U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
 [Register]
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.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-03-2010, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
1,847 posts, read 2,650,610 times
Reputation: 1543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthera View Post
Why would they want to? There's a big difference in living in a thriving major city and trying to resurrect a dying one. Where would they even work?
Why would they want to do that? Maybe to support were they're from and show some civic pride. Look, I was not exactly speaking literally, just commenting on how things could have played out instead of how they are. As someone else pointed out, Chicago and Detroit were not all that different 50 years ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
I think that's true of a lot of places. I grew up in Iowa, and I can't throw a rock in Chicago without hitting someone else who transplanted from Iowa.

It's amazing the state is doing as well as it is regarding quality of life, education, crime, budgets, etc. given that it produces one of the most educated group of young people year after year - and then immediately loses them to bigger and brighter states once they graduate college. I feel like this applies to Michigan as well. They produce a very quality group of people - and then they take off.

Luckly in that case though Des Moines has finally gotten its sh** together and started grabbing up a pretty big share of the youth in Iowa as it grows and comes out of this recession with one of the lowest unemployment rates, highest job growth, low housing prices and a stable economy/budget, etc.

I look at the 15 kids I grew up with in my neighborhood. All of them graduated from a 4-year university, and not a single one lives within 150 miles of Iowa. I notice that people aren't really "running away" from Iowa at all - we all still love the state to death. It's fun, relaxing, beautiful. People were just running to find something else a little biggeer, brighter and more exciting.
Well, I'm from Ohio and there are certainly a lot of us in Chicago also. I don't think nearly as many people in Ohio are dead set on Chicago as their big urban option like the people I come across from Michigan though. Many people I know back home would be just as likely to move to the east coast, but of course I'm from the eastern part of Ohio which is almost as close to NYC as it is Chicago.

Iowa may have people who move out to live in a larger city, but it also does not have any reason it should be hurting. People in the midwest move to Chicago because it's the closest big city option for them. We simply don't have enough dynamic cities in this country for urban-minded people to stay more local.

Last edited by 5Lakes; 05-03-2010 at 09:35 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-03-2010, 11:24 AM
 
8,304 posts, read 6,675,318 times
Reputation: 3700
Certainly Chicago has its problems. United and Continental plan to merge, forming the World's largest airline, and be headquartered in Chicago. This will cement our status as the nation's transportation capital.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2010, 08:53 PM
 
1,060 posts, read 2,329,758 times
Reputation: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
Why would they want to do that? Maybe to support were they're from and show some civic pride. Look, I was not exactly speaking literally, just commenting on how things could have played out instead of how they are. As someone else pointed out, Chicago and Detroit were not all that different 50 years ago.
.
If people wanted to be urban pioneers in Detroit they would already be doing it.

Coleman Young literally told whites to hit the road (8 mile road to be exact), He also threw the police and fire department under the bus when ever possible. Thats a big part of why there aren't urban pioneers in Detroit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2010, 09:34 PM
 
10,484 posts, read 17,689,846 times
Reputation: 3422
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
As someone else pointed out, Chicago and Detroit were not all that different 50 years ago.
Yes they were.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2010, 09:44 PM
 
10,484 posts, read 17,689,846 times
Reputation: 3422
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
We simply don't have enough dynamic cities in this country for urban-minded people to stay more local.
The list is short:

New York
Boston
San Francisco
Chicago
Washington D.C.
Maybe Portland or Seattle...
Maybe Philadelphia

Nearly all of the major southern and western cities are car-oriented and lack urban, vibrant street life. For instance, there are a few dense areas in Denver, but for the most part the city has deconcentrated. Downtown is largely dead except for an "artsy" warehouse district, the sports bars near the stadiums, and one pedestrain strip dominated by chains. There are cool neighborhood fragments scattered throughout the city, but there is a lot of space between them. And Denver is better than most large American cities.

Other east coast and midwest metro areas were once vibrant, but have been decimated in the post WWII period. Cities like Milwaukee have a few remnants and revived areas, but are downright dead compared to what they were like sixty years ago.

And cities like Miami and Los Angeles have great urban districts with crazy nightlife, but for the most part are disjointed city fragments that are only connected by automobile traffic. Our cities have really been decimated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Ukrainian Village
20 posts, read 25,022 times
Reputation: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes
If all the people who moved to Chicago from Michigan got together and moved to the city of Detroit they could form a neighborhood there the equivalent of Lakeview. Ok, maybe not really, but there are a massive amount of Michigan transplants here who come for city life not found in Michigan. Makes me wonder what the positive impact these people could have on Detroit if more of them stayed home and became urban pioneers in Detroit.

As a member of this exact demographic I must object to the idea that transplants come here out of a desire for glamourous city life and a lack of affection for their home. This really only applies to a very small subset of young people with wealthy families and worthless humanities degrees. Any skilled young person who wants to do more than wait tables has no choice but to leave Michigan as the older workers are hanging onto their jobs for dear life. The comparatively abundant employment to be found in Chicago is irresistible. Public transportation in Detroit is nonexistent as are habitable urban neighborhoods. To encourage unwelcome Michigan transplants to leave Chicago and carve out a gentrified pocket in Detroit would be like urging sanguine North Siders to set down new roots in Englewood for the sake of "civic pride".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 01:51 PM
 
320 posts, read 523,964 times
Reputation: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
If all the people who moved to Chicago from Michigan got together and moved to the city of Detroit they could form a neighborhood there the equivalent of Lakeview. Ok, maybe not really, but there are a massive amount of Michigan transplants here who come for city life not found in Michigan. Makes me wonder what the positive impact these people could have on Detroit if more of them stayed home and became urban pioneers in Detroit.
Except that we all are not from Detroit. Some of us have no connection to the city. One has to understand that Michigan is pretty depressed economically, from Monroe to Houghton. And you really don't appreciate it unless you are from there.

The auto industry went, and all the small towns built around auto part supplies went bust.

The farm industry went corporate in the 1980's, and family farms and dairies could not compete with the economies of scale.

The furniture industry moved all their jobs to developing countries.

Not much mining left, and the stuff that is left, is automated.

I can go on and on, and then go into blaming the idiocy of state and local municipalities for not diversifying the industrial base, and giving breaks to the Big Three, even as they closed production. I could bash the short-sightedness of union leaders, and auto company management who thought the golden goose would never be killed. But those are discussions best had around beers at many of the Michigan State themed bars populating the North Side. Everyone has a theory.

But the end result is, you have a generation of young people from a state with a good public education system, and a great state university system, who are in a mass exodus from the state. We all have friends and relatives who didn't escape, and now a good number of them collect public assistance, as unemployed, or underemployed. The only growth industries left are debt collection and health care services.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 07:58 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
1,847 posts, read 2,650,610 times
Reputation: 1543
Man people, I was speaking hypothetically about the fortunes of Detroit. Not scorning people for moving from Michigan to Chicago or not moving into inner city Detroit. Obviously bringing back Detroit is no small task, and may take centuries to happen. My point was that things did not have to be that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lookout Kid View Post
Yes they were.

The list is short:

New York
Boston
San Francisco
Chicago
Washington D.C.
Maybe Portland or Seattle...
Maybe Philadelphia
I'm not sure how life in Detroit in the 50' & 60's would have been all that different from Chicago. They were both largely made up of the children from working class Euro-immigrant backgrounds and both had thriving neighborhoods that served those populations. The only real difference I see is that white flight after that period resulted in all the white people leaving Detroit vs. only half of the white people leaving Chicago.

Take your list for example. Prior to the 60's Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, and others would have also been on it. That's the point I was making - that Detroit could have turned out much like Chicago if things would have played out differently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Oak Park, IL
5,233 posts, read 8,020,324 times
Reputation: 3245
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5Lakes View Post
Take your list for example. Prior to the 60's Detroit, St. Louis, Cleveland, and others would have also been on it. That's the point I was making - that Detroit could have turned out much like Chicago if things would have played out differently.
Chicago had the advantage of a large critical mass of white collar employment in the CBD supported by excellent public transit (commuter rails and el). This allowed the Loop to maintain its preeminent position for office jobs.

In contrast Detroit never had rail public transit (other than the practically useless People Mover). Ford, GM, and Chrysler HQs were not in the Detroit CBD (GM relatively recently moved to Renaissance Towers).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2010, 09:00 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
1,847 posts, read 2,650,610 times
Reputation: 1543
Quote:
Originally Posted by oakparkdude View Post
Chicago had the advantage of a large critical mass of white collar employment in the CBD supported by excellent public transit (commuter rails and el). This allowed the Loop to maintain its preeminent position for office jobs.

In contrast Detroit never had rail public transit (other than the practically useless People Mover). Ford, GM, and Chrysler HQs were not in the Detroit CBD (GM relatively recently moved to Renaissance Towers).
Detroit actually had an extensive street car system up until the 50's. If you look at Detroit's street layout you will see that it is a spoke system, which had streetcars running into the downtown. Just because Detroit did not have a heavy rail train does not mean that it never had decent transit. Obviously once the auto-era and the suburbanization of American took hold in the 50's it was downhill for Detroit's and all of America's streetcar systems.

I agree that the Loop largely maintained its position as a job center because of transit, but then again Chicago did not have short sided people of influence who came along and tore up the EL because they saw it as obsolete. They did manage to tear up all of Chicago's streetcars though, just like Detroit's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Illinois > Chicago
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top