Is Chicago Underpopulated? (Detroit: neighborhoods, living in, housing)

[CitizenJoe]

From an article appearing in the Wall Street Journal from earlier this year:
"A larger-than-expected exodus over the past 10 years reduced the population of Chicago to a level not seen in nearly a century. The U.S. Census Bureau reported Tuesday that during the decade ended in 2010, Chicago's population fell 6.9% to 2,695,598 people, fewer than the 2.7 million reported back in 1920."
Chicago Population Sinks to 1920 Level - WSJ.com

The article goes on to note that Chicago's population peaked at 3.62 million people in 1950. In other words, there used to be a third more people living in the city. I realize that desirable neighborhoods are still fully populated (true?), but large swaths of the other Chicago now look like Detroit, where not even illegal aliens dare try to settle, even though there is plenty of physical space for them.

Is this population decline good for Chicago? Was a population of 3.6 million too many? Is 2.7 million too few? What's the optimal population for a city Chicago's physical size?

[j_cat]

There are so many factors to consider. For one thing, the newer type of "city person" tends to have a much smaller household size than previous types. So that's a loss in population without any loss in occupancy (or wealth). The list goes on and on.

[Irishtom29]

Originally Posted by CitizenJoe

What's the optimal population for a city Chicago's physical size?

That depends on how many jobs are available. There are less jobs in the city than there used to be.

[Manigault]

Originally Posted by CitizenJoe

I realize that desirable neighborhoods are still fully populated (true?), but large swaths of the other Chicago now look like Detroit, where not even illegal aliens dare try to settle, even though there is plenty of physical space for them.

How do you know?

It is advisable to avoid commenting on complicated-issue threads started by single-digit posters.

[CitizenJoe]

I know what the current and peak population numbers are for Chicago because they are stated in the Wall Street Journal article I cited. I know what Chicago was like when it was more heavily populated because that was the city in which I grew up. I know that large parts of the city now have an empty feel because I still have family in the city, visit it and have driven around to see such things for myself. I know that these empty quarters have not been repopulated by immigrants (typically from Mexico) because, well, an empty lot is an empty lot, and an abandoned building is an abandoned building.

[RingWalk]

What neighborhoods in Chicago are empty or at extremely low occupancy? I have never seen/heard that before. I am very familiar with Detroit.

[It'sAutomatic]

Though much of the city is intact, there's no question that certain areas of Chicago have seen dramatic population loss, and I am referring to the near south and near west sides.

[Jandur]

I wouldn't say its under-populated by any means. It's shrank over the past 10-20 years but a lot of major cities have, especially in the eastern half of the country.

[RingWalk]

I was referring to the contention that Chicago has neighborhoods that are virtually abandoned, like Detroit has. Which neighborhoods?

[Irishtom29]

Originally Posted by RingWalk

What neighborhoods in Chicago are empty or at extremely low occupancy? I have never seen/heard that before. I am very familiar with Detroit.

North Lawndale and Garfield Park for instance. Look at Bing Maps birdseye views of those neighborhoods and you'll see lots of praries where there once was housing. Not as bad as Detroit but quite disconcerting to old time West Siders.