Quote:
Originally Posted by photoLith
As some may know, I've been spending the last 6 years taking photos of every single historic church of the Rust Belt before they close. My question is, does this map represent the region that is the rust belt or is it more confined? My experience after living in Pittsburgh for 7 years is that most towns and cities within a 7 hour drive of here, minus D.C. and NYC are complete crap holes with some or many exceptions. To me, the Rust Belt extends from most towns and cities from St. Louis north to Milwaukee, south to Louisville and over to Utica, NY and then all of WV, most of PA, and all the towns and cities located along the Ohio River Valley. The only exceptions to the Rust Belt with population gain are certain areas of Pittsburgh, Baltimore, most of Columbus, only some hoods of Cleveland, etc. Most small towns in the entire rust belt, minus some college towns are completely destroyed. Anyways, does this map to you represent what is the Rust Belt?
 rust-belt-map1
https://beltmag.com/mapping-rust-belt/ |
Not all of Ohio is/was the rust belt. Columbus is not listed on the map because it never was a rust belt city/was never dominated by manufacturing-it has always had a more diversified economy. I would also say the same for most of Central Ohio. Columbus would certainly be listed as a recovered rust belt city if it had ever been one.
I think having /being dominated by lots of manufacturing and then losing it is more of the definition of rust belt-from all of the old manufacturing plants abandoned and "rusting"-at least that is how I always thought of it.
https://via.library.depaul.edu/mom/29/ -dominant industry in 1950-Columbus is the only one listed as "administration"-although the map is supposed to represent rust belt cities and includes Columbus?