How did the New England and Southern colonies compare?

Question

Which was more successful in terms of:

the lives of their people

the health of their people

the growth of the colonies

Why?

Answer 1

The North was superior in most things. The agrarian South was good for wealthy plantation owners, but not really anyone else. The industrial North had a higher overall wealth, and consequently standard of living, and the industry encouraged immigration.

I'd say the North offered better quality of life, and had faster growth, for sure. But as to which had healthier citizens, that's a bit more debatable. The northerners would tend to have more money, but perform more dangerous work.

Answer 2

much of the difference was related to climate.

In the south, a longer growing season meant more food could be produced, and relations with the natives were much stronger than in the north.  also, because the north was settled by puritans, they had a lower birth rate than in the south.  the south also had lots of mosquitoes, which carried malaria and other diseases, reducing life expectancy. initially, the northern states carried the majority of the european population that had migrated, simply because it was a shorter sea journey.  

one interesting point about contrasts of qualities of life didn't become apparent until the mid 1800's.  believe it or not, the average quality of life for a slave in the south was far better than it was for factory workers in the north~those same people who represented the core of the abolitionist movement.  they rationalised that if they were free, and life was so bad for them, then it must be worse for those who were not free in the south.