Premier City of the Great Lakes in 2015: Chicago versus Toronto (Greater Chicago versus Greater Golden Horseshoe) (Los Angeles, people)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Metro Toronto is majority white; Metro Chicago is majority nonwhite. And the difference is even greater comparing city to city. So, yeah, I think that if "diversity" is measured by actual presence of races/ethnicity, it can be argued that Chicago is more diverse than Toronto. Toronto is certainly whiter and has a dominant ethnicity; Chicago not so much.
Toronto, though, has far more immigration, and has a much greater presence of newcomers, and a much more visible "salad bowl" approach.
Here's the actual residential construction data for 2015, by MSA, through September of this year. Note that Chicago is the 3rd largest MSA, so it should be around #3 in residential construction numbers.
What sort of spin can anyone give to these numbers? I think it's pretty clear Chicago is a relative laggard. It's 3rd in population but 15th in construction numbers, behind that of Charlotte, Austin, Tampa and Nashville. If you look back 10 or 20 years ago, Chicago was among the national leaders in new construction.
And this is MSA. CSA numbers would be much worse, and Chicago would fall further down the list.
MSA Housing Units Permitted, through September 2015
Chicago 11216
NYC 68119
Houston 44212
Dallas 40589
LA 26560
Atlanta 22016
Seattle 20138
Phoenix 17495
DC 17334
Miami 16072
Denver 15134
Charlotte 13820
Nashville 12516
Tampa 11936
Austin 16064
There was no spin. There's no claim in anything I posted that Chicago is currently building more than other places, and it doing well currently currently certainly wouldn't really make sense in terms of being cautiously optimistic. Most of what I said was pointing to Chicago possibly being at its nadir right now and that there may be a good enough confluence of things that will slowly take Chicago out of that bottom in coming years.
Chicago in 2014 looks remarkably like Chicago in 1986. So I recommend you look at what happened in the following 5 years, 1986-1991. Chicago just finished a Great Recession unseen since the 1930s and people, for some reason, seem to think those metrics should be extrapolated forever.
Good idea and I will hold you responsible for this statement next month when I look at the census information that gets released for American states and their population estimates for 2015. I'll keep you in mind when I look at those numbers, because you're the one that made the bold prediction that Chicago's next 5 years will be a takeoff compared to its previous years. It made me laugh a little, Chicago capable of high growth in the 21st century? LOL, I'll believe it when I see it for myself.
It is simple, the counties in Chicagoland that are in Illinois make up 77% of the state of Illinois' population. If I look at Illinois as a whole next month, if its growth improves from what it was last year, it can be inferred that Chicago is in fact improving as well since it is the only game in the entire state. However, if it stays the same or even gets worse, I'll be having a word with you then. I'll reactivate this this and quote this exact same post of yours when the numbers come out next month. We'll see Chicago for what it is in a month.
Until next month though, enjoy your little farfetched dreams.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,279,693 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red John
Good idea and I will hold you responsible for this statement next month when I look at the census information that gets released for American states and their population estimates for 2015. I'll keep you in mind when I look at those numbers, because you're the one that made the bold prediction that Chicago's next 5 years will be a takeoff compared to its previous years. It made me laugh a little, Chicago capable of high growth in the 21st century? LOL, I'll believe it when I see it for myself.
It is simple, the counties in Chicagoland that are in Illinois make up 77% of the state of Illinois' population. If I look at Illinois as a whole next month, if its growth improves from what it was last year, it can be inferred that Chicago is in fact improving as well since it is the only game in the entire state. However, if it stays the same or even gets worse, I'll be having a word with you then. I'll reactivate this this and quote this exact same post of yours when the numbers come out next month. We'll see Chicago for what it is in a month.
Until next month though, enjoy your little farfetched dreams.
No one is denying the debt situation of the city from Pension promises.... SO NO ONE EXPECTS A MIRACLE OF IMPROVING NUMBERS IN A MONTH.... BUT YOU INFER A TOTAL COLLASPE??? A PREDICTION?
Honestly Red John..... the city that helped raise you a few years IS A PUNCHING BAG FOR YOU ....Your family chose that city .... EVEN FROM MERRY BUT CLOUDY LONDON.... Why do you make it a AGENDA.... To lessen ANY POST FAVORABLE TO CHICAGO? I know its deep personal reasons.... but when its so common and expected from you.... it really is getting a bit trolling for this city......
Post more on how much better or more vibrant LONDONTOWN is for you.... less on mocking AND LAUGHING AT CHICAGO LIKERS..... Spare us you still really like the city and want to see it booming.... Your post keep saying otherwise in even laughing....
You were NOT this demeaning before you moved to London??? You lessen Chicago even for being just a FLAT Landscape city.... Well are you going to lessen London for being FLAT too?
AGAIN GIVE US MORE GREATNESS ON CITIES AND LONDON YOU ARE IN NOW? I SEE NOTHING ON POST FROM YOU ON YOUR HOME FOR FURTHER SCHOOL? OR CHANCES OF YOU STAYING???
Do you really think CHICAGO IN A MONTH OR MORE.... CHICAGO GOING TO BECOME A ABANDONED GHETTO? ITS DOWNTOWN STOP FUNCTIONING?
Honestly... NYC went through FAR MORE DECLINES BY 1975 WHEN IT WAS BANKRUPT AND RIDDEN WITH CRIME IN DRASTIC POLICE CUTS . Heck Times Square was seedy with prostitutes and X-rated shops....... A RELUNTANT PRESIDENT FORD FINALLY AGREED TO GOVERNMENT LOANS TO BAIL IT OUT after even Big business was seeking help for it.... LOOK WHERE IS IT TODAY???
I do not see this happening or allowed happen to Chicago??? .... NO SIGNS OF VISIBLE DECLINES IN THE CITY like Detroit had throughout... Gang violence is not new on the Southside.... All city festivals went on as usual..... Super-Tall skyscrapers planned. Downtown.
Even in some form of Bankruptcy the city's IMPROVEMENTS will not just disappear.... Plenty of high debt American cities... Even one like Houston... Even NYC has a few times Chicago's pension debt... but it is super rich today in money it takes in to support it.
No one is denying the debt situation of the city from Pension promises.... SO NO ONE EXPECTS A MIRACLE OF IMPROVING NUMBERS IN A MONTH.... BUT YOU INFER A TOTAL COLLASPE??? A PREDICTION?
Not at all, I would actually like Chicago to do about 50,000 people a year in population growth (meaning 500,000 people a decade). That would be moderate to slightly above-average population growth for an area of 10 million people. I would even welcome the "slow and sustainable growth" of 25,000 to 45,000 people per year (meaning 250,000 to 450,000 people a decade) in population growth for Chicago (similar to what Boston CSA is growing by right now -- that range). While nothing to write home about, that growth would be a vast improvement and a path in the right direction for Chicago.
The problem is that I'm not delusional with optimism. I know how to read empirical data from both last year as well as half-a-century ago and I can recognize the writing on the wall when I see it. Chicagoland is a place that is going to get itself surpassed, easily at that, it'll start straight in 2020 when Washington DC-Baltimore CSA surpasses it. I see at least another 3 American CSAs (and 2 MSAs) in addition to Washington DC-Baltimore passing it up in a few decades too by population (1 in CA, 2 in TX). Doesn't mean I want to see it get passed up (I don't), but I've already accepted that Chicagoland isn't capable of retaining its 3rd place spot in the United States for much longer. I've moved on and have adjusted my expectations for Chicagoland to reflect that.
My only expectation now and my only expectation for the last 3 years for Chicago in regards to population growth has been that I just want to see it in the black/green now (as in post growth and not declines). I don't even care by how much now, just don't decline, that's it. Those are my only expectations for Chicago. I wont set them any higher than this again, not for Chicago at least. If I set my expectations any higher for Chicago, then I'm afraid that my expectations will never come close to materializing. So no expectations at all for Chicago, other than at least posting some gains, whether it is 1 person or 150,000 people is up to those that run Chicago and those looking into moving there to figure out.
Toronto CMA and the Greater Golden Horseshoe, it is my full expectation that it too will pass Chicago, for the Greater Golden Horseshoe it will come really soon since its right on Chicago's heels now (both are in the 9 millions range now). That is the fundamental difference between a place growing by 100,000 a year and one growing by 10,000 a year. Oh and Toronto's been in the 6-digit growth for several years now.
Last edited by Trafalgar Law; 11-10-2015 at 01:14 PM..
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,279,693 times
Reputation: 1483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red John
Not at all, I would actually like Chicago to do about 50,000 people a year in population growth (meaning 500,000 people a decade). That would be moderate to slightly above-average population growth for an area of 10 million people. I would even welcome the "slow and sustainable growth" of 25,000 to 45,000 people per year (meaning 250,000 to 450,000 people a decade) in population growth for Chicago (similar to what Boston CSA is growing by right now -- that range). While nothing to write home about, that growth would be a vast improvement and a path in the right direction for Chicago.
The problem is that I'm not delusional with optimism. I know how to read empirical data from both last year as well as half-a-century ago and I can recognize the writing on the wall when I see it. Chicagoland is a place that is going to get itself surpassed, easily at that, it'll start straight in 2020 when Washington DC-Baltimore CSA surpasses it. I see at least another 3 American CSAs (and 2 MSAs) in addition to Washington DC-Baltimore passing it up in a few decades too by population (1 in CA, 2 in TX). Doesn't mean I want to see it get passed up (I don't), but I've already accepted that Chicagoland isn't capable of retaining its 3rd place spot in the United States for much longer. I've moved on and have adjusted my expectations for Chicagoland to reflect that.
My only expectation now and my only expectation for the last 3 years for Chicago in regards to population growth has been that I just want to see it in the black/green now (as in post growth and not declines). I don't even care by how much now, just don't decline, that's it. Those are my only expectations for Chicago. I wont set them any higher than this again, not for Chicago at least. If I set my expectations any higher for Chicago, then I'm afraid that my expectations will never come close to materializing. So no expectations at all for Chicago, other than at least posting some gains, whether it is 1 person or 150,000 people is up to those that run Chicago and those looking into moving there to figure out.
Toronto CMA and the Greater Golden Horseshoe, it is my full expectation that it too will pass Chicago, for the Greater Golden Horseshoe it will come really soon since its right on Chicago's heels now (both are in the 9 millions range now). That is the fundamental difference between a place growing by 100,000 a year and one growing by 10,000 a year. Oh and Toronto's been in the 6-digit growth for several years now.
American cities and regions still go in cycles.... not all together. Many American cities have BILLIONS in debt including Pensions. AMERICN CITIES IN THE SUNBELT GROW AS TORONTO... Canadian cities DID NOT experience racial strife as Northern American cities have.... they still have issues.
You chose AGAINST Chicago over Vancouver ALL major cities I saw... THE LAUGHING MORE THEN ONCE AT A ANY FAVORABLE CHICAGO POST..... SAYS A LOT. THEY WERE NOT ON DEBT.
Many cities have Huge pension Debt. Houston does ...Jacksonville Fla. Even NYC has a Huge one. But it is rich today... it is manageable for it.
Heck Houston was warned by Moody's ratings.... we know you tried to hide some debt... realize we will downgrade you too.... Moody's did put Houston's OUTLOOK at "NEGATIVE" This sight not only notes Houston's REAL bonds and pensions debt.... but also Chicago's and NYC's and Jacksonville. Sure Chicago's is worst. No one disputes that.
For example, New York has real pension debt of $182 billion, 3 times its annual revenue. which would send anyone else running for the hills. But the city is so rich, that’s only triple NYC’s annual budget.
Chicago, whose $72.2 billion in real pension debt was more than 10 times its annual revenue.
Jacksonville was in second place, with pension debts equal to 730 percent of revenue,
Houston just behind at 710 percent. Houston’s numbers are artificially prettier, because its teachers aren’t included in the calculation. They’re part of the state Teachers Retirement System, which also has tens of billions of dollars in debt. Houston
When Detroit declared bankruptcy in 2013, it had $19 billion in debt. Houston officially has $17.2 billion in debt, but underestimated its pension debt by 1.1 billion. Add in the real pension debt, and you’re looking at a $26 billion debt for Houston.
Houston’s debts include $11.2 billion in outstanding bonds. Houston’s unfunded pension liability is $13.7 billion Houston is in the hole by $12.3 billion.
Houston’s unfunded pension liability is $13.7 billion
Houston is in a hole ..........................$12.3 billion in debt,
Houston underestimated pension debt $ 1.1 billion
--------------------------------------------$ 26 billion
Houston’s debts include $11.2 billion in outstanding bonds. Houston’s unfunded pension liability is $13.7 billion Houston is in the hole by $12.3 billion.
SURE EVEN ILLINOIS IS BROKE.... BUT YA KNOW......Illinois gets around $0.45 from every $1.00 given to the federal government. On the other hand South Carolina gets around $8.00 for every $1.00 given!! .... MUST HAVE A DARN GOOD CONRESSMAN....
If those stats were switched Illinois would be raking in BILLIONS into its budget and the state from the Feds instead of handing over hundreds of millions more than it gets back.
I'm surprised you don't predict the USA's fall with Debt?
It is YOUR OPINION OF Chicago... NEVER bouncing back... But as for population loss Chicago's 200,000 loss the census showed a 181,000 loss of African-Americans.....
As you should know.. the decade of the 70s was NYC's WORST. It lost nearly... ONE MILLION PEOPLE. It till a government Loan (bailout) in 1975. Cut Police and Fire. Crime was skyrocketing.
If climate change and water shortages... get worst? The Midwest cities could rise again as the Sunbelt today.
Never say never in the USA. Heck... living through the Era of double-digit interest rates ant high inflation.... I never thought it would EVER come down to a few % again.... IT DID.
You are surely entitled to your decision of Chicago's fall and continued fall. But in virtually any thread it is in the topic or comes up.... you make it your point to LAUGH AT ANY COMPLEMENT to Chicago... threads posted in, are like forever there to have ANYONE GO BACK TO...
I certainly don't begrudge Toronto. But you should POST THINGS TORONTO HAS IN SPACIFICS TO CURRENTLY WIN HERE FOR YOU OVER CHICAGO... NOT MERELY NEGATIVES ON CHICAGO'S FUTURE.....
I agree Toronto's growth is like Houston... going to continue. But currently Chicago HAS NOT FALLEN and STILL VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS AND...... ESPECIALLY ITS DOWNTOWN. EVEN SUPER-TALLS PLANNED AGAIN. ONE APPROVED.
TORONTONIANS are tired of Chicago comparisons... they see themselves as the NYC of Canada... and more and more see comparisons to it... just saying.
Oh for comparisons too of YOU CLAIMS TO CHICAGO'S SLOW GROWTH OVERALL. IT STILL POSTED IN ITS METRO WELLOVER A MILLION GROWTH OVER 4 DECADES...HERE IS A COUPLE EASTERN CITIES NUMBERS....
FOR COMPARISONS....
Chicago:
Chicago 1970: 7,882,640
Chicago 2014: 9,554,598
Total change in 44 years: + 1,671,958
Boston:
Boston 1970: 3,919,024
Boston 2014: 4,732,161
Total change in 44 years: + 813,137
-- Average Annual Growth over 44 year period: + 18,481 people per year growth annually per year for 44 years
Philadelphia:
Philadelphia 1970: 5,323,603
Philadelphia 2014: 6,051,170
Total change in 44 years: + 727,567
-- Average Annual Growth over 44 year period: 16,536 people per year growth annually per year for 44 years
I think you are seriously underestimating just how big a fish Toronto is in Canada's relatively small pond.
It's basically uncontested. Especially in Anglo-Canada. People from coast to coast move there in order to live in the ''big city'' that is Toronto. All of their ''national'' stuff is concentrated in Toronto: publishing, media, etc.
Sad....but I maintain my assertion that Chicago is an even bigger fish in a larger pond in Midwest America than Toronto is in Canada. Basic FACT
Sad....but I maintain my assertion that Chicago is an even bigger fish in a larger pond in Midwest America than Toronto is in Canada. Basic FACT
No, that's just absurd.
Last edited by stillinthesouth; 11-11-2015 at 08:56 AM..
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Moody's did put Houston's OUTLOOK at "NEGATIVE" This sight not only notes Houston's REAL bonds and pensions debt.... but also Chicago's and NYC's and Jacksonville. Sure Chicago's is worst. No one disputes that. 
