Where Is The Rust Belt?

[Failte]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

US Steel's South Works on Chicagoss southside once employed 20,000 steel workers with solid middle class jobs, today it employs zero people and the 600 acres of prime lakefront land it sat upon have been cleared and remain fallow 3 decades after the plant closed.

That story was repeated dozens of times at various industrial plants all up and down the Calumet River on Chicago's south side, from the 70s through today. Plants closed, hundreds of thousands of good middle class union jobs gone forever.

Chicago only came out on the other side so much better than Youngstown because it also has an enormous base of corporate, finance, and transportation jobs that allowed it to weather the storm better.

So while Chicago might not be the very buckle of the rust belt like NE Ohio, it's definitely still part of the belt.

Yep, all true and people think the Loop and trendy north side 'hoods are Chicago. Or that neighborhoods were abandoned by whites because of ''crime''. As I stated above, it was job flight.

Again, you nailed it succinctly with this take on the south side. And yes, there were tons of steel, auto, and various other manufacturing centers all over the south side. All gone. Folks always post pics of Chicago's booming Loop with no idea of what even downtown Chicago was like into, at a minimum, the mid-'90s.

And US Steel's huge swath of land still sits fallow on the south side despite a couple announced plans pre-2007 Depression. When all those factories were humming, everyone was working and these plants needed workers; see also the black migration to Chicago before the mid-60s for sure. The city population alone was 3.6 million. Post '50s manufacturing collapse and the city is down under 2.7 million; who knows what it will be in this year's census.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Chicago is definitely rust belt.

Anyone saying otherwise is woefully ignorant of the city's history.

Agreed.

https://forgottenchicago.com/articles/south-works/

(Not intended for you, I know you won't learn anything from it, but others might.)

[Failte]

Originally Posted by lio45

Agreed.

https://forgottenchicago.com/articles/south-works/

(Not intended for you, I know you won't learn anything from it, but others might.)

Others definitely need to read up on Chicago's history; ''others'' being those that think Chicago couldn't be rust belt cuz it has the largest Starbucks and never knowing that the city is down about 1 million people from its peak.

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by dc_denizen

Abandonment in certain neighborhoods due to white flight and crime is way different than what happened in Youngstown (20000 jobs gone in one day, when Youngstown sheet and tube collapsed)

Northeastern Ohio is the rust belt par excellence . Chicago isn’t in the same league

I agree, I believe that the term rust belt was just as much related to a condition as it was to a Region. Just because a region was called the Rust Belt did not mean every city within that defined area fit that description. And Chicago being more diversified was in no way subject to the degree of decay as a lot of cities that were largely dependent on a single manufacturer like steel, auto, rubber, etc. Yes Chicago lost population during that period, so did Boston, D.C.,and I believe N.Y.C for a short period of time but you would not describe them at that time as being rust belted.

[SIGSEGV]

Also don't forget about Lake County Indiana...

[Failte]

Originally Posted by skysoar

I agree, I believe that the term rust belt was just as much related to a condition as it was to a Region. Just because a region was called the Rust Belt did not mean every city within that defined area fit that description. And Chicago being more diversified was in no way subject to the degree of decay as a lot of cities that were largely dependent on a single manufacturer like steel, auto, rubber, etc. Yes Chicago lost population during that period, so did Boston, D.C.,and I believe N.Y.C for a short period of time but you would not describe them at that time as being rust belted.

No one has stated that Chicago saw the degree of decline that smaller RB cities did, but this doesn't mean Chicago isn't or wasn't RB. You claimed earlier that you thought Chicago was never RB. Please.

New York was RB by the '70s, its manufacturing industry was pretty much gone and it lost a lot of people in a short time but has surpassed its prior population peak. It's no longer RB at all. Boston lost people as its smaller manufacturing base declined to vanished. All were RB to RB-ish. Boston was a rough and tough town. Navy Yards closed etc.

Chicago in 2020 is still losing population unlike Boston, DC, and NYC. Varying degrees of decline for many cities yet the RB itself still struggles.

Sorry, but you may want to pick-up that mike you dropped earlier...Chicago is Rust Belt.

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by Failte

No one has stated that Chicago saw the degree of decline that smaller RB cities did, but this doesn't mean Chicago isn't or wasn't RB. You claimed earlier that you thought Chicago was never RB. Please.

New York was RB by the '70s, its manufacturing industry was pretty much gone and it lost a lot of people in a short time but has surpassed its prior population peak. It's no longer RB at all. Boston lost people as its smaller manufacturing base declined to vanished. All were RB to RB-ish. Boston was a rough and tough town. Navy Yards closed etc.

Chicago in 2020 is still losing population unlike Boston, DC, and NYC. Varying degrees of decline for many cities yet the RB itself still struggles.

Sorry, but you may want to pick-up that mike you dropped earlier...Chicago is Rust Belt.

No I will leave it where it is, you are now using population as the determiner of the Rust belt. At this point no one knows what the population of Chicago will be in the 2020.census. With a more intense effort to count as many people as possible in this 2020 Census we may all be surprised, or maybe not. If you or others see Chicago as Rust belt that is fine with me, but we just disagree on what constitutes a rust belt city. I lived in Ohio and visited other rust belt areas in Western Pennsylvania during the epic of the Rust belt era and I saw cities whose manufacturing left and there were literally no other employment, whole cities nearly decimated. Chicago like any other city has experienced ups and downs but nothing like that. And matter of fact employment continues to increase in the Chicago area with even manufacturing up slightly in 2019, not much rust here.

[CaliNative]

Originally Posted by Failte

Yep, all true and people think the Loop and trendy north side 'hoods are Chicago. Or that neighborhoods were abandoned by whites because of ''crime''. As I stated above, it was job flight.

Again, you nailed it succinctly with this take on the south side. And yes, there were tons of steel, auto, and various other manufacturing centers all over the south side. All gone. Folks always post pics of Chicago's booming Loop with no idea of what even downtown Chicago was like into, at a minimum, the mid-'90s.

And US Steel's huge swath of land still sits fallow on the south side despite a couple announced plans pre-2007 Depression. When all those factories were humming, everyone was working and these plants needed workers; see also the black migration to Chicago before the mid-60s for sure. The city population alone was 3.6 million. Post '50s manufacturing collapse and the city is down under 2.7 million; who knows what it will be in this year's census.

South Chicago & Gary, Indiana merge together in one huge rust belt. But they will come back or be repurposed, maybe sooner than expected. Detroit too. Even Youngstown.

[Crawford]

I don't think anyone could drive from downtown Chicago to Michigan and not notice that Chicago has a massive, super-prominent industrial legacy. That corridor is about as stereotypical Rust Belt as it gets anywhere in the U.S. Even Detroit and Cleveland don't have corridors like that. Northern Indiana is about as "rusty" as it gets (at least in terms of appearance).

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't think anyone could drive from downtown Chicago to Michigan and not notice that Chicago has a massive, super-prominent industrial legacy. That corridor is about as stereotypical Rust Belt as it gets anywhere in the U.S. Even Detroit and Cleveland don't have corridors like that. Northern Indiana is about as "rusty" as it gets (at least in terms of appearance).

Of course I agree Northern Indiana is rust belt, but the subject was the city of Chicago. We also agree parts of South Chicago resembled the rust belt, but the city as a whole was not rust belt. Chicago was too big and too diverse as a city. The two other cities you spoke of were nearly hollowed out, Detroits population went from 1,849,000 to presently 700,000,Clevelands population in 1950 was 914,000 now presently at about 380,000. Chicago too has suffered losses in population but percentage wise nowhere near that level, and I did not even mention Gary, Indiana. . Last thing I will say on this topic is to quote Wikipedia, trying to describe the geographical boundaries of the rust belt as a single region is like trying to define what is the Midwest.

[dc_denizen]

Indiana has the highest percent of total workers in manufacturing of any state, and the highest share of gross state product from manufacturing of any state

[The North One]

Originally Posted by skysoar

Of course I agree Northern Indiana is rust belt, but the subject was the city of Chicago. We also agree parts of South Chicago resembled the rust belt, but the city as a whole was not rust belt. Chicago was too big and too diverse as a city. The two other cities you spoke of were nearly hollowed out, Detroits population went from 1,849,000 to presently 700,000,Clevelands population in 1950 was 914,000 now presently at about 380,000. Chicago too has suffered losses in population but percentage wise nowhere near that level, and I did not even mention Gary, Indiana. . Last thing I will say on this topic is to quote Wikipedia, trying to describe the geographical boundaries of the rust belt as a single region is like trying to define what is the Midwest.

Chicago has lost about a million people, Chicago keeps rapidly losing people on all sides, if population is entirely the definition for what is "rustbelt" Chicago is well defined by it.

Rustbelt is a stupid media term with no objective reasoning behind it but your Chicago exceptionalism denial is annoying and wrong.

[Handro]

Originally Posted by The North One

Chicago has lost about a million people, Chicago keeps rapidly losing people on all sides, if population is entirely the definition for what is "rustbelt" Chicago is well defined by it.

Rustbelt is a stupid media term with no objective reasoning behind it but your Chicago exceptionalism denial is annoying and wrong.

Chicago is definitely rust belt, but this is is not true.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Failte

Yep, all true and people think the Loop and trendy north side 'hoods are Chicago.

they are chicago.

just as the forlorn former industrial neighborhoods of the southside are as well.

chicago, like most major cities, is a giant and complex beast with many different facets.

the main difference is that one of those realms represents chicago's future and the other its past. winners and losers. chicago's got plenty of both.

but i still place chicago in the rust belt category because of the scale and scope of industrial job-loss here. it's doesn't make much sense to me to dissect these things and say things like "well the calumet river corridor and NW indiana might be rust belt, but downtown chicago isn't." that's like saying that detroit is rust belt, but oakland county isn't. i don't see the rust belt as hopping and skipping around like that. i see it as a broader region that was especially hard hit by industrial job loss over the past half-century, even if not every specific place within said belt looks like a decrepit old rusting factory. chicago fits within that broad category.

Originally Posted by Failte

Or that neighborhoods were abandoned by whites because of ''crime''. As I stated above, it was job flight.

neighborhoods don't go from 90% white to 90% black in a generation simply because the local factory shuts down.

white flight was a GIGANTIC factor in many south and west side neighborhoods transitioning from white to black in the 60s/70s/80s.

anyone who says otherwise is woefully ignorant of chicago's history.

[JManc]

Growing up in the Rust Belt, I always associated Chicago with 'Rust Belt' because of its legacy as a major transportation and manufacturing hub. It also is a cosmopolitan city with a huge corporate presence that for some, probably helped it shake the stigma better than a Cleveland or Detroit.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I don't think anyone could drive from downtown Chicago to Michigan and not notice that Chicago has a massive, super-prominent industrial legacy. That corridor is about as stereotypical Rust Belt as it gets anywhere in the U.S. Even Detroit and Cleveland don't have corridors like that. Northern Indiana is about as "rusty" as it gets (at least in terms of appearance).

it also still produces more BOF* steel than any other place in the country. in fact, the 3 massive steel plants in NW indiana (indiana harbor, gary works, & burns harbor) hold HALF of the nation's blast furnace capacity. you better believe that the soviets kept several of their ICBMs targeted on NW indiana at all times throughout the cold war.

but NW indiana is still hard-core rust belt because those massive steel plants no longer need many people to make those millions of tons of steel they churn out each year. US steel's gary works used to employ 30,000 people back in the 70s. today, it's still the most productive integrated steel works on the continent, but it only employs around 3,000 people. a 90% labor reduction in 2 generations. how in the fuck is a one-factory town like Gary supposed to cope with that?


(*) BOF steel is brand new steel made from raw mineral ore mined out of the earth in a basic oxygen furnace. most steel these days is actually produced from recycled steel at mini-mills with electric arc furnaces, and those plants can be located anywhere because they aren't reliant on the raw mineral ingredients (taconite, coal, & limestone) needed to produce brand new steel in a blast furnace.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by JManc

Growing up in the Rust Belt, I always associated Chicago with 'Rust Belt' because of its legacy as a major transportation and manufacturing hub. It also is a cosmopolitan city with a huge corporate presence that for some, probably helped it shake the stigma better than a Cleveland or Detroit.

I can't speak for Cleveland, but for Detroit it seems like the key differentiator between it and Chicago is the level of flight (white and corporate) from the inner-city between the 1950s and 1990s. This was different from what the small industrial towns like Youngstown and Gary went through, which was mostly a complete collapse of industry.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

This was different from what the small industrial towns like Youngstown and Gary went through, which was mostly a complete collapse of industry.

or in the case of Gary, industry didn't collapse, it just no longer required human labor.

the factory remained open, but said "we don't need 90% of you anymore, go find find something else to do while we let the machines make the steel now".

[Failte]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

they are chicago.

just as the forlorn former industrial neighborhoods of the southside are as well.

chicago, like most major cities, is a giant and complex beast with many different facets.

the main difference is that one of those realms represents chicago's future and the other its past. winners and losers. chicago's got plenty of both.

but i still place chicago in the rust belt category because of the scale and scope of industrial job-loss here. it's doesn't make much sense to me to dissect these things and say things like "well the calumet river corridor and NW indiana might be rust belt, but downtown chicago isn't." that's like saying that detroit is rust belt, but oakland county isn't. i don't see the rust belt as hopping and skipping around like that. i see it as a broader region that was especially hard hit by industrial job loss over the past half-century, even if not every specific place within said belt looks like a decrepit old rusting factory. chicago fits within that broad category.





neighborhoods don't go from 90% white to 90% black in a generation simply because the local factory shuts down.

white flight was a GIGANTIC factor in many south and west side neighborhoods transitioning from white to black in the 60s/70s/80s.

anyone who says otherwise is woefully ignorant of chicago's history.

My point about the Loop and north side is that many people think that is the true and only Chicago cuz that's all they know.

As far as white flight, it gets blamed for everything and my point was that the manufacturing collapse certainly is a factor in why the people left. But to imply that a neighborhood went from 90% white to 90% black as only a bad thing is misplaced and could be construed as either racist or patronizing white folk think.

There were middle class black neighborhoods in the city. We've had black flight for some time now yet it appears to many to be a good thing and no one complains about black city abandonment. The mortgage fraud that went on in Chicago certainly didn't help and remains a drag on the city akin to the city's Rust Belt past.

[Tom In Chicago]

Also to pile on the Chicago is in fact Rust Belt notion, I like to remind people that up until the 1980s the downtown Chicago Loop was surrounded by heavy industry and heavy rail. . . much of the latter is still there being used with shiny skyscrapers and/or parks being built on air rights above them. . .

. . .