Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ReactsWithWords t1_j0t40mi wrote

Worcester County and everything directly north of Rhode Island Central Mass. West of that is Western Mass, east of that is Eastern Mass.

12

canadacorriendo785 t1_j0uvcsr wrote

If argue from a socio-economic standpoint Central Mass doesn't really exist. Worcester and Fitchburg are the outskirts of the Boston area and all the development that's happened in those cities plus the increasing suburban development in surrounding towns is due to proximity to Boston.

Once you get West of Worcester the circumstances change dramatically and you have Holyoke and North Adams etc that have an entirely different set of circumstances.

−1

meggiemay4749 t1_j0v7au5 wrote

Being from central mass I gotta disagree. Especially from a socioeconomic standpoint. And a sociocultural standpoint. It’s the Midwest of Massachusetts.

4

canadacorriendo785 t1_j0v9owx wrote

I'm not telling you Worcester is exactly the same as central Boston but I am telling you its a lot closer to being Lowell than it is Holyoke and that has everything to do with Boston. Everything within 50 miles, from Providence to Worcester to Manchester, NH is really still the Boston area.

0

meggiemay4749 t1_j0vam5o wrote

Worcester isn’t anything like Lowell either though. It’s its own thang baby. I’m just saying central mass exists, and it exists especially from a socioeconomic standpoint.

2

SteveMcTravel t1_j0vhojq wrote

The thing about Worcester is that Worcester is actually closer to being Worcester than it is to being Lowell or Holyoke or Boston. These are all different places. I checked on my map. I’ve been staring at it now for an hour trying to make sense of it all. I’m going slightly mad.

2

SteveMcTravel t1_j0vgv97 wrote

I’d argue that all state and county lines are merely a construct and that in fact we are all flying through space on a spinning orb that is mostly water. Also, conversely, Worcester and Fitchburg are outskirts of the Boston area? Saugus is an outskirt of the Boston area. Fitchburg is barely on the same planet. How far does the Boston area extend in your universe?

2

canadacorriendo785 t1_j0viyrp wrote

The parochialism of people in New England is exhausting. Every town within 50 miles of Boston is fundamentally defined by its relationship with the Boston area.

20 of the 25 poorest towns in the state are west of Worcester. The overwhelming majority of remaining vacant former industrial space in Massachusetts is west of Worcester. The towns with the largest and continuing population loss are west of Worcester, while places like Worcester, Lawrence, Lowell etc are all set to surpass or have already surpassed their historic population highs. Rockingham and Hillsborough counties NH are far and away the wealthiest counties in the state.

Every piece of data we have points to the Boston area extending about 50 miles from the Downtown core, which is completely in line with major cities around the country. Once you get outside of that orbit circumstances change dramatically.

−1

meggiemay4749 t1_j0vm37b wrote

You are reading far, far too much into this. When it comes down to it, this question is about geography. We don’t need a lecture on economics or population density or whatever the fuck this is. Central mass exists. It is fundamentally different than both the Boston area and western mass in a geographical and socioeconomic sense. For the love of god you sound so pompous.

2

canadacorriendo785 t1_j0vrtdj wrote

I dont understand how it's pompous to share factual information related to the question of if Western Mass begins west of Worcester or at the county line.

−1

meggiemay4749 t1_j0vsnc4 wrote

I mean it’s kinda all in the tone but whatever. You do you, I suppose.

2

canadacorriendo785 t1_j0vukb5 wrote

I'm not trying to be a dick I just genuinely think it's important. That everyone in the state views their town as this little fiefdom disconnected from the larger region completely handicaps our ability to address all these huge issues we have. If you care about how much you pay for housing, public transportation, public education you should care about what I'm trying to say.

−1

meggiemay4749 t1_j0vvgke wrote

I don’t want to continue having this argument with you. Christ almighty. And again, this isn’t about towns this is about regions and geography and nobody is looking to get into a fucking economic debate or whatever the fuck kind of debate you’re trying to have. Please kindly lay off.

2

SteveMcTravel t1_j0w1ji3 wrote

But what about if the state of Massachusetts is long and can easily be divided into thirds and therefor we divide it into Western, Central and Eastern? Does that not count for anything because there are people who live in Fitchburg but work in Boston? There are people in southern New Hampshire who work in Boston. Is New Hampshire part of the Boston area? By this logic all of New England is Massachusetts and New England is part of New York City. Maybe it is, I don’t know. I’m not even from here. I live in Regina, Saskatchewan, which is the Worcester of Canada.

2

SteveMcTravel t1_j0vnz0z wrote

Ok but who decided that we only divide up states by socioeconomics? What is The Cape? What is the North Shore? What is the South Shore? That last one is an actual question, I genuinely don’t know. Also there are people who live outside of Worcester who commute to Worcester for work. It’s the heart of central Massachusetts, a place that exists. Look at an electoral map of Massachusetts and note how often there is a big red streak sticking out right down the middle, because the culture and people there are different from the urban and suburban people of eastern Massachusetts and the old hippies in Western Mass. There are a lot more ways to divide up a state than socioeconomics and if you don’t enjoy the parochial New Englander’s views on this I dare say you have come to the wrong place, dear boy. Pip pip, cheerio!

2