Chicago in 25 Years: World Player or Flyover Rust Museum? (Cicero: house, neighborhoods)

[Drover]

Originally Posted by jimbo13

you never even lived in the city? your opinion is pretty much moot as far as i can tell, if you're from the 'burbs. all that for nothing, haha...

This isn't really fair. A major city, at least in U.S. form, is not an entity unto itself. It's part of a greater metropolitan area, albeit the center of it. The vitality of a city and its suburbs are intertwined and draw resources from each other. The fate of one depends on the fate of the other; and in fact, it has often been the suburbs that have sustained a city during hard times by providing a place for the city's resource pool to live and safely raise families. Detroit, for instance, would be in even worse shape were it not for its surrounding metropolitan area; it would absolutely cease to exist as a business center. But any way you look at it, the interactions of the whole metropolitan area are important, and a person's legitimate claim to be a part of it is not determined by where the city border stops and suburbia starts.

[UnderTheLiveOaks]

Originally Posted by Drover

This isn't really fair. A major city, at least in U.S. form, is not an entity unto itself. It's part of a greater metropolitan area, albeit the center of it. The vitality of a city and its suburbs are intertwined and draw resources from each other. The fate of one depends on the fate of the other; and in fact, it has often been the suburbs that have sustained a city during hard times by providing a place for the city's resource pool to live and safely raise families. Detroit, for instance, would be in even worse shape were it not for its surrounding metropolitan area; it would absolutely cease to exist as a business center. But any way you look at it, the interactions of the whole metropolitan area are important, and a person's legitimate claim to be a part of it is not determined by where the city border stops and suburbia starts.

This is a great point. Still, I'll stick up for Jimbo a little by saying that someone who has never lived in an urban center trashing that urban center isn't entirely fair either. Criticism of the 'burbs or the region, sure. But if your exposure to a place is limited to short visits and regional news blurbs, you are bound to have a skewed view.

[oakparkdude]

Looks like the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) is on an acquisition binge.

CME ties future to Nymex buyout -- chicagotribune.com

Chicago should continue to be a leader in the financial derivatives market for a long time to come. The continued growth of the financial industry in Chicago will be a big boost to the overall Chicagoland economy. These wealthy financial workers are the type of people who will continue to buy multimillion dollar high rise condos (Chicago Spire, etc).

[desert student]

Originally Posted by Nafster

I have issues with much of your response, and here they are in organized fashion

a) I'm not going to tell you whether or not you hate Chicago. You are the only one who knows what you like and what you don't. From your posts, you have seriously negative and amazingly odd comments about the city (things I've never heard from even the most insistent Chi-haters), so I presumed you had some sort of nub with the city.

b) I'm sorry that us Chicagoans love our city so much. If you'd like, you can bring the same issue up with the New Yorkers (who have a good reason to also love their city), the Los Angeles folks, the Houstonians, and yes even people in Phoenix who do the same thing!


c) Yeah, Chicago has lots of problems, I'll give you that. And your honest for admitting that other cities suffer the same fate as Chicago does. But honestly, some of the "problems" you listed are not some of the ones that Chicago stands out on. Chicago does not have as huge of an "urban sprawl" problem as Atlanta, Los Angeles, Phoenix, or Houston does. The suburbs are expanding and sprawling, true, but the city I find to be very minimally sprawled. Also, your "strip malls" statement, I hope you agree, is strictly a suburban problem, no? Are there more strip malls in an older city like Chicago than there are in a newly developed city like Phoenix?

d) Crime - Bleehhhh. Won't even bother with that one. Good luck trying to avoid cities with crime in your life.

e) I never challenged Houston's significance. Houston is a fine city that may actually beat Chicago's population. It's no problem. But population does not define metropolitan area, as well as how good a city is. Just keep that in mind.

Your post is very confusing. What are you trying to say?
a) Name one thing that I listed that most people don't have a problem with in Chicago.

b) Yes, I'm quite sure others love their repective cities as well. ????

c)Well most people on this forum from Chicago seem to be able to switch between the suburbs and the city as often as they like and whenever it is convienent for them. EX: (attacker) "Chicago has tons of crime!" (defender) "Oh, well our suburbs are some of the safest places in the country." Sound familiar? So if we are going to lump Chicagoland together, than I think it is safe to make the remarks I did. Chicago is sprawled out just as badly as anything in Atlanta or Phoenix. I lived in the western burbs, and can tell you first hand, that the cookie-cutter sprawl is just as bad, if not worse, than anything in Phoenix.

d) Again, we will just visit "la-la" land some more shall we? "Bleehhh. Won't even bother with that one." This speaks volumes!! YO! Snap out of it folks! Chicago was murder capitol USA a few years back!!! New York is almost three times the size of Chicago, and has a crime rating that is FAR below the Windy City. Even LA has less! What? Chicago wants to be compared to those cities and play with the "big boys" then it needs to step up and get a clue. Whenever crime is brought up, Chicago falls into the shadows of the conversation and says,"Well, we are doing better than Houston!" Ok, so now it is ok to compare Chicago to smaller cities, but any other time isn't??

e)I think you definition of good is far different than others. Let me remind you that Houston now is more of an economic leader than Chicago. Just because a city is "urban" does not make it a great city either. Just keep that in mind.

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by desert student

I lived in the western burbs, and can tell you first hand, that the cookie-cutter sprawl is just as bad, if not worse, than anything in Phoenix

No, no, no. Not even close. Most suburbs here very old, and have old cores with lots of old homes (read: NOT COOKIE CUTTER). While the outer expanding areas might be sprawlish, there are still tons of old homes in the area to choose from. You dont get that in Phoenix's burbs. You also dont get to choose from dozens upon dozens of architectural styles in PHX either, which is why all the suburbs look absolutely identical for the most part. And another thing to consider is that PHX (actually AZ as a whole) has less than 1/2 the population of Chicagoland, yet is spread out in an area much larger. Dont think for one second that Chicago's sprawl can be compared to PHX's vast and boring wasteland suburbs.

And dont discuss crime either. Chicago has cleaned up immensely, while PHX continues to plunge downhill. Not only is PHX consistently rated in the "most dangerous places" list, but AZ and NV are ranked as the most dangerous states in the USA. Ouch.

[UnderTheLiveOaks]

Originally Posted by desert student

c)Well most people on this forum from Chicago seem to be able to switch between the suburbs and the city as often as they like and whenever it is convienent for them. EX: (attacker) "Chicago has tons of crime!" (defender) "Oh, well our suburbs are some of the safest places in the country." Sound familiar? So if we are going to lump Chicagoland together, than I think it is safe to make the remarks I did. Chicago is sprawled out just as badly as anything in Atlanta or Phoenix. I lived in the western burbs, and can tell you first hand, that the cookie-cutter sprawl is just as bad, if not worse, than anything in Phoenix.

Having grown up in areas that are truly dealing with sprawl in urban as well as suburban areas, I can honestly say that the city of Chicago is planned, compact, and urbanized in a way many sunbelt cities are not. If we're comparing apples to apples, the city of Chicago does a much better job of managing sprawl than the cities of, say, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, etc.

d) Again, we will just visit "la-la" land some more shall we? "Bleehhh. Won't even bother with that one." This speaks volumes!! YO! Snap out of it folks! Chicago was murder capitol USA a few years back!!! New York is almost three times the size of Chicago, and has a crime rating that is FAR below the Windy City. Even LA has less! What? Chicago wants to be compared to those cities and play with the "big boys" then it needs to step up and get a clue. Whenever crime is brought up, Chicago falls into the shadows of the conversation and says,"Well, we are doing better than Houston!" Ok, so now it is ok to compare Chicago to smaller cities, but any other time isn't??

Crime stats (meaningful ones, anyway) are per capita. The size of the city is irrelevent.

e)I think you definition of good is far different than others. Let me remind you that Houston now is more of an economic leader than Chicago. Just because a city is "urban" does not make it a great city either. Just keep that in mind.

Houston more of an economic leader than Chicago? Got numbers for that? Here's an Economist article from March of 2007 that estimates the top 15 city economies in the world in 2020. City economies | Economist.com 2005 rankings are also given.

The top 5 are Tokyo, NYC, LA, London, and Chicago. Other US cities on the list include Philly, DC, Boston, and DFW. Houston doesn't appear.

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by desert student

e)Let me remind you that Houston now is more of an economic leader than Chicago.

Really? Based on local GDP, I would beg to differ...

METRO ECONOMIES
Gross domestic product in billions of dollars by metro area for 2005:
------------------------------------
New York $1,056.4
Los Angeles $632.4
Chicago $461.4
Washington, D.C. $347.6
Houston $316.3
Dallas-Fort Worth $315.5
Philadelphia $295.2
San Francisco $268.3
Boston $261.1
Atlanta $242.4

[NYrules]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

I know the people who hang out on the Chicago board are probably a bit biased, but what do you think the future of our city is? Have mergers, job loss, population loss, and the new dominance of the Sun Belt sealed Chicago's fate as a second-rate town of the future? Or will Chicago continue to be world player into the next century?

(See the poll above)

As much as I don't want to rant on how wonderful Daley is, I will give his corrupt _ _ _ credit where it's due. Chicago looks better than it ever has, is growing rapidly (for a midwestern city), crime is dropping (gangs are being forced out to the burbs), more high rises are in the works or are under way than pretty much ever before, roads are being widened/signals are being coordinated and synchronized better to accomodate future increases in traffic, litter and abandoned buildings are being cleaned up, more parks/trees/overall apperance of the city is being cleaned up, and much much more is going on, so I really don't see Chicago slipping away to becoming the next Detroit anytime soon. All we need to do is figure out a way to improve our weather and we will be the draw of the world.

[oakparkdude]

Originally Posted by NYrules

All we need to do is figure out a way to improve our weather and we will be the draw of the world.

Just wait for the polar ice caps to melt. NYC and Florida will be underwater and most other sunbelt cities will have too inhospitable weather and/or no drinkable water. ( only partially joking)

[NYrules]

Originally Posted by sukwoo

Just wait for the polar ice caps to melt. NYC and Florida will be underwater and most other sunbelt cities will have too inhospitable weather and/or no drinkable water. ( only partially joking)

Ain't gonna happen in my life or my kid's lives. I could care less.