally settled by a majority of Scots-Irish persons, and includes many places that are not at all sunny, and excludes a lot of places that are. As the term is used, it means place where a number of people, perhaps a majority, take their religion seriously and believe that one's life should be guided by it.
If I grew up in Phoenix don't think it would be ironic to either,
a.) Worry about if I'm going to run out of potable water, or
b.) Not worry about it and think that there will be a solution like desalination.
Both sound like very human responses.
^ Wrong thread? :confused:
Sorry, I was responding to the previous post. I'm used to forums that are more digressive and less apt to stay on topic than aaroads.
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2019, 12:47:16 PM
^ Wrong thread? :confused:
No, it's a valid retort to SP Cook's claims and beliefs. And I, for one, find them especially infuriating because he tends to present these things as obvious facts that more or less go without saying.
Quote from: jon daly on April 30, 2019, 01:40:44 PM
Sorry, I was responding to the previous post. I'm used to forums that are more digressive and less apt to stay on topic than aaroads.
No worries, I guess I was expecting to see something about potable water in his post after I read yours.
I take it you were responding to his point about environmental extemism? I can't exactly tell what he thinks is ironic, but I agree with what you said, anyways. :crazy:
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2019, 07:04:26 PM
Quote from: jon daly on April 30, 2019, 01:40:44 PM
Sorry, I was responding to the previous post. I'm used to forums that are more digressive and less apt to stay on topic than aaroads.
No worries, I guess I was expecting to see something about potable water in his post after I read yours.
I take it you were responding to his point about environmental extemism? I can't exactly tell what he thinks is ironic, but I agree with what you said, anyways. :crazy:
Basically he thinks it's ironic that people who live in a major city located in some of the most inhospitable land in the US would care about the environment.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on April 30, 2019, 07:20:54 PM
Quote from: webny99 on April 30, 2019, 07:04:26 PM
Quote from: jon daly on April 30, 2019, 01:40:44 PM
Sorry, I was responding to the previous post. I'm used to forums that are more digressive and less apt to stay on topic than aaroads.
No worries, I guess I was expecting to see something about potable water in his post after I read yours.
I take it you were responding to his point about environmental extemism? I can't exactly tell what he thinks is ironic, but I agree with what you said, anyways. :crazy:
Basically he thinks it's ironic that people who live in a major city located in some of the most inhospitable land in the US would care about the environment.
Not knowing Sp's thoughts on the topic, perhaps I thought that he might think that it's ironic that these sons of Arizona show an extreme amount of apathy.
Perhaps I think that both Ostriches and Henny Penny's are birds of a similar feather.
moto e5 play
I should probably exit this thread. I stopped by this place for the first time in a long time recently to ask a question about construction on my commute but got sucked into a geography thread. I forgot how heated they can get.
That hasn't happened yet, but my presence won't help matters. I sometimes like discussing politics and theology but this doesn't seem to be a good venue for that.
moto e5 play
When someone lives in a built environment, a place made habitable via massive public works projects that, if they were proposed today, that same person would oppose, that is ironic. The western third or at least quarter of the Sun Belt is just such a place.
One major difference between the Sun Belt and the rest of the country, is that the rest of the country was already habitable.
Thanks I get that now.
I was afraid that I may've stepped on some toes, but I hope that folks never take anything I say seriously. I'm unconventional in thought and all over the map.
Quote from: jon daly on May 01, 2019, 01:11:20 PM
I hope that folks never take anything I say seriously.
I take everything you say seriously -- except for this. :-P :-D
Quote from: SP Cook on May 01, 2019, 09:05:01 AM
When someone lives in a built environment, a place made habitable via massive public works projects that, if they were proposed today, that same person would oppose, that is ironic.
I don't see the irony in one generation having different beliefs than the generation before them. It's a fact of life, and happens to at least some degree with pretty much every issue imaginable.
QuoteOne major difference between the Sun Belt and the rest of the country, is that the rest of the country was already habitable.
:rofl: