Will the Migration from "Snowbelt" to "Sunbelt" Reverse in the U.S.?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

The numbers speak for themselves.

what numbers?

you've offered nothing in the way of numbers or facts.

all we get from you are your vague impressions of how you believe things are.



but you're entitled to your "opinion".

and we're entitled to our opinion of your opinion (ie. garbage).

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

when the fuck has boston ever received a one-time 176" snowfall?

They recently received 100" in a span of one month (February 2015). But I'm just going off your example, which was ridiculous in the first place.

Averages meteorologists used for weather forecasting are established over a span of 30 years. If Boston sees a handful of winters with 70-80" of snow, scattered between a ton of winters with only, say, 5-10", of course it will even out to an average of 40".

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

The numbers speak for themselves.

The Great Lakes and Upper Midwest didn't see huge population growth until the Industrial Revolution (specifically after the Civil War ended). And ever since employment in Manufacturing peaked in the 1970s, net migration has been back in the Sun Belt.

no one is disputing that.

European immigration which largely populated northern cities at the time, had nothing to do with the automobile or the collapse of the confederacy (this is what you claimed). The collapse of the confederacy led to Blacks moving to northern cities... that's the only "back to the Sun Belt" migration.

[Steely Dan]

boston see more snowfall on average than chicago.

if chicago is in this mythic "snowbelt" then so is boston.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by pj3000

There are. Even close to the Lakes which are still cold, there are leaves in April and May. Leaves on trees start coming out in March. In higher elevation areas, Spring comes later.



How far "up north" are you talking about?

Even with a long, rough winter, leaves start coming out in March. In Pittsburgh right now on Feb 23, there are buds on a few trees in my backyard. Get close to the Lakes and it's about 2.5 weeks behind.

I think you are full of poop.



Really? I thought it was "mainly because of the automobile and the collapse of the confederacy following the civil war"
as claimed

You know, all those southern good ol' boys who came in through Ellis Island to populate our northern cities!

Oh I know. Trees usually start budding in March here. The dude is completely talking out of his a$$.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by pj3000

no one is disputing that.

European immigration which largely populated northern cities at the time, had nothing to do with the automobile or the collapse of the confederacy (this is what you claimed). The collapse of the confederacy led to Blacks moving to northern cities.

Well I guess I'm not sure what's being disputed then.

I'm not saying absolutely no one lived in that region at the time. But the point is much of the growth it enjoyed didn't occur until the mass migration from the Sunbelt began (for the manufacturing opportunities that existed).

BTW, it wasn't just blacks, but also poor / uneducated whites as well. The cotton industry was dead and they also had to make a living somehow. That's why so much racial tension built up in these cities during the mid 20th century.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

but all opinions are not equal.

an opinion formed from facts is superior to one formed from "impressions".

on average, boston sees more snowfall than chicago in any given winter.

and no, that's not because boston routinely gets one-time 176" snowfalls one year, and then no snow for 3 years.

that's a ridiculous claim. stop being ridiculous.

Facts clearly don't matter here.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

They recently received 100" in a span of one month (February 2015). But I'm just going off your example, which was ridiculous in the first place.

That was a record snowfall. You could live multiple lifetimes in Boston and never see that again.

Also, not quite getting the "snow sucks because you have to shovel it" argument. I do think snow (generally speaking) sucks, but no one has to shovel. My parents have lived in Michigan for a quarter century, and I don't think they own a shovel. You can hire a snow service, live in a condo, etc.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Crawford

That was a record snowfall. You could live multiple lifetimes in Boston and never see that again.

But up until that point, they had only seen like 8" of snow.

Point being, it's pretty much feast or famine when it comes to snow on the immediate east coast. It's not comparable to a Detroit or Chicago winter (with frequent snow and relatively constant snowcover throughout).

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

But up until that point, they had only seen like 8" of snow.

Point being, it's pretty much feast or famine when it comes to snow on the immediate east coast. It's not comparable to a Detroit or Chicago winter (with frequent snow and constant snowcover throughout).

True, winters are quite different. Living in NYC, extended snow coverage is rare, while in Detroit it's the norm. NYC winters are more rainy. But in Detroit winter megastorms are rare, while in NYC, not exactly common, are certainly much more frequent.

If you don't like winter (and I don't) it's a question of "do you prefer being constantly annoyed, or really annoyed once in a while"?

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

Well I guess I'm not sure what's being disputed then.

I'm not saying absolutely no one lived in that region at the time. But the point is much of the growth it enjoyed didn't occur until the mass migration from the Sunbelt began (for the manufacturing opportunities that existed).

BTW, it wasn't just blacks, but also poor / uneducated whites as well. The cotton industry was dead and they also had to make a living somehow. That's why so much racial tension built up in these cities during the mid 20th century.

Because it seems you're failing to acknowledge that hundreds of thousands and then millions of European immigrants went to and populated northern cities from the 1840s through the early decades of the 1900s.

They did not come because of the automobile. They did not come because of the collapse of the confederacy.

You are trying to concoct an history that doesn't exist to fit into your "migration back to the Sunbelt" narrative.

[Khantilever]

To add my two cents to the discussion, there's a good debate in the economics literature on the rise of the sunbelt. There's some good evidence that it's not a preference for warm weather or sun that's driving growth in the sunbelt. Rather, the automobile and air conditioning led to increased productivity in the South up until the '80s, but now it seems that housing supply growth (due to ample land and lax zoning) is driving the shift in population. (http://www.nber.org/papers/w13071)

One of the co-authors of that paper, Harvard urban economist Ed Glaeser, wrote up a nice summary for the NYTimes: https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2...ulation-shift/

We also need to stop taking it for granted that people hate the cold and love the heat. In fact, it seems that people actually have a stronger aversion to heat than to cold. The "sweet spot" for the average American is around 65 degrees Fahrenheit. http://davidalbouy.net/climatewelfare.pdf

[Crawford]

Also, Midwest did not grow at the expense of the Sunbelt. Sunbelt migration to the Midwest didn't peak until the Midwest was already a relative population laggard.

It's more accurate to argue that the Great Migration sustained Midwestern growth following the end of mass European migration.

[JManc]

Who the hell lives up north and doesn't shovel? Having a shovel sitting outside your door is kind of a main-stay for most people up there in the winter even if you pay someone to plow your driveway. They usually don't shovel your sidewalks and porch.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by JManc

Who the hell lives up north and doesn't shovel? Having a shovel sitting outside your door is kind of a main-stay for most people up there in the winter even if you pay someone to plow your driveway. They usually don't shovel your sidewalks and porch.

I wield a snow shovel like Paul Bunyan and Jimi Hendrix wield an axe.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Because it seems you're failing to acknowledge that hundreds of thousands and then millions of European immigrants went to and populated northern cities from the 1840s through the early decades of the 1900s.

They did not come because of the automobile. They did not come because of the collapse of the confederacy.

You are trying to concoct an history that doesn't exist to fit into your "migration back to the Sunbelt" narrative.

No, you're just completely distorting my point.

The fact is culturally and economically, the Upper Midwest and Great Lakes as a whole was completely irrelevant despite the relatively few people who lived there. The largest cities in that region (besides Chicago) were barely on the map before the Great Migration. It wasn't until jobs in manufacturing were being churned out in droves (the invention of and demand for the Automobile being the main catalyst for this) that the mass migration from the south began and the Midwest really began to grow and develop.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by JManc

Who the hell lives up north and doesn't shovel?

I've basically never shoveled in my life (outside of clearing cars and once helping an old lady in high school), and have only lived in the Snowbelt. My parents always had a snow service (it's like $25 a visit, not exactly a bank-breaker), and since college I've been in rentals and condos, none requiring such work.

Originally Posted by JManc

They usually don't shovel your sidewalks and porch.

My parents' snow service does sidewalks, front and side entries. The truck cleans the driveway and a snow blower does the little stuff.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

The largest cities in that region (besides Chicago) were barely on the map before the Great Migration.

This is nonsense. The Midwest peaked prior to the Great Migration.

Detroit had nearly 2 million people in the city proper during WW2, and barely had a black population, nor did it have Appalachian whites.

[skyscraperpage17]

Originally Posted by Crawford

This is nonsense. The Midwest peaked prior to the Great Migration.

Detroit had nearly 2 million people in the city proper during WW2, and barely had a black population, nor did it have Appalachian whites.

The first wave of The Great Migration started in the early 1900s (around the time the Automobile was revolutionizing the world and Henry Ford perfected the assembly line).

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by skyscraperpage17

The first wave of The Great Migration started in the early 1900s (around the time the Automobile was revolutionizing the world and Henry Ford perfected the assembly line).

and in 1900 chicago already had a population of 1,698,575 and was the 2nd largest city in the nation, before the great migrations from the south even began.

it was primarily european immigrants that vaulted chicago to super-city status in the mid/late 19th century.

your premise is simply wrong.