Thanks for the followup, and the criticism. I always appreciate a healthy discussion and critique. I re-read the post, and definitely agree — there are lots of sweeping, poorly considered generalizations about the midwest it it. Certainly within the bounds of the lightly edited travel logs I usually write, but that's no excuse, even if they're emotionally sound. I regret the characterizations, if only because they don't like my emotional experiences to other non-emotional sources of evidence. It'd be interesting to have a discussion about that evidence, as there are very real differences in how the midwest and pacific northwest approach quality of life at the margins.

We'll have to disagree about zero sum though. The U.S. has plenty of collective resources to make every town and city, no matter how big or small, livable, sustainable, loving places. We don't use those resources right now — we mostly let the wealthy keep them, and invest the collective resources we do gather on non-sustainable, oppressive infrastructure like roads for cars. And Detroit and its suburbs are objectively some of the biggest offenders of that in the U.S., in addition to states like Florida and Texas. Seattle, for all of its flaws, is one of the few places in the nation putting real resources into resisting those unsustainable models, as far behind as it is from other regions in the world.