What would Illinois look like if the state wasn't broke/corrupt? (Chicago: real estate, crime)

[CCrest182]

So obviously Illinois is a very unfavorable place to live outside of the Chicago area (and for some people, even within the Chicago area). We have one of the worst pension crises in U.S. history, Chicago is on the verge of declaring bankruptcy (like Detroit did), and overall people are very pessimistic about this state's financial future.

Our roads also suck, schools in some places are underfunded, and COL is very high even downstate, making this not a very business friendly state compared to neighboring states in all directions.

And of course, this state has also become famous for spawning some of the most corrupt politicians in the country.

But what if Illinois was fiscally responsible? What if we weren't as corrupt as we are? What if we had politicians who actually balanced the state's budget? What would the state look like? What would the infrastructure from Chicago all the way down to Springfield look like? Would other Illinois cities be economic engines instead of only Chicagoland (and to a lesser extent, Champaign-Urbana)? Would we be a growing population state?

[MSchemist80]

Housing prices would be a lot higher, this would be a much more desirable place to move to, open a business, invest in real estate. The Chicago area could be a huge powerhouse for economic activity if the toxic fiscal and business climate weren't dragging it down. It could be exploding with growth like places in Colorado, Texas, Florida... Instead it is on a trajectory like Detroit for stagnation and decline.

[TheTimidBlueBars]

Rockford, Peoria, and the Quad Cities would still presumably be shrinking in population like most of the Rust Belt, but Springfield, with its many government jobs and having one of three branches of the flagship state university, would be growing. The Chicago area would be growing, but not that fast - the pension crisis was set in motion decades ago, and it's still a city with a lot of crime, weather that is not to most people's liking, and the mild stigma of being in the "Midwest" and not as culturally cool as a coastal city.

I imagine an Illinois with average levels of corruption being comparable to Ohio or Michigan in many ways.

[CCrest182]

Originally Posted by TheTimidBlueBars

Rockford, Peoria, and the Quad Cities would still presumably be shrinking in population like most of the Rust Belt, but Springfield, with its many government jobs and having one of three branches of the flagship state university, would be growing. The Chicago area would be growing, but not that fast - the pension crisis was set in motion decades ago, and it's still a city with a lot of crime, weather that is not to most people's liking, and the mild stigma of being in the "Midwest" and not as culturally cool as a coastal city.

I imagine an Illinois with average levels of corruption being comparable to Ohio or Michigan in many ways.

Interesting take, though the pension crisis is directly a result of the corruption of the city/state. In some ways, the crime could also be seen as a result of corruption. I'm moreso trying to imagine an Illinois that is genuinely a business friendly, not on the verge of bankruptcy, and overall more equivalent in reputation to the surrounding states like IA, IN, MI, and MO, instead of only being known for being a corrupt, overpriced/overtaxed place.

I'm actually most interested in what Peoria, Springfield, Rockford, and the Quad Cities would look like. On one hand, those cities would qualify as historically rust belt cities, and as a result would still be losing population anyways. On the other hand, you are seeing some booming populations in smaller cities in places like Indiana, Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconsin; almost certainly because of the business friendly, and relatively less corrupt reputation of the state compared to Illinois. Not only that, Peoria, Rockford, and the Quad Cities all have the natural beauty of having major rivers going through the cities, so that could definitely be seen as a business/development attraction.

The only "booming" metro outside of Chicago in Illinois is Champaign (which, considering Chicago is losing population, that actually makes it the only metro gaining population)

As for the weather and "not being on a coast", I also think this is sort of irrelevant. After all, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota are doing just fine, even though they have equally brutal, if not even more brutal winters. As for the coastal part, you're seeing a boom in population in many Midwestern and southern cities, so I also don't think that would play a role as much personally

[riffle]

Originally Posted by CCrest182

On the other hand, you are seeing some booming populations in smaller cities in places like Indiana, Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconsin; almost certainly because of the business friendly, and relatively less corrupt reputation of the state compared to Illinois.

Which smaller cities are you thinking of that are "booming" in other Midwest states?

[Cat777]

Originally Posted by riffle

Which smaller cities are you thinking of that are "booming" in other Midwest states?

I wouldn't call it booming, but Bloomington, Indiana is doing really well, gorgeous place to live too.

[CCrest182]

Originally Posted by riffle

Which smaller cities are you thinking of that are "booming" in other Midwest states?

Maybe booming was the wrong word, but many Midwestern cities are reversing historic trends and moving up in population; Bloomington, IN, Fort Wayne, Grand Rapids, Iowa City, Cedar Rapids, Lafayette/West Lafayette IN, even South Bend and Lansing MI are starting to see some growth.

And this is excluding the legitimately booming/growing population in larger cities like Madison, Indianapolis, Columbus, Minneapolis, Des Moines, Omaha, and Kansas City.

Compare that to population trends in Rockford, Peoria, Moline/Rock Island, and Springfield and you'll see the discrepancy between the cities in those states and the cities in Illinois.

[riffle]

https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/...html?src=bkmk#

Battle Creek, Bay City, Flint, Jackson, Midland, Monroe, Niles-Benton Harbor, Saginaw metros all lost population in Michigan. As did Kokomo, Michigan City, Muncie, Terre Haute in Indiana.

The toxic political climate and financial problems in Illinois can't help - but I doubt if Decatur, Peoria, Rockford, etc. would look all that different with improved state government. Economic and demographic birds of a feather flock together (which is why it's a pleasant surprise to see someplace like Fort Wayne buck the trend!)

[Maintainschaos]

Originally Posted by riffle

https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/...html?src=bkmk#

Battle Creek, Bay City, Flint, Jackson, Midland, Monroe, Niles-Benton Harbor, Saginaw metros all lost population in Michigan. As did Kokomo, Michigan City, Muncie, Terre Haute in Indiana.

The toxic political climate and financial problems in Illinois can't help - but I doubt if Decatur, Peoria, Rockford, etc. would look all that different with improved state government. Economic and demographic birds of a feather flock together (which is why it's a pleasant surprise to see someplace like Fort Wayne buck the trend!)

Yeah, these (Decatur, Peoria, Rockford) were all super industrial cities that have suffered from decades of manufacturing losses and population losses.

Springfield shouldn't be lumped with them, as it's now mostly white collar gov't and healthcare employment as the main job base and, up until very recently, was and has been growing 5-10% population every decade. It also doesn't help that so many state government jobs that should be located in the capital are located in Chicago...

[CCrest182]

Originally Posted by riffle

https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/...html?src=bkmk#

Battle Creek, Bay City, Flint, Jackson, Midland, Monroe, Niles-Benton Harbor, Saginaw metros all lost population in Michigan. As did Kokomo, Michigan City, Muncie, Terre Haute in Indiana.

The toxic political climate and financial problems in Illinois can't help - but I doubt if Decatur, Peoria, Rockford, etc. would look all that different with improved state government. Economic and demographic birds of a feather flock together (which is why it's a pleasant surprise to see someplace like Fort Wayne buck the trend!)

Right, but the *only* MSA in IL that saw growth was Champaign. The Chicago area, and every other small town lost population.

Compare that to surrounding states which have multiple growing smaller cities, and you again will see a difference.