Two tired, while you make a good point, it hardly explains the situation.
Er, what "situation" was I trying to explain?
It's a complicated socioeconomic issue.
It certainly can be. Depending on how it is defined and how many facts are hidden or subverted.
Southern states have the highest rates of poverty. How much higher would the poverty rates be without all of those military base jobs?
This is like the "How long have you been beating your wife?", argument. Where the assumption is buried within the question. However, it is still only conjecture based on what ifs and supposition. The bases HAVE been placed there, and the population, indigenous or imported, adapted to what they were subjected to endure. One could also ask how much higher the poverty rates would have been if all the military base jobs were comprised of only southern locals. Couldn't be that northern imports drove locals into poverty, could it?
The south's climate naturally has a much longer growing season for a wider variety of plant species, making it more suitable for raising crops on sparsely peopled large land areas. The north has long periods where the only suitable production is inside factories and office buildings. I don't think it is a coincidence that wall street investment, banking, and insurance companies are primarily located in the north where they pay minimum dollar for food products.
Further, it is easier to simply survive in warmer climates, without the risk of losing fingers and toes to frostbite. The south with it's warmer climate, allows those with less resources to survive through the seasons.
One might argue that the northerners have already killed off those locals that didn't pay the piper for their very survival during cold winters. Its the adapt or die scenario.
Also, there are some cultures that don't measure their self worth or fulfilling life enrichment based on wall street standards of the almighty dollar or having the most possessions that a consumer exploiting society constantly preaches as the essence of life itself.
Without all of those military jobs how much more assistance would they need?
They can grow more food, and year round, than the northern states can.
What is it they need from the North? An investment banker, perhaps? Paving supplies? Tourists?
We could also ask, without the military personnel garnered from those states, would there even be "wealthy" Northern states?
The south has the highest percentage of people on wellfare.
Can you quote a source for this claim?
The south has the least educated workforce.
Can you cite your sources for this conclusion?
