WI Louisiana as a rich state

I had the notion of pirate films being a staple instead of Westerns.
Don't forget, there was a time when the Southern was a common genre, & for that, N.O. would be about ideal.

As for making Louisiana richer, a few things come to mind. One, finding oil offshore sooner, or getting to it sooner, or both. Two, adding a Caribbean state (Puerto Rico? Cuba? Dominican Republic? Any two? All three?), to make N.O. a trade hub. Three (& more nearly ASB), have the War of 1812 go better for Britain, so Chicago ends up in Canada: that (ISTM) makes the Mississippi, hence N.O., more important to U.S. internal trade.
Hawaii is in the running for the poorest state too.
:eek::eek::confounded: All that beauty, all those magnificent beaches, the fabulous weather... That's criminal. (There's a reason "5-0" & "Magnum" filmed there; I can't help wonder why more TV shows don't. {Harmon finally did, with the new "NCIS" spinoff".:openedeyewink: })
 
Last edited:
I know the laws for contracts and everything in Louisiana are a bit different than the rest of the US, so would we say it is unlikely they can make it big with banking or professional services? Sure, some might think they could use it to get a foot in the door with Europe, but they have specialists like that already and I imagine the Roman Law used by some countries in Europe will be much like the French used in Francophonic parts of Europe. Almost completely foreign to the French communities in America who don’t do what the Belgians and Swiss did and go all in on Parisian French. Anyone got a good map showing how much of Louisiana is actually above water? Do we think if we get a lot of good levees all around the coast they can keep or reclaim more land or would that basically mean pouring all the money they get from oil in the Gulf (which causes more storms and erosions) and is basically something an oil fire with dry canvas filled with holes?
 
I don't think climate has anything to do with wealth. There are plenty of hot and rich and cold and poor countries. Anyways, to answer this question, getting rid of Jim Crow would be the best way to do it.
 
It's interesting how we measure things. Louisiana's per capita GDP is substantially higher than Great Britain's - but I don't think anyone would dispute the idea that Louisiana is poorer than Great Britain!
 
It's interesting how we measure things. Louisiana's per capita GDP is substantially higher than Great Britain's - but I don't think anyone would dispute the idea that Louisiana is poorer than Great Britain!
I would dispute that idea.
 
Not sure if it’s been mentioned yet but keeping New Orleans more relevant for travel and shipping might help as well, on top of what some of the other posters here have said. The other major factor is not having the most commercially important city built in a bowl on top of a swamp, next to two large bodies of water. Keep in mind, Galveston was Texas’ major Gulf city until it got hit by a hurricane and flooded. Houston just picked up the remnants and filled the gap.

The video below gives a good idea as to what I’m getting at. The short version is that, when railroads and highways went in, the river stopped being as important and the money left with it. When the hurricanes hit, the population left too.

 
Keep in mind, Galveston was Texas’ major Gulf city until it got hit by a hurricane and flooded. Houston just picked up the remnants and filled the gap.
Not really. Houston was clearly rising before the 1900 Hurricane, which was more of a nail in the coffin than the actual cause of death. The fundamental issue was and is that Galveston has a rather limited amount of space for further development and that, importantly for the time, Houston was a railway junction and Galveston wasn't (unsurprisingly). The hurricane just sped things up a little.
 

JWQ

Banned
For New Orleans prosperity to continue, you need 1 of these two options.

1 for the American civil war not to happen, which butterflied away much of the Mississippi River trade and caused a tremendous southern depression


Option 2 is to have the south win the American civil war, allowing permanent free trade for the great city. The south didn’t have much industry or large financial institutions, but New Orleans proved the exception. The city’s industrial capacity could have been much more significant during the war, and the factories could have flourished had it stayed in the south’s hands longer. If European intervention occurred in 62 or even the city with virtually the only extreme industrial capacity (if you don’t count thebunion in St. Louis, Louisville, Kentucky, or Baltimore ), then the city would likely we see much investment as the south would be a proxy to the united states.

After the war, the CSA will have to solve the loss of river trade as railroads are replacing the steamboat. The solution offers all states suffering from lack of river trade to join the CSA where railroad tracks are inferior to the north; this works better if the north has high protectionism against the south. A free trade agreement between north and south would work much better for New Orleans, where neither nation had to pay tariffs to improve each other’s relationships. It would probably still be advantageous if you were to urge peaceful referendums to the states southern portion said they wish to belong to the confederacy in exchange allow other areas such as east Tennessee to be allowed to separate. The south should also construct a railway between New Orleans and Southern California to harness the pacific trade as the gateway to the southwest.

. The confederacy had an expansionist agenda of the golden circle in and it is in a prime position to aid Napolean the 3rds empire due to new Orleans strategic position. It is possible that the south expansion would escalate the gulf state trade and Napolean the 3rd hoped for central America to be under the french economic heal allow these dreams look beneficial to new Orleans.

Napoleon’s third hope to ally with the confederacy New Orleans is in top shape for the emperors’ aid after the war. With the south keeping slavery as it was during the antebellum years, the cold fact remains their economy won’t be destroyed, Such As abolition. Napoleon the third is a man most likely to invest in the great city, encouraging French companies to invest in the city and its areas.

With New Orleans being able to retain its prosperity, this will mean massive work projects for the city dealing with drainage and flooding, including plumbing. In addition, the principal city was one of the first major cities to receive electricity ⚡️ in 1882.

The CSA financial stock market would be in New Orleans, such as the cotton exchange and a healthier southern economy means a more enjoyable, more expensive World Cotton Centennial 1884.The city prospered before the civil war and it was one of the relatively few areas in the united states where sugar can be grown ina ideal climate

Despite severe financial issues, the fair did a surprisingly good job attracting visitors and providing attractions.
 
Last edited:

JWQ

Banned
Yellow fever is also another factor that slowed down New Orleans economic growth but the same is true with the rest of the south.

so whatever the point of dieversions it should be known that once it is discovered that yellow fever is from mosquitoes life expectancy‘s and economies will improve

it is siad that the mosquito is the state of Louisiana’s bird
 
Last edited:

JWQ

Banned
I don't think climate has anything to do with wealth. There are plenty of hot and rich and cold and poor countries. Anyways, to answer this question, getting rid of Jim Crow would be the best way to do it.
I don't understand how him Jim crow has much to do with it. Racism was if not is a national issue.
 
Top