Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd say the main difference between Chicago and Detroit aside from it's economic shape is transportation. Driving is part of Detroit's culture (with good reason), while Chicagoans are much more likely to use trains to get around. Of course, if driving is an important part of your life, you can do so in the Chicago suburbs, you just have to learn traffic patterns and how to use GCM (http://www.GCMtravel.com - broken link) to effectively get around. Even without Detroit's recent woes, Chicago is a bigger and more crowded city.
Other than that, I would say the two cities are pretty culturally similar. The climate in both cities are quite similar, with cold winters and mild-warm summers, a decent amount of rainfall, and Great Lakes causing some strange weather patterns. Both cities were built up in the 19th century originally around the railroad. Both cities were also destinations during the "underground railroad" as well as the "great migration" giving them sizable Black populations. Because of Chicago's more diversified economy and recent economic strength, Chicago is probably more diverse, with more sizable Asian and Hispanic communities. Both cities also have plenty of urban areas and suburban areas, which differ from each other within the metropolitan area more than the two metropolitan areas differ.
The beer drinking thing is definitely more of a Midwest thing. I was told in 2005 that the top 3 states for binge drinking (defined as 5 or more drinks in one night) were Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois. Wisconsinites are proud of how much beer they drink and how early they introduce their children to it. The rest of the great lakes states seem to go heavy on the beer as well.
If deciding on a place to live, I would definitely pick Chicago given Detroit's economic conditions, and if you are looking for a place where you can find Detroit's way of life, but with job opportunities, I would say there are parts of Chicago that fit that bill.
What good reason? Don't say because it being a hub to auto companies. Stuttgart, Toyko have public transportation as being an hub to auto companies also.
[SIZE=3]Having lived in both Chicagoland and Metro Detroit, I can give a fairly good view. As far as the cities co, Chicago takes the cake. Detroit was far more industrialized than Chicago ever was. Detroit is also a much tougher city…grittier. Chicago’s current crime wave is reminiscent of what Detroit went though from 1970 to recent times. Chicago’s core was never abandoned, while Detroit’s was at least partially abandoned. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]SE MI lacks any mass transit, but I will admit that I thought Detroit’s suburbs were nicer on every scale. Troy, Farmington, Bloomfield Hills along with the Grosse Pointes were all nicer than what I saw in the North Shore. Add Plymouth and Northville in as well. Detroit perfected suburban living, that is for sure.[/SIZE]
The Detroit mindset is extremely provincial. I only recently heard (from a Detroit area resident) the term "Michitucky", but it seems to sum up what I personally have observed.
[SIZE=3]Having lived in both Chicagoland and Metro Detroit, I can give a fairly good view. As far as the cities co, Chicago takes the cake. Detroit was far more industrialized than Chicago ever was. Detroit is also a much tougher city…grittier. Chicago’s current crime wave is reminiscent of what Detroit went though from 1970 to recent times. Chicago’s core was never abandoned, while Detroit’s was at least partially abandoned. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]SE MI lacks any mass transit, but I will admit that I thought Detroit’s suburbs were nicer on every scale. Troy, Farmington, Bloomfield Hills along with the Grosse Pointes were all nicer than what I saw in the North Shore. Add Plymouth and Northville in as well. Detroit perfected suburban living, that is for sure.[/SIZE]
crime wave? I mean yeah its still bad but from the late 80s till i'd say the early 00's things were alot worse.
[SIZE=3]Having lived in both Chicagoland and Metro Detroit, I can give a fairly good view. As far as the cities co, Chicago takes the cake. Detroit was far more industrialized than Chicago ever was. Detroit is also a much tougher city…grittier. Chicago’s current crime wave is reminiscent of what Detroit went though from 1970 to recent times. Chicago’s core was never abandoned, while Detroit’s was at least partially abandoned. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]SE MI lacks any mass transit, but I will admit that I thought Detroit’s suburbs were nicer on every scale. Troy, Farmington, Bloomfield Hills along with the Grosse Pointes were all nicer than what I saw in the North Shore. Add Plymouth and Northville in as well. Detroit perfected suburban living, that is for sure.[/SIZE]
Have you ever been to the south side? I disagree with that statement that Detroit was "far more" industrialized than Chicago ever was.
Chicago has simply redeveloped, retrofitted, and torn down many of its former industrial areas. At least in the areas where gentrification has spread to. Have you ever been to the south side?
I personally thought the Gross Pointes and Bloomfield/Birmingham area were basically the equivalent of the north shore. With Troy being a bit like the Oak Brook area? With Somerset and surrounding office complexes being comparable to OakBrook center and surrounding areas. Of course Detroits upscale suburbs are more relatively more affordable.
The Detroit mindset is extremely provincial. I only recently heard (from a Detroit area resident) the term "Michitucky", but it seems to sum up what I personally have observed.
In Chicagoland you have to work a little bit to find the provincial "Michitucky" type mindset. I don't want to offend anyone who lives there , but the southwest suburbs (Chicago) (between I-55 and I-57 all the way through Joliet) is where to find the greatest dose of it.
crime wave? I mean yeah its still bad but from the late 80s till i'd say the early 00's things were alot worse.
Chicago recorded it highest murder count in 1974 when the city had 970 homicides. People have this misconception that the late 60s and 70s were all about disco music, hippies, and safe on the streets.
A main difference is the city mayors. Say what you will about both Daleys, but at least the proverbial trains pretty much kept running on time under both of them, and they worked to keep Chicago from degenerating into a 3rd World dump. Washington did too, when he wasn't paralyzed by the council wars.
Unlike Detroit, who in the 60's and early 70's had Jerome Cavanaugh, a John Lindsay-style do-gooder who really didn't do anything, followed essentially by 37 years of "blame whitey" except for Dennis Archer's one term.
Chicago is built on the grid mod. while Detroit is not, making public transportation more difficult.
I found this article on Detroit and thought it was worthwhile.
One marketing ploy that may work for Detroit is as a retirement center. More people are having to retire much earlier than they had planned, and that means a lower Social Security pension. Detroit's low cost of living could draw a few if the crime problem could be alleviated. Sure, there are other cheap places to live, but few have Major League Baseball, Football or Basketball. Much of the infrastructure needed to serve the elderly, such as hospitals, is already in place.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
