Will Chicago possibly become more populated then Los Angeles (Riverside: real estate market, foreclosures)

[Drover]

Originally Posted by moneylova

Since it's a lot cheaper to live and is more attractive. And forgive me for not putting "than" instead of "then".

No, Chicago will not become more populated than LA. LA is a geographically much larger city so there's more room to put people. Attraction is relative. And as long as people keep streaming in from Mexico, LA is just going to keep growing. That's really the main source of LA's population growth -- the fact that it's the primary "default" city for Latino immigrants. Chicago's population stabilization also owes to immigration, but they have to make a special effort to get here, instead of just ending up here by happenstance like they do in LA.

[urza216]

Originally Posted by ccjarider

No- too cold for most Mexicans.

lol, WTF?

[ToriaT]

No. But, I wonder if Chicago is really that much smaller than LA because many of what we would call suburbs in LA are considered LA.

Here is an interesting article about the LA population.
LA Population - The Population of Los Angeles

[Dncr]

No, this won't happen, at least not for a very long time. The problem L.A has is that it's easily replaced. Loosing L.A would be devastating to our economy, for a brief time period at least, but other cities along the Pacific could easily handle the vast amounts of cargo the ports process. Chicago is a lot harder to replace. It's positioned along the largest fresh water supply in the world and is huge transportation center.

L.A's going to continue to grow drastically for as long as Hispanics immigrate to the U.S in droves. I'm sure we all know, but domestically, L.A is shrinking more than 3 times faster than Chicago. It's the immigration that keep them both positive. Apparently though, Chicago grew by more than 20,000 people between July of 08 and 09. That's good, even if it is because of the recession .

[Chicagoland60426]

Originally Posted by ccjarider

No- too cold for most Mexicans.

There are about 1.5 million Mexicans in Illinois.

[Superion2K9]

I agree, Chicago and LA are two different worlds. Chicago does not need to be L.A.'s size to be the major player it already is. I would note that Houston, TX may pass Chicago in 25 years or so. That would not mean much either as Houston & Chicago are two distinct towns with their own character.

[Lookout Kid]

At some point the size of a city stops bringing urban benefits and it becomes a hinderance. Would you rather live in Paris or Bombay?

[smoking357]

Originally Posted by moneylova

Since it's a lot cheaper to live and is more attractive. And forgive me for not putting "than" instead of "then".

Man, back in 2006, Chicago was just as expensive as L.A. Don't tell me Chicago is becoming the new Detroit.

As for attractive, L.A. has mountains and ocean, and it's always around the 70's.

Portillo's now has two locations in L.A. Both places have broken liberal governments, abusive police and high crime. All things being equal, people like the ocean and the lack of snow.

[latikeriii]

No way it'll happen. Just like the posters above mentioned, LA is at least 25% larger in land area and the high amount of immigration from Mexico and Central America. However, I predict that LA will start loosing population for the first time this decade. Again, just like another poster touched on, Houston will eventually surpass Chicago. It has a larger land area than LA, immigration is increasing as well, they have a decent economy, lower cost of living, and no state income tax so people are moving there in droves from everywhere else. When you go to an Astros-Cubs game or Texans-Bears game, you'll notice a good 40% of former Chicagoland residents in the crowd cheering for the Chicago teams.

[Dncr]

Originally Posted by latikeriii

No way it'll happen. Just like the posters above mentioned, LA is at least 25% larger in land area and the high amount of immigration from Mexico and Central America. However, I predict that LA will start loosing population for the first time this decade. Again, just like another poster touched on, Houston will eventually surpass Chicago. It has a larger land area than LA, immigration is increasing as well, they have a decent economy, lower cost of living, and no state income tax so people are moving there in droves from everywhere else. When you go to an Astros-Cubs game or Texans-Bears game, you'll notice a good 40% of former Chicagoland residents in the crowd cheering for the Chicago teams.

Chicago has a more than realistic chance of staying ahead of Houston in both City and Metro population. Chicago's something like 3 times as dense. You can only sprawl so far before it starts to collapse. Chicago's density is only going to increase as (I'm assuming here) the population of the city increases, which is obvious. Revitalization of dilapidated communities, residential skyscrapers, better transit, and a host of other things will be enough for Chicago to maintain a solid lead over Houston.

I also feel the post recession economies in cities like L.A, New York, and Chicago will be just as strong, if not stronger, than those of the sunbelt. Giving Chicago even more of an edge over Houston, but not L.A. Essentially, L.A pretty much as sealed it's place as either our second largest, or even largest Metropolitan area. Chicago may drop from spot number 3 at some point, but I doubt it.