http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/04/opinion/co...minnesota/

Minnesota thinks so.

And does that mean its time to rebrand the BigTen the Big North?

"Midwest" definitely is a bit of a "catch-all" .... you can see the map in the link, there are all of 12 states (MI, OH, IN, IL, WI, MN, MO, IA, KS, NE, SD, ND) that most people will label "Midwest."

Thing is, Ohio & Michigan don't really have that much in common with the likes of Nebraska and the Dakotas.

That said, breaking things off north/south doesn't really make much sense either. Frankly, there is NO good way to break things off. Maybe we can settle on this:

(1) Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas are the "Great Plains region."

(2) Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin are the "Great Lakes region."

(3) Iowa, Minnesota & Missouri are the leftovers. Iowa & Missouri keep the Midwest tag, while ...

(4) Canada annexes Minnesota as their 11th province. What do "Canadian elitists" from Toronto call those folk who live in Manitoba & Saskatchewan? That will be Minnesota's new label.

They could rebrand as "Baja Ontario".

I completely sympathize with the OP's link.

It's not so much the term "Midwest" itself, but rather the patronizing back-handed compliment stereotypes that most of the rest of the country has of the region (i.e. "down-to-Earth" being code for simple and unsophisticated, "friendly" being code for naive, "old-fashioned" being code for behind with times, "working class" being code for not being a good environment for high-tech and creative class jobs, etc.), all of which have NOTHING to do with Chicago, which is where I grew up and still live to this day. I absolutely loathe it when I see the coastal-ites talk about the "Midwest" with the image of the cornfields of Central Illinois, Indiana and Iowa as opposed to the sophisticated metropolises like Chicago and Minneapolis. It's not that I don't appreciate those agricultural areas - they're certainly critically important to our economy and straight-up our overall well-being. I attended college right smack dab in the middle of that atmosphere. However, no one's immediate image of the East Coast is of Vermont dairy farmers. Instead, it's of New York City, Boston and DC. Likewise, no one's immediate image of the West Coast is of the Central Valley of California. Instead, it's of LA, San Francisco, San Diego, Portland and Seattle. In a global economy where the creative class rules, the Midwestern stereotype is absolutely a complete hindrance to its long-term economic growth and even the places that don't fit that stereotype (like Chicago, Minneapolis and Madison) have to work overtime to overcome that stereotype to avoid getting dragged down. That's the pernicious aspect behind how the Midwest "brand" is looked at right now.

(03-05-2015 03:06 PM)Wedge Wrote:  They could rebrand as "Baja Ontario".

LOL, plus 3.

That said, it's been called the Midwest for so long that one can ask why change it? Will they change the name of Northwestern University to Midnortheastern University?

The South or Southeast doesn't have it any better.

(03-05-2015 03:12 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I completely sympathize with the OP's link.

It's not so much the term "Midwest" itself, but rather the patronizing back-handed compliment stereotypes that most of the rest of the country has of the region (i.e. "down-to-Earth" being code for simple and unsophisticated, "friendly" being code for naive, "old-fashioned" being code for behind with times, "working class" being code for not being a good environment for high-tech and creative class jobs, etc.), all of which have NOTHING to do with Chicago, which is where I grew up and still live to this day. I absolutely loathe it when I see the coastal-ites talk about the "Midwest" with the image of the cornfields of Central Illinois, Indiana and Iowa as opposed to the sophisticated metropolises like Chicago and Minneapolis. It's not that I don't appreciate those agricultural areas - they're certainly critically important to our economy and straight-up our overall well-being. I attended college right smack dab in the middle of that atmosphere. However, no one's immediate image of the East Coast is of Vermont dairy farmers. Instead, it's of New York City, Boston and DC. Likewise, no one's immediate image of the West Coast is of the Central Valley of California. Instead, it's of LA, San Francisco, San Diego, Portland and Seattle. In a global economy where the creative class rules, the Midwestern stereotype is absolutely a complete hindrance to its long-term economic growth and even the places that don't fit that stereotype (like Chicago, Minneapolis and Madison) have to work overtime to overcome that stereotype to avoid getting dragged down. That's the pernicious aspect behind how the Midwest "brand" is looked at right now.

Let's be honest on the Chicago front: this goes two ways.

First, Chicago's biggest problem these days isn't a "Midwest label", it's that most Americans perceive Chicago to be extremely dangerous and crime-ridden. That may not be fair, but there's a lot of work Chicago needs to do in that regard.

Second, there's a lot of downstate "Midwest" folk who would be perfectly happy with Chicagoland seceding from the state. Our 51st state: Chicagoland! East-coast folk may look down on Chicago, but Chicagoland-folk act the same way in regards to their downstate brothers (no offense, but even your post with the use of words like "sophisticated" sounds somewhat "snobbish" in this very way).

(03-05-2015 03:06 PM)Wedge Wrote:  They could rebrand as "Baja Ontario".

For Minnesota, it is Baja Manitoba, or Bajatoba for short

(03-05-2015 03:36 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  Let's be honest on the Chicago front: this goes two ways.

First, Chicago's biggest problem these days isn't a "Midwest label", it's that most Americans perceive Chicago to be extremely dangerous and crime-ridden. That may not be fair, but there's a lot of work Chicago needs to do in that regard.

Oh, that perception drives me nuts, too. Here's the thing: Chicago is a BIG city. Unless you're from New York, a lot of people don't quite understand how big it is. If you cut Chicago in half and took the North Side/Loop (and the adjacent West Loop and South Loop), you'd have a city that's safer than Toronto with significantly more people than places like Boston and San Francisco. Now, I agree that the other half of Chicago has a ton of crime problems. The advantage that a place like San Francisco has is that its equivalent is called Oakland, so SF gets the benefit of not having Oakland's crime problems incorporated into their overall city rates. When you think of "Global Chicago" as SF and "Left Behind Chicago" as Oakland, then you get a much more accurate picture of what the city really looks like.

Let's put it this way: if you go to the half of Chicago that virtually everyone visits, you're as safe as you would be in any large city in America. In Chicago, it is almost impossible to take wrong turn and then stumble into a bad neighborhood, which is quite different from places like Miami or LA where you have million dollar condos on one block and then bombed out neighborhoods on the next block. Chicago has a huge swath of safe affluence and a huge crime-ridden swath, and those swaths don't really intersect. To be sure, that's the byproduct of a separate problem of how clearly segregated Chicago is based on income, class and race with a very clear geographic line of demarcation. However, the places that most visitors of Chicago see (downtown, Michigan Avenue, the Museum Campus, Wrigley Field, etc.) is incredibly safe and, for those that haven't been there in awhile, incredibly CLEAN compared to its counterparts of NYC and SF.

Quote:Second, there's a lot of downstate "Midwest" folk who would be perfectly happy with Chicagoland seceding from the state. Our 51st state: Chicagoland! East-coast folk may look down on Chicago, but Chicagoland-folk act the same way in regards to their downstate brothers (no offense, but even your post with the use of words like "sophisticated" sounds somewhat "snobbish" in this very way).

Yes, we see the old secession "threats" in Illinois, just like people in Upstate New York like complaining about NYC. A lot of people in rural areas like to tell themselves that they're sending so much money up to the supposedly greedy people in the big cities with all of their crime, welfare queens, etc. Of course, it's completely backwards: the Chicagoland area sends MUCH MUCH MUCH more revenue to Downstate Illinois than the other way around (just as NYC sends way more to Upstate New York and LA and SF send way more to the other parts of California). It's not even close - Downstate Illinois would financially die without the Chicagoland area to prop it up and being the only source of population and business growth in the entire state. I don't feel snobbish toward that area (like I said, I went to the University of Illinois and will always cherish my time there), but the complaints that I hear about supposed spending disparities between Chicagoland and Downstate Illinois are so wrong and off-base that it's pretty infuriating.

And to be clear, I'm not saying that rural areas are bad or undesirable. We NEED rural areas and a strong agricultural economy. I don't dispute their importance.

However, economic growth in this country is primarily driven by knowledge industries such as high-tech, finance, engineering, medicine, law, etc. So, yes, the perception of the "sophistication" of an area is pretty important if not downright critical for its economic prospects. The overall perception of the Midwest is often tied to the Rust Belt image and/or the rural image, neither of which addresses the needs of the global economy well. It would be one thing if it was just NYC and the Bay Area beating the Midwest on this front - you see places like the Research Triangle and Austin cleaning the clocks of most Midwestern cities, as well.

FWIW, Ohio, Michigan and 80 of Indiana's 92 counties are in the Eastern Time Zone.

(03-05-2015 04:47 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 03:36 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  Let's be honest on the Chicago front: this goes two ways.

First, Chicago's biggest problem these days isn't a "Midwest label", it's that most Americans perceive Chicago to be extremely dangerous and crime-ridden. That may not be fair, but there's a lot of work Chicago needs to do in that regard.

Oh, that perception drives me nuts, too. Here's the thing: Chicago is a BIG city. Unless you're from New York, a lot of people don't quite understand how big it is. If you cut Chicago in half and took the North Side/Loop (and the adjacent West Loop and South Loop), you'd have a city that's safer than Toronto with significantly more people than places like Boston and San Francisco. Now, I agree that the other half of Chicago has a ton of crime problems. The advantage that a place like San Francisco has is that its equivalent is called Oakland, so SF gets the benefit of not having Oakland's crime problems incorporated into their overall city rates. When you think of "Global Chicago" as SF and "Left Behind Chicago" as Oakland, then you get a much more accurate picture of what the city really looks like.

Let's put it this way: if you go to the half of Chicago that virtually everyone visits, you're as safe as you would be in any large city in America. In Chicago, it is almost impossible to take wrong turn and then stumble into a bad neighborhood, which is quite different from places like Miami or LA where you have million dollar condos on one block and then bombed out neighborhoods on the next block. Chicago has a huge swath of safe affluence and a huge crime-ridden swath, and those swaths don't really intersect. To be sure, that's the byproduct of a separate problem of how clearly segregated Chicago is based on income, class and race with a very clear geographic line of demarcation. However, the places that most visitors of Chicago see (downtown, Michigan Avenue, the Museum Campus, Wrigley Field, etc.) is incredibly safe and, for those that haven't been there in awhile, incredibly CLEAN compared to its counterparts of NYC and SF.

Quote:Second, there's a lot of downstate "Midwest" folk who would be perfectly happy with Chicagoland seceding from the state. Our 51st state: Chicagoland! East-coast folk may look down on Chicago, but Chicagoland-folk act the same way in regards to their downstate brothers (no offense, but even your post with the use of words like "sophisticated" sounds somewhat "snobbish" in this very way).

Yes, we see the old secession "threats" in Illinois, just like people in Upstate New York like complaining about NYC. A lot of people in rural areas like to tell themselves that they're sending so much money up to the supposedly greedy people in the big cities with all of their crime, welfare queens, etc. Of course, it's completely backwards: the Chicagoland area sends MUCH MUCH MUCH more revenue to Downstate Illinois than the other way around (just as NYC sends way more to Upstate New York and LA and SF send way more to the other parts of California). It's not even close - Downstate Illinois would financially die without the Chicagoland area to prop it up and being the only source of population and business growth in the entire state. I don't feel snobbish toward that area (like I said, I went to the University of Illinois and will always cherish my time there), but the complaints that I hear about supposed spending disparities between Chicagoland and Downstate Illinois are so wrong and off-base that it's pretty infuriating.

Cleaner than NY is an understatement. I think I've gone on record saying you could eat off the street in (affluent/relatively affluent) Chicago when compared to New York. Back to your regularly scheduled debate folks...

(03-05-2015 05:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  However, economic growth in this country is primarily driven by knowledge industries such as high-tech, finance, engineering, medicine, law, etc. So, yes, the perception of the "sophistication" of an area is pretty important if not downright critical for its economic prospects. The overall perception of the Midwest is often tied to the Rust Belt image and/or the rural image, neither of which addresses the needs of the global economy well. It would be one thing if it was just NYC and the Bay Area beating the Midwest on this front - you see places like the Research Triangle and Austin cleaning the clocks of most Midwestern cities, as well.

Those who are Upper Class and have economic ties to some of the Fortune 500 companies in that region know its value. Those who are Upper Middle class who have education ties or have friends in the Midwest think highly of it. A lot of lawyers I know rave about Chicago and would consider transferring there.

The middle class East Coast/West Coast family who likes to take the kids and smelly Fido to the beach for one week in the Summer in their limited minds the Midwest is a cornfield. Countries outside the US are weird-do places that do not have a Subway and Starbucks on every corner.

Part of the reason you see the skyline of the East Coast cities is there is nothing else worth talking about. The coastal areas are marshy surrounded by insignificant woodlands. Research Triangle you never see a picture of that because its in a podunk area smack in the middle of North Carolina a podunk state except for OBX (Fido's favorite beach, the family breadwinner).

Texas has an anti-authoritarian image and that attracts a lot of people to it. People who are tired of the BS in California and high cost of living. California is a net exporter of people and they'll go as far as Texas or Oklahoma to go off to college. The problem is Texas has its own BS going on like any other place.

Is it even worth the trouble for the Midwest to reinvent itself? What is there to sell? They have waterways but there isn't much in the way of topography to draw people to the area. Theater is strong in the region including Toronto and Strattford. Chicago and Cleveland have strong theater districts. Quality museums. The North Coast definitely can hold hold its footing with the East and West Coast but nothing that is exceptionally standout.

(03-05-2015 02:54 PM)NittanyLion Wrote:  "Midwest" definitely is a bit of a "catch-all" .... you can see the map in the link, there are all of 12 states (MI, OH, IN, IL, WI, MN, MO, IA, KS, NE, SD, ND) that most people will label "Midwest."

Thing is, Ohio & Michigan don't really have [b]that much in common with the likes of Nebraska and the Dakotas.[/b]

That said, breaking things off north/south doesn't really make much sense either. Frankly, there is NO good way to break things off. Maybe we can settle on this:

(1) Kansas, Nebraska, and the Dakotas are the "Great Plains region."

(2) Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin are the "Great Lakes region."

(3) Iowa, Minnesota & Missouri are the leftovers. Iowa & Missouri keep the Midwest tag, while ...

(4) Canada annexes Minnesota as their 11th province. What do "Canadian elitists" from Toronto call those folk who live in Manitoba & Saskatchewan? That will be Minnesota's new label.

You go outside of the city in either of those two states and they have a lot in common, more so than a Quaker. Most of Michigan and Ohio are covered in either farms or in Michigan's case, forests.

2. Great Lakes is like a sub category of the Midwest.

All in all, I'd refuse to be called the "North" because there is little I have in common with the yankees in the Northeast or the yuppies in the Northwest.

New York's island of Manhattan has more people in it during the day than the populations of Chicago and SF. With that many people in a relatively small area, that was built in many different eras over the last 350+ years, it's harder to clean...

However, having spent YEARS watching people while eating my lunch on park benches... I can say that an awful lot of NYC's litter is actually dropped by tourists, not NYers! It's scary how inconsiderate people are. That said, New York is SOOOOO much cleaner than it was in the 70's, 80's, and 90's! There are several business districts around the Manhattan now where you do NOT see dirt and litter anymore... there are crews constantly working to make NYC cleaner!

It's the Crossroads of the World and Center of the Universe they are making it better!

I'll take being Midwestern over northern any day of the week. Way too much history there to jettison (although most people don't care about it :( )

I guess, I don't understand folks like Frank with their Defensive nature. There is nothing to be ashamed about with the "Midwest" mantra. They are some of the best educated States in the Union. The fact that regions of the country try to act like academic superiors is just funny.

Why act so defensive though? Yes, Chicago is a metropolis for sure. It has some great culture but it's most endearing aspect is how it is the epitome of a Midwestern Town. It is the very best of a Culture that has nothing to be ashamed of. Try being confident about it for a change. You might be surprised at how easy it is.

(03-06-2015 12:03 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 05:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  However, economic growth in this country is primarily driven by knowledge industries such as high-tech, finance, engineering, medicine, law, etc. So, yes, the perception of the "sophistication" of an area is pretty important if not downright critical for its economic prospects. The overall perception of the Midwest is often tied to the Rust Belt image and/or the rural image, neither of which addresses the needs of the global economy well. It would be one thing if it was just NYC and the Bay Area beating the Midwest on this front - you see places like the Research Triangle and Austin cleaning the clocks of most Midwestern cities, as well.

Those who are Upper Class and have economic ties to some of the Fortune 500 companies in that region know its value. Those who are Upper Middle class who have education ties or have friends in the Midwest think highly of it. A lot of lawyers I know rave about Chicago and would consider transferring there.

The middle class East Coast/West Coast family who likes to take the kids and smelly Fido to the beach for one week in the Summer in their limited minds the Midwest is a cornfield. Countries outside the US are weird-do places that do not have a Subway and Starbucks on every corner.

Part of the reason you see the skyline of the East Coast cities is there is nothing else worth talking about. The coastal areas are marshy surrounded by insignificant woodlands. Research Triangle you never see a picture of that because its in a podunk area smack in the middle of North Carolina a podunk state except for OBX (Fido's favorite beach, the family breadwinner).

Texas has an anti-authoritarian image and that attracts a lot of people to it. People who are tired of the BS in California and high cost of living. California is a net exporter of people and they'll go as far as Texas or Oklahoma to go off to college. The problem is Texas has its own BS going on like any other place.

Is it even worth the trouble for the Midwest to reinvent itself? What is there to sell? They have waterways but there isn't much in the way of topography to draw people to the area. Theater is strong in the region including Toronto and Strattford. Chicago and Cleveland have strong theater districts. Quality museums. The North Coast definitely can hold hold its footing with the East and West Coast but nothing that is exceptionally standout.

I agree with you - it's just that the national image of the Midwest seems to either ignore the positive aspects or emphasize the negative aspects. As high cost as California might be, it still has great weather and is home to Hollywood and Silicon Valley to overpower the negatives. As much BS as Texas might have, it has its own braggadocio with a great business climate.

In the Midwest, Chicago is as cosmopolitan as any world class city. Minneapolis has much more in common with Seattle and Portland than it does with the Rust Belt. One of the primary reasons why this board even exists - the Big Ten - is the best top-to-bottom collection of public universities in the country that are able to provide a top tier education to tens of thousands of more people compared to East Coast private universities. That also has created some of the country's best college towns like Madison, Ann Arbor and Bloomington. I'm a beach connoisseur, and I'll tell you straight up that the entire west coast of Michigan has better beaches than anything on the Atlantic Ocean outside of Florida - it's all smooth white sand akin to what you'd find on the Gulf Coast. Northern Wisconsin and Michigan are every bit as spectacular in the summer and fall as New England. There's a national park within 30 minutes of Cleveland.

Yet, none of that ever seems to be even a *part* of the national image of the Midwest. I'd be the first to tell you that the Midwest has a lot of problems, but it doesn't help that the region just does a terrible job of communicating its assets.

(03-06-2015 12:49 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 12:03 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 05:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  However, economic growth in this country is primarily driven by knowledge industries such as high-tech, finance, engineering, medicine, law, etc. So, yes, the perception of the "sophistication" of an area is pretty important if not downright critical for its economic prospects. The overall perception of the Midwest is often tied to the Rust Belt image and/or the rural image, neither of which addresses the needs of the global economy well. It would be one thing if it was just NYC and the Bay Area beating the Midwest on this front - you see places like the Research Triangle and Austin cleaning the clocks of most Midwestern cities, as well.

Those who are Upper Class and have economic ties to some of the Fortune 500 companies in that region know its value. Those who are Upper Middle class who have education ties or have friends in the Midwest think highly of it. A lot of lawyers I know rave about Chicago and would consider transferring there.

The middle class East Coast/West Coast family who likes to take the kids and smelly Fido to the beach for one week in the Summer in their limited minds the Midwest is a cornfield. Countries outside the US are weird-do places that do not have a Subway and Starbucks on every corner.

Part of the reason you see the skyline of the East Coast cities is there is nothing else worth talking about. The coastal areas are marshy surrounded by insignificant woodlands. Research Triangle you never see a picture of that because its in a podunk area smack in the middle of North Carolina a podunk state except for OBX (Fido's favorite beach, the family breadwinner).

Texas has an anti-authoritarian image and that attracts a lot of people to it. People who are tired of the BS in California and high cost of living. California is a net exporter of people and they'll go as far as Texas or Oklahoma to go off to college. The problem is Texas has its own BS going on like any other place.

Is it even worth the trouble for the Midwest to reinvent itself? What is there to sell? They have waterways but there isn't much in the way of topography to draw people to the area. Theater is strong in the region including Toronto and Strattford. Chicago and Cleveland have strong theater districts. Quality museums. The North Coast definitely can hold hold its footing with the East and West Coast but nothing that is exceptionally standout.

I agree with you - it's just that the national image of the Midwest seems to either ignore the positive aspects or emphasize the negative aspects. As high cost as California might be, it still has great weather and is home to Hollywood and Silicon Valley to overpower the negatives. As much BS as Texas might have, it has its own braggadocio with a great business climate.

In the Midwest, Chicago is as cosmopolitan as any world class city. Minneapolis has much more in common with Seattle and Portland than it does with the Rust Belt. One of the primary reasons why this board even exists - the Big Ten - is the best top-to-bottom collection of public universities in the country that are able to provide a top tier education to tens of thousands of more people compared to East Coast private universities. That also has created some of the country's best college towns like Madison, Ann Arbor and Bloomington. I'm a beach connoisseur, and I'll tell you straight up that the entire west coast of Michigan has better beaches than anything on the Atlantic Ocean outside of Florida - it's all smooth white sand akin to what you'd find on the Gulf Coast. Northern Wisconsin and Michigan are every bit as spectacular in the summer and fall as New England. There's a national park within 30 minutes of Cleveland.

Yet, none of that ever seems to be even a *part* of the national image of the Midwest. I'd be the first to tell you that the Midwest has a lot of problems, but it doesn't help that the region just does a terrible job of communicating its assets.

I've lived all over the country. Sorry, but no...no one tops the Fall season in New England.

(03-06-2015 12:29 AM)He1nousOne Wrote:  I guess, I don't understand folks like Frank with their Defensive nature. There is nothing to be ashamed about with the "Midwest" mantra. They are some of the best educated States in the Union. The fact that regions of the country try to act like academic superiors is just funny.

Why act so defensive though? Yes, Chicago is a metropolis for sure. It has some great culture but it's most endearing aspect is how it is the epitome of a Midwestern Town. It is the very best of a Culture that has nothing to be ashamed of. Try being confident about it for a change. You might be surprised at how easy it is.

It's not defensive - as you see by my last post, I love the Midwest. However, that love means that I have a lot of concern of the economic direction of the entire region. I see it upfront in a business where we're constantly competing for top Millennial and recent college grad talent. They generally like Chicago quite a bit, but you see places like Denver and Austin rising quickly in attracting them, much less traditional stalwarts like New York and Silicon Valley. If Chicago has to battle against the likes of Denver, where the heck does that put Detroit, Cleveland and Milwaukee on the pecking order? This isn't just my personal anecdotal observation - you can see clearly in Census data the migratory pattern of virtually every part of the Midwest sending people to other regions much more than they're bringing them in.

Plus, the Midwest gives its kids a great education compared to most other regions, but then those kids are increasingly moving away. Outside of Stanford and Berkeley, the biggest sources of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs are Big Ten grads (particularly Illinois and Michigan). The Midwest couldn't provide a suitable environment to create their companies at home, so they had to move. Imagine how different the Midwest would look if the founders of companies like Google, PayPal, Oracle and YouTube (two of whom lived in my dorm at Illinois) along with the primary venture capital behind Facebook, Twitter and Skype had stayed at home. Every single one of those companies had at least one Big Ten grad as a founder. That cost the Midwest literally trillions of dollars in economic development. This is something that needs to change in the long-term and it's rooted in the image (and reality) that the Midwest is conservative (and I don't mean politically, but rather in terms of business development, investment and practices).