On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Gray, Tom wrote:

> It obviously takes a tough house to brave very many northern winters, but
> that doesn't take into account the wear and tear factor of southern heat and
> humidity, etc.   But - possibly even more important than weather would be
> regional attitudes toward permanency in dwellings.

Certainly cultural factors are likely to be important, and often trump the
local physical reality (like green lawns in Phoenix, or the low rate of
house fires in Japan).

It is also possible that average quality of construction was lower in the
South before 1940 due to poverty alone, and that an increase in affluence
also leads to lower retention as people replace cheap houses with better
ones.

I didn't (and don't) have income data from 1940 to include in the
analysis.  But it certainly appears that poverty (e.g. in Maine) or an
increase in affluence (e.g. in Connecticut) did not have a negative impact
on retention in the northern areas.

I tend to agree with those who argue that the South has a distinctive
culture which leads to different behavior and hence social statistics,
etc.

---
Lawrence Kestenbaum, [log in to unmask]
The Political Graveyard, http://politicalgraveyard.com