Whats Chicago Suburbs like? Coming from a Detroiter.

[Shrewsbury Road]

Originally Posted by M TYPE X

But it won't be, either in Metro Detroit or Greater Cleveland (from the former, lived in the latter as well) or half a bizillion other midwestern places (hello Milwaukee and St Louis). Indianapolis and Minneapolis are the only major midwestern metros outside of Chicago that look like they have a future.

Read Madigan's "Global Chicago" book. It talks in detail about how Chicago changed from Midwest rustbelt malaise to the city it is today.

As for the suburbs, I'm from the Rochester Hills/Troy/Bloomfield/Farmington area in Metro Detroit. I like Naperville, Glen Ellyn, Schaumburg/Hoffman Estates/Palatine, and all of the North Shore, from Evanston up to Lake Bluff and inland to Lincolnshire, Riverwoods, Deerfield, Northbrook, Glenview, Libertyville, Mundelein, and so on. There's a lot of options.

I'll assume those Chicago Suburbs are upscale like in those areas of Oakland County. As for Detroit I believe it does have a future and will in time be the next Chicago or perhaps better, and I'm not just being optimistic.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by Shrewsbury Road

As for Detroit I believe it does have a future and will in time be the next Chicago or perhaps better, and I'm not just being optimistic.

Hmmmm... I don't see it ever happening. Detroit is just too far down a different path at this point.

[ihynes]

When we were house shopping here, our realtor and her broker were transplanted Detroiters. They love Detroit, but just couldn't get careers going there. Although realty isn't going anywhere now . . .

[hsw]

Funny thing is Detroit's suburb-based economy, which dates from '70s when many lived in Bloomfield Hills and commuted to jobs in other suburbs like Troy, etc is replicated in any modern (or "old") US region

Almost 50% of hedge funds in NYC region are based in suburban Greenwich, about 30 mis N of NYC, for lower income tax rates of CT and close to homes of many HF execs

Silicon Valley is car-centric suburban sprawl, stretching 40 mis from Redwood Shores to SanJose, but again close to suburbs where most engineers and execs prefer to reside

And in newer regions like Dallas, major companies like Exxon prefer suburban HQ campuses in suburbs like Irving, near the suburbs where most execs and workers prefer to reside

Cities like Chic are great for high-income yuppies for great restaurants/bars and proximity to other yuppies, but most companies tend to prefer suburbs, even those in high-IQ, high-income industries like finance or tech

And I don't buy the nonsensical mass transit argument, as many of the well-paid yuppies in Manhattan or Chic or SF prefer to drive themselves around town to office or to dinner or to run errands; those who can't afford to drive around a costly city prob should work at offices in Naperville or Deerfield (or suburban Dallas/Houston) where parking is free and cheap exurbs are closer

[Anthera]

Originally Posted by hsw

Funny thing is Detroit's suburb-based economy, which dates from '70s when many lived in Bloomfield Hills and commuted to jobs in other suburbs like Troy, etc is replicated in any modern (or "old") US region

Almost 50% of hedge funds in NYC region are based in suburban Greenwich, about 30 mis N of NYC, for lower income tax rates of CT and close to homes of many HF execs

Silicon Valley is car-centric suburban sprawl, stretching 40 mis from Redwood Shores to SanJose, but again close to suburbs where most engineers and execs prefer to reside

And in newer regions like Dallas, major companies like Exxon prefer suburban HQ campuses in suburbs like Irving, near the suburbs where most execs and workers prefer to reside

Cities like Chic are great for high-income yuppies for great restaurants/bars and proximity to other yuppies, but most companies tend to prefer suburbs, even those in high-IQ, high-income industries like finance or tech

And I don't buy the nonsensical mass transit argument, as many of the well-paid yuppies in Manhattan or Chic or SF prefer to drive themselves around town to office or to dinner or to run errands; those who can't afford to drive around a costly city prob should work at offices in Naperville or Deerfield (or suburban Dallas/Houston) where parking is free and cheap exurbs are closer

Good post. The difference with Detroit is that the downtown provides no cirtical mass. There is no reason to locate in the Detroit region as opposed to anywhere else. The high salaries and benefits demanded by union workers are also a disincentive to employers. Not to mention the crime rate. Or the high taxes. Or the segregation.