Is Chicago Underrated? (real estate, home, to live in)

[Steve-o]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

Other underrated large cities (in my opinion):

1. Philladelphia
2. Washington, D.C.
3. Providence, RI
4. Charleston, SC
5. San Antonio
6. Milwaukee
7. Pittsburgh
8. Cleveland


Largely overrated large cities (in my opinion)

1. Los Angeles
2. Phoenix
3. Atlanta
4. Dallas-Fort Worth
5. Houston
6. Orlando
7. Charlotte
8. Minneapolis
9. Denver

Id agree with your list almost 100%, except Id swap Minneapolis with Austin, TX. I think Minneapolis is kinda, sorta underrated. Those that have been there know its a great place, but there are untold millions of people who automatically shun it because its in Minnesota (for some retarded reason).

Regarding Chicago? I think its underrated, but not badly. It gets a lot of exposure, and sure has a HUGE following. It seems the only people who dont like it are from sunbelt cities, who somehow think theyre on Chicago's level now that theyve finally had some growth within the last 15 years. Its a pattern Ive noticed and I find it hilarious. Anyways, of alllllll the people Ive met, probably 95% or more LOVE Chicago, including its warts.

[Works Aero]

well, i do believe its a bit underrated, but i also think the coasts have a bit of envy for the fact that weve started stealing some of there thunder, we have taller buildings, better skylines, our city is cleaner. less crime (im guessing) weve had some pretty good movies made here etc.... but also just as i feel im a Chicago snob (best city ever) they feel the same about there own places. and although i could see myself living in NYC or LA Chicago is always my favorite.

[Chinolala]

Originally Posted by bluchidog

Chicago is underrated because its in the Midwest. There is nothin wrong with Chicago, but because its in the Midwest, its sorta of underrated. IF Chicago was moved on the east coast or California it will get more credit.

You hit it on the head. Chicago will never get the press that LA or NYC receive because its in the Midwest.

[ndfmnlf]

Definitely underrated. Chicago has the best skyline in the US. The city is organized into a grid, which makes it easy to navigate. New York City is too confusing. LA is nice, but too dispersed and doesn't have an urban core. San Francisco is pretty, with nice topography....until the next big earthquake remodels it.

Lots of rich people live in Chicagolandia, says this: The Wealth Report - WSJ.com : Where Do All the Millionaires Live? Cook County is 2nd only to LA in number of millionaire households.

[Chicagoland60426]

Originally Posted by ndfmnlf

Definitely underrated. Chicago has the best skyline in the US. The city is organized into a grid, which makes it easy to navigate. New York City is too confusing. LA is nice, but too dispersed and doesn't have an urban core. San Francisco is pretty, with nice topography....until the next big earthquake remodels it.

Lots of rich people live in Chicagolandia, says this: The Wealth Report - WSJ.com : Where Do All the Millionaires Live? Cook County is 2nd only to LA in number of millionaire households.

Not only do alot of millionaires live in Cook County, but there are a sizeable millionaire population in Dupage County and Lake County. I know Dupage County is the wealthiest county in Illinois and in the top 50 wealthiest counties in the country .

[neonwattagelimit]

I think it might be a bit overlooked, but it's not really underrated. It's a subtle distinction, but important. Because of the concentration of media and stuff on the coasts, Chicago doesn't quite get as much attention as one would think, given its size and importance. However, I think the city is generally viewed positively and most people who visit here seem to like it.

Sometimes on C-D you get those posters who go on about Chicago as though it's some kind of backwater, but I always view those posts questionably. I'm from New York, and I've never met anyone in real life who thinks of Chicago as backwards or boring (even if it's comparatively less exciting than NY). I've also never heard a real New Yorker use the term "flyover states" seriously. I'm not saying these people don't exist, but this forum will leave you with the impression that there's far more of them than there really is (why? I'm not gonna get into that). The most common misconception about Chicago on the coasts seems to be the weather - a lot of people think it snows here every day from October to the end of April. That's really about it.

[Lookout Kid]

I think lumping "the coasts" together is also a misconception. You often hear people talk about "the coasts" vs. "the Midwest". But they really just mean the Boston-New York-D.C. corridor on the East Coast--and Southern California, the Bay Area, Seattle, and Portland on the West Coast. No one thinks that the Carolinas, Georgia, or Florida are somehow more sophisticated or cosmopolitain than Chicago (except for a few dillusional residents of those areas). The same could be said for Maine, New Hampshire, and rural Oregon and Washington. And parts of central and northern California and are extremely provincial.

[DC's Finest]

Neon has a great point. Most of the people who post drivel about Chicago have never been there. But i do think people on the coast have a negative perception of the midwest. As for the weather. I have lived in NY & DC and the weather between those two cities can vary by 4 or 5 degrees on any given day. Everytime I visit Chicago in the deep winter, I never seem to have on enough clothes to escape the chill that rattles my bones.

[jdiddy]

I think discussions on what is under/overrated are overrated.

[neonwattagelimit]

Lookout Kid - Good point. It's also worth noting that the Northeastern cities, and LA, and SF, and Portland, and Seattle are all pretty different. To be honest with you, I think in many ways Chicago is more like New York than LA or (less obviously) SF is. I'd guess it's just easier to say "the coasts" than to list all those metros.

DC's Finest - Oh, Chicago winters are brutal, no question about it. They're not much longer than New York winters, though (if at all, even), and that's where the misconception comes in. They're certainly considerably more intense.