Why are there so many threads trashing South Side and West Side neighborhoods? (Chicago: real estate, lofts)

[LakeShoreSoxGo]

Originally Posted by Drover

I gave no indication that I meant my response as an all-inclusive solution. In fact it was an attempt to add complexity to the somewhat simplistic "fix the schools" solution. My point was to say "it's not that easy."

Well that is simply my misinterp. I was under the false impression that this was a purposed solution, albeit not all-inclusive. But yes I agree with you...'fixing the schools'... 'not that easy'.

[LakeShoreSoxGo]

Originally Posted by Humboldt1

The west side was affected very badly by the decline in the manufacturing sector. I think blaming the republicans is folly but that is to be debated on another thread as I know people on here like to see anything controversial or political get moved to the political forum. Democrats were involved in the decline of manufacturing as well but the biggest culprit in all of this is globalization, which is a force that can't be stopped.

NAFTA was a major culprit as it led to the shutting down of Brach's. Essentially you have 4-5,000 manufacturing jobs shifted to Mexico. Now, the plant is being razed to make way for get this, 300-500 warehouse jobs for the two massive warehouses that are planned to be built on the former site. I say that the warehouse jobs are better than nothing but clearly not going to generate the sort of tax base that Brach"s did.

Chicago is doing better than say Detroit or Cleveland as we do have a strong service economy, but unfortunately service jobs don't pay as well as manufacturing jobs. I guess that is just life. The glory days of manufacturing may be behind us.

Hopefully, the increase in fuel costs and the further gentrification of our inner core in Chicago will encourage more and more yuppies to live in the city instead of taking the train from places like arlington heights or naperville. Of course, they will move once they have kids to avoid raising them in CPS, but hopefully Chicago can keep them for a few years prior to their kids being enrolled in public school. With people having children later and later, this might be 15-20 years of living in the city for a recent college grad, so not bad.

I pretty much whole-heartedly disagree with your first paragraph, but thats okay we skip the Poli


Call me crazy, but it seems a good deal of Chicago has improved for the better since Clinton's signing of NAFTA.


I'm not sure where you are going with your last paragraph, but I feel whole-sale gentrification of the city will not solve the issues regarding the west side. If anything it will aplify the problems.

[Drover]

Well I don't want to get too political, but to blame NAFTA for the manufacturing decline is incredibly short-sighted. For one, it's easy for us in the North to look around and believe that manufacturing is going straight to Hell all over the country. But the simple truth is that there has been far, far more displacement of manufacturing within the nation's domestic boundaries -- namely from the north to the south -- than there has been from the U.S. to other nations.

But more broadly, the manufacturing employment sector in the U.S. had been in secular decline for decades before NAFTA was ever even debated in Congress. It's currently in secular decline worldwide. If indeed this is something to which one must assign blame, then blame automation and mechanization -- though I'd no more assign "blame" to these forces than I'd assign "blame" to those very same forces that reduced the agricultural employment sector from 70% of the workforce at the beginning of the 20th century to 2% by the end of the century. The truth is that even though manufacturing employment has declined substantially, our manufacturing output has actually increased.

[Humboldt1]

Talk to the people who live near the former Brach's site and those who used to work there. NAFTA destroyed this area. There is really no debate to be had on this.

I work in commercial banking with a lot of tool and die guys who went out of business or who had to seriously change as their jobs first went to Mexico and now China and India. Some of these same jobs that went to Mexico were lost to even cheaper labor markets.

I am not against NAFTA, however as I am a proponent of free trade and believe in efficiencies that it creates. Tariffs and quotas are not something I support, whether it is to prop up the domestic sugar cane or wool industry (textiles too) or manufacturing (including auto).

It just goes back to if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. If you aren't efficient and making money you shouldn't be in business. The same is to be said of employees. If you aren't adding value to your organization, you should not be employed or should be paid what you are worth regarding revenue generation for your firm. Clearly, this doesn't often happen in real life, but it is the ideal. If you can't play in the big leagues, perhaps you should find a space where you can play. Many niche manfacturers have done this, specializing in small batch orders and those requiring high levels of tolerance that have yet to be replicated in China or US defense jobs, which can only be performed in the US.

Many of the manufacturing companies, including, Brach's were not as efficient as they could have been. Thus, when Mexico opened up with cheap labor via NAFTA, all the jobs went there and a west side Chicago neighborhood was decimated. I blame the markets and just life, both of which aren't always fair.

[Drover]

I'd be willing to bet that sugar tariffs had more to do with Brach's decision to move its operations than NAFTA.

Furthermore, the West Side was already in very sorry shape before NAFTA was ever conceived. Brach didn't shut down its Chicago operation until, what, 2001 or something? If anything, the West side has actually improved quite a bit since NAFTA was passed, though not because of NAFTA.

[Humboldt1]

Drover,

I did a loan a few years ago to a candy distributor in Elk Grove so I am very familiar with Brach's. Sugar Cane and the tariffs imposed upon it was a huge determinant in their decision, but NAFTA just gave them the excuse to move their production to Mexico, which is located within spitting distance of the US.

[Humboldt1]

Here is some background info on Brach's from Crain's:

ML Realty Partners LLC of Itasca recently closed on the purchase of the dilapidated seven-story factory at 401 N. Cicero Ave., which employed as many as 3,500 people in the late '80s but has stood vacant since Brach's closed it four years ago.

ML Realty's $42.3-million plan calls for demolishing the old candy plant and constructing a 500,000-square-foot building to accommodate as many as three tenants that would use it as a distribution center, likely for consumer products destined for city dwellers.


mod cut: removed copyrighted text

Chicago Business News, Analysis & Articles | Brach's factory to get new life | Crain's


Here is another interesting article (NOTE it is from US sugar lobby):

[LEFT]When Brach’s Confections announced that it would leave Chicago in favor of Mexico in 2001,
food manufacturer lobbyists were quick to blame sugar prices.
Many national news outlets took the bait, criticizing America’s sugar farmers and ignoring the
fact that other manufacturers like Levi Strauss & Company and Black & Decker left the country
around the same time.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]All of these manufacturers left for the same reasons, employee expenses and operation-related
costs. Sugar had little if anything to do with Brach’s decision.
A 2003 study conducted on-site at candy manufacturing locations by a former career USDA
sweetener analyst found that other costs far outweigh the price of sugar when determining where
to locate operations.[/LEFT]
[LEFT]Wages in Chicago were 27 times higher than Mexican wages, the study found. Healthcare costs
were 4 times higher in Chicago—a divide that continues to widen. The average tax rate in
Chicago was 42%, compared to a mere 9% in Mexico. Energy costs came in 5 times higher in[/LEFT]
Chicago, and land costs were twice as expensive.




Regardless, it was cheaper to make candy in Mexico

[Drover]

Ah, the sugar lobby -- now there's a disinterested party. Pardon me while I wipe my backside with their "article."

[Humboldt1]

Drover,

I gave the disclaimer. Obviously, the sugar lobby is going to be creative about their facts and figures. All I am saying is it was a combo of things that made Brach's leave, including sugar.

[LakeShoreSoxGo]

Originally Posted by Drover

Well I don't want to get too political, but to blame NAFTA for the manufacturing decline is incredibly short-sighted. For one, it's easy for us in the North to look around and believe that manufacturing is going straight to Hell all over the country. But the simple truth is that there has been far, far more displacement of manufacturing within the nation's domestic boundaries -- namely from the north to the south -- than there has been from the U.S. to other nations.

But more broadly, the manufacturing employment sector in the U.S. had been in secular decline for decades before NAFTA was ever even debated in Congress. It's currently in secular decline worldwide. If indeed this is something to which one must assign blame, then blame automation and mechanization -- though I'd no more assign "blame" to these forces than I'd assign "blame" to those very same forces that reduced the agricultural employment sector from 70% of the workforce at the beginning of the 20th century to 2% by the end of the century. The truth is that even though manufacturing employment has declined substantially, our manufacturing output has actually increased.

i like this guy