Education

Disclaimer: This topic can get dicey.  It is not my intent to disparage any group of people – this is based upon validated statistics and my own observations. There are, of course, exceptions to these statistics in both the North and the South. We all know of someone who succeeded after dropping out of school, and we all know of someone struggling with poverty after completing an advanced degree.

There is a lot of correlation between education and poverty. On average, the less education a person has, the less they earn over the course of their adult life. The US Census Bureau’s study on this relationship noted:
“Earnings increase with educational level. Average earnings ranged from $18,900 for high school dropouts to $25,900 for high school graduates, $45,400 for college graduates, and $99,300 for workers with professional degrees (M.D., J.D., D.D.S., or D.V.M.).  Each successively higher education level is associated with an increase in earnings.”

Yet poverty and poor educational attainment continue to plague the South overall. Southern states have reduced graduation rates both for high school and college. There are lower scores on reading and science, which indicates it is poorer quality of education in primary and secondary schools, not only kids dropping out who drive these statistics. Per-pupil spending is lower in the South, and poverty higher.  This is a pattern, but there is not necessarily a causal relationship.

Why is this? Nobody has a clear answer. Of course, per-pupil spending might increase quality and graduation rates, but because poverty rates are higher, where will the money come from? Are the people poor because of inadequate education, or is the lack of education preventing people from escaping poverty? It’s an endless circle.

Then there is the political side of things. I understand (and agree to an extent) that this nation cannot afford to raise everyone out of poverty. National programs cost billions and billions each year, but don’t have a significant impact at the local level. State and local school boards are supposed to know their people best – what is needed and how to fulfill that need. It’s obvious that a program which works in Montana or Maine may not work the same in Mississippi.  But continuing to vote against federal or state programs which “can” help seems to me to be against the best interests of the people.

It does not need to be this way, on the political side. Montana is a reliably Red state, so the philosophy of smaller government is similar to that of the South. Yet it has a much higher graduation rate and test scores, and lower poverty rates, with just a modest increase in per-pupil spending. Is the spending what causes the improvement? Or does the higher overall income allow the higher spend?

I don’t have the answers and I don’t know where to start. But we are not doing people any favors by allowing this pattern to continue.

Tornadoes

Tornadoes are associated with violent storms, and most everyone is familiar with them. While *of course* tornado severity is generally unpredictable, and small tornadoes can occur in the South, as well as large tornadoes can pop up in the North, my experience living in the Great Lakes area is simply that tornadoes were not as awful as those in the South. 

As a child, we had tornado warning frequently enough – storms can be nasty here, especially coming across the Great Plains. But when a tornado hit, it was often nearly surgical. One house here, and the next house virtually untouched. A bad tornado might take out a block (though often only one side of the street). 

My first experience with a Southern tornado was the one which hit Tuscaloosa in 2011. My company had a small location there as well as a landfill. While the landfill was not damaged really (hard to hurt a landfill), the rest of the site (and much of the town) were utterly destroyed. I’d not seen anything like it in the US from a tornado (I am rather news-oblivious, as I’m certain there were others when I was younger). The later that year Joplin, MO was hit even worse. 

Tornadoes in Florida are not super-common, as I’m guessing the narrow landmass is more conducive to hurricane damage rather than the types of storms which generate tornadoes, but overall in the South tornadoes seem to be massive. Whole counties are seriously damaged, on a scale exceeded only by a hurricane.

Up North in the Great Lakes area, the worst natural disasters I've experienced are winter storms, where the greatest danger is the large vehicle pile-ups in white-out conditions on the highways. When we get several feet of snow, we dig out and move on. You can’t do that as easily after one of the huge southern storms.

Beaches

The South has some impressive beaches. Beginning somewhere around South Carolina-ish, the beach transitions from the rock-based sand of the northern beaches to the coral-and-shell-based sand of the Deep South.  White sand predominates the beaches of Florida and the Gulf Coast, often lined with sea oats. They are very pretty and great for collecting shells. Caribbean islands and Puerto Rico can have blinding white sand.

The Carolinas change over with marshy areas along the barrier islands and move away from the white sand. Up north, we have golden and ‘sandy’ colored sand.

Further north, we abandon the concept of a beach and just go for ‘coastline.’ The rocky coasts of Maine are well-known, but are great for tide pools. Along the Great Lakes we have a variety of beach-like areas. Sleeping Bear Dunes and Indiana Dunes have normal sandy beaches and dunes.

Along the eastern side of Lake Huron you find pebbly beaches, which are great for finding shell fossils. Further north to Georgian Bay and the Canadian Shield the edge of the lakes are slabs of rock just angling into the water.

Beaches and coastlines come in many forms, but there seems to be more variety up north. Beaches are more enjoyable, however, down South.

Religion, Part One

Religious practices are expressed differently in the South. Deep-down, I don't think people are *more* religious down here, just that it is more visible. Up north, people overall are more reserved and private regarding their beliefs. Down south, it is an open part of daily life.

Wikipedia states: The Bible Belt is an informal term for a region in the south-eastern and south-central United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is generally higher than the nation's average. The Bible Belt consists of much of the Southern United States.

I'm not just referring to Southern Baptists or the Megachurch group. The gal in the office next to mine goes to the same Catholic Church that I do, but you would not know it comparing our offices. I have one small icon (which I think is pretty) in my office. Hers definitely says 'Catholic.' Even the local police have regular times to sit with their lights on for 20 minutes to assist in traffic going into and out of numerous churches on Sunday, if they don’t have a traffic light. Up north, I’m only used to seeing taking up police time in this manner for funerals and such.

Megachurches, while located in every region of the country, is most prevalent in the South. (California has the greatest number of Megachurches by individual state.) Since Protestants are the predominant group in the Bible Belt, and in my experience I think of the 'personal Savior' ideology as associated with Protestants, I find the Megachurch concept at odds with that. Now, I may have things wrong, this is just my experience and opinion, but to me any church which has 5000+ people at one service would have a difficult time making any concept personal.

I have maintained my more northern, reserved approach to religion, but if a conversation is started I am more likely to participate now. I also have begun to join in church activities since I've come South, primarily the Homeless Ministry.