Why is the rural Midwest "easier" to live in than the rural/suburban South? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 01:14:40 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 100% pro-life no matter what)
  Why is the rural Midwest "easier" to live in than the rural/suburban South? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why is the rural Midwest "easier" to live in than the rural/suburban South?  (Read 3747 times)
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


« on: July 03, 2014, 09:04:42 AM »
« edited: July 03, 2014, 12:02:00 PM by memphis »

Problem is you don't know anything about the geography of Memphis. We have relatively few incorporated suburbs for a city our size, but the ones we have are (to varying degrees) mass affluent. This is particularly true for Germantown and Collierville, but Bartlett, Arlington, and Lakeland, for all their ticky tacky pointy house subdivisions, are still a helluva lot nicer than some desolate hellhole on the Plains. Your map in question only shows counties.Of the counties that border Shelby, only DeSoto, MS is predominantly suburban in population, and even there, it's still low density exurban and very new, with a strong underlying rural feel in much of the county. Fayette and Tipton, TN, Crittenden AR, and Marshall MS, remain authentically rural places, with the usual sorts of Dirty South rural problems.  
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.