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.
Silly thing to say considering that Chicago and Philadelphia are bigger and more populous than San Francisco or Boston. If they aren't desirable, why do so many live there?
Putting aside the fact that this is factually wrong (all four metros are in the same very general size range), it's completely absurd.
Detroit is much bigger and more populous than the Hamptons, Malibu, Palm Beach and Beverly Hills. So, going by your logic, Detroit is more desirable than Beverly Hills because more people live there. Who knew!
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpinionatedOne
High paying salaries + NIMBY's + foreign investment.
No, this is all basically irrelevent. The expensive cities aren't more NIMBY and don't produce less housing, the salaries aren't much higher, and foreign investment is a very small % of local sales.
It's very simple. Chicago and Philly aren't as desirable. If they were more desirable, they would cost more.
Chicago is a great city, but isn't as urban or aesthetically nice, has bad weather, sits in the most boring part of the country, has high crime, a so-so economy, and isn't a glamorous locale.
Philly is also a great city, but has limited professional jobs, some really crappy zones, is kinda cliquish and tribal and just 70 miles from the most important city on earth.
I will note that really nice parts of Chicago and Philly are basically as expensive as NYC, Boston, SF, DC, etc. You will pay millions if you want something really nice and well-located in Rittenhouse Square or on the Gold Coast.
Perhaps you want to explain what Cliquish and Tribal means in reference to Philly?
I will say I disagree with your comment on Chicago isn't as Urban in some offerings or Aesthetically nice, or a Glamorous locale? Of course, Chicago has not blocks of 6-7 story tenements. But there are loft offerings that pile in residents LOL. But truly, many visitors note the Grandeur and Glamour that Chicago can give. Its high-end skyscrapers with views lack little. You can even have your Ferrari its own condo near you .... . It's a asset I'd say. You surely can maintain NYC as Glamour Capital. But to say Chicago lacks it???? I totally disagree. Quantity and aspects of the international scope... yes. But it certainly offers Glamour you lessen to as of no warrant.
I wouldn't disagree if its said SF has a Romantic component over other cities, or DC, Boston and SF offer more attached as in row-housing..... as they do. I can agree the Midwest is perceived as a bit boring a region also. But most do exclude Chicago.
Your bias to NYC is in every post vs other cities all know. No one ever disputes NYC's status as in a tier of its own. But I've never heard anyone who visited Chicago and saw its core attributes and highly desirable neighborhoods especially north and northwest of the core as .... call them not HIGHLY AESTHETICALLY NICE IMO The way River North has urbanized too and its South Loop and Hot West Loop is still .... Quality Urban and Aesthetically Nice too, with a huge rep for Cleanliness IMO.
There are NO REASONS ..... these neighborhoods would not be seen as Highly desirable as any in SF or DC, Boston or Philly. I realize to say over any in NYC won't work for you. I remember you fighting NYC Brownstones? Were just oh so much superior to any similar stone offerings in Chicago? I will acknowledge Chicago's are not solid blocks of rows .... that's for sure. But many varieties along blocks and others are gorgeous.
As for crime? What Chicago has more then NYC is gang on gang crime and revenge upon their own that lead to these murders. But IN ALL OTHER CRIMES? NYC has FULLY its share in the news daily.
So far Chicago's Core and surrounding neighborhoods are still in boom stage in housing being built and desirability. That is not worthy of lessening and always a NYC card pulled as if to be the stake in that city's heart to NOT give it its due .....
But we do have bias, agendas and opinions that are just that. Sometimes they seem extreme.
This thread is NOT a Chicago vs your NYC one. To continue to lessen Chicago as if NOTHING it can have as good or like NYC? It gets old ..... and its certainly more then skyscrapers. But NO ONE SAYS IT IS SUPERIOR TO NYC unless you mention cleanliness or a more civil less over the top vibe that can become overwhelming continuously in NYC.
I for one would be satisfied with going home to a tree-lined street with lots of greens to admire as I walk and not have all the excitement street-scape just blocks away. Vibes differ but there is surely QUALITY in a Chicago vibe that need NOT BE DISSED to boost NYC's superiority... There are other cities in the thread and you will LESSEN them WAY BENEATH NYC TOO. But you generally will Chicago more.... unless vs Toronto. and maybe I did see against Cleveland too.....
Maybe SF and Boston are more like NYC to you? I believe you did say Philly's vibe is more so? But I doubt you would say the scope is of course or Glamour component.
* I hope the thread isn't the rest vs you on only one's opinion is right?
Can you keep those goalposts still for a second? You made a claim that it cost millions of dollars to buy into the nicest neighborhoods in Chicago, and it doesn't.
No, I never wrote this.
I said that it cost millions to live in prime Chicago real estate. This is garbage real estate. Obviously anything in Chicago without parking and elevator will be undesirable to high earners. And Midwest families aren't cramming into a one bedroom, Hong Kong style.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands
The barrier of entry simply isn't that high. You can call those garbage properties if you want, but each of those properties are upward of $3 million dollars in comparable New York City neighborhoods.
Yes, Chicago has a lower barrier to entry, obviously, because it's a much less desirable city. We already know this. Supply and demand.
In NYC you don't need parking, so would not be an issue. People with money in Chicago need cars. But, no, this property would not be worth anything close to $3 million in NYC. Maybe $1.5 million, at most, but it would be a nicer area than Chicago's Gold Coast, hence the higher price.
The point is that high income professionals in Chicago are paying millions just like in any other major metro. It's the cheap stuff that is so much cheaper.
I said that it cost millions to live in prime Chicago real estate. This is garbage real estate. Obviously anything in Chicago without parking and elevator will be undesirable to high earners. And Midwest families aren't cramming into a one bedroom, Hong Kong style.
Yes, Chicago has a lower barrier to entry, obviously, because it's a much less desirable city. We already know this. Supply and demand.
In NYC you don't need parking, so would not be an issue. People with money in Chicago need cars. But, no, this property would not be worth anything close to $3 million in NYC. Maybe $1.5 million, at most, but it would be a nicer area than Chicago's Gold Coast, hence the higher price.
The point is that high income professionals in Chicago are paying millions just like in any other major metro. It's the cheap stuff that is so much cheaper.
You don't have to lie. I bolded what you actually said, and guess what? It's not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
It's very simple. Chicago and Philly aren't as desirable. If they were more desirable, they would cost more.
Chicago is a great city, but isn't as urban or aesthetically nice, has bad weather, sits in the most boring part of the country, has high crime, a so-so economy, and isn't a glamorous locale.
Philly is also a great city, but has limited professional jobs, some really crappy zones, is kinda cliquish and tribal and just 70 miles from the most important city on earth.
I will note that really nice parts of Chicago and Philly are basically as expensive as NYC, Boston, SF, DC, etc. You will pay millions if you want something really nice and well-located in Rittenhouse Square or on the Gold Coast.
I guess you're going to play that silly game where you will deem any Chicago property that doesn't cost millions "garbage" or "undesirable". For those who don't know Chicago, here are some sub-million dollar properties in prime neighborhoods:
It's very simple. Chicago and Philly aren't as desirable. If they were more desirable, they would cost more.
How bout we go with Chicago + Philly have a greater quantity of less desirable areas and apartments, alot more than SF + Boston. Which is going to drag down average rental rates for Chi + Phila.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
Chicago is a great city, but isn't as urban or aesthetically nice, has bad weather, sits in the most boring part of the country, has high crime, a so-so economy, and isn't a glamorous locale.
Philly is also a great city, but has limited professional jobs, some really crappy zones, is kinda cliquish and tribal and just 70 miles from the most important city on earth.
These are merely non critical symptoms of the main problem previously mentioned . Chi + Phila have more distressed areas dragging down the overall city + region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101
I will note that really nice parts of Chicago and Philly are basically as expensive as NYC, Boston, SF, DC, etc. You will pay millions if you want something really nice and well-located in Rittenhouse Square or on the Gold Coast.
Chicago isn't anything like NYC. They're totally different. That's, in part, why they have very different prices.
Lots of people who don't know NYC and Chicago think Chicago is some mini-NYC when it has a totally different feel. Outside of the fact that they're both big U.S. cities with lots of skyscrapers, they have a completely different vibe and streetscape.
It's a good thing everyone doesn't choose to live in NYC, isn't it, NOLA101, as there just wouldn't be room. Some of us prefer Chicago, hence, we live there, or have lived there. Hard to swallow, I know, but you'll have to try harder to convince me that the millions in the Chicago MSA have chosen to live in the wrong place.
People love living near large bodies of water especially oceans. Living on an ocean also cuts your potential real estate options in half. Creating a crisis in supply + demand. High Prices for Apartment rentals and housing.
How bout we go with Chicago + Philly have a greater quantity of less desirable areas and apartments, alot more than SF + Boston. Which is going to drag down average rental rates for Chi + Phila.
Doesn't New York have a greater quantity of less desirable areas and apartments than Chicago and Philly?
How bout we go with Chicago + Philly have a greater quantity of less desirable areas and apartments, alot more than SF + Boston. Which is going to drag down average rental rates for Chi + Phila.
Yeah, agree with this.
Chicago and Philly have very nice, expensive neighborhoods, and the professional-dominated areas tend to be very costly, but they're overall much cheaper because they have large swaths of geography where real estate is worth little.
In contrast, NYC and SF-type places don't really have areas where real estate is worth little. Even the "bad" areas aren't that bad. There are no wasteland, half-abandoned type areas.
Doesn't New York have a greater quantity of less desirable areas and apartments than Chicago and Philly?
NYC is an anomally.
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.
. It's a asset I'd say. You surely can maintain NYC as Glamour Capital. But to say Chicago lacks it???? I totally disagree. Quantity and aspects of the international scope... yes. But it certainly offers Glamour you lessen to as of no warrant. 
There are other cities in the thread and you will LESSEN them WAY BENEATH NYC TOO. But you generally will Chicago more.... unless vs Toronto. 
and maybe I did see against Cleveland too.....
