Is it a popular misconception for ppl to think of Chicago as an affordable city just because it's in the midwest? (Lincoln: 2013, renting)

[EastBoundandDownChick]

I think Chicago is a good value especially for people who are looking to start their careers. It provides opportunities not available in smaller markets and is still affordable enough that someone can live decently on an entry-level salary. Having lived in NYC I appreciate that someone can be starting out and still have their own place in a decent neighborhood. This isn't realistic for most individuals in NYC.

[MassVt]

Yes, people from Columbus and Omaha will find Chicago expensive; those from NYC, SF and Boston will think that Chicago is a bargain..

It might be said, though, that the overshadowing of Chicago might be a benefit to its own residents in that its prices will remain somewhat affordable. If it ever truly became "discovered", then...there goes the neighborhood...

[prelude91]

Originally Posted by EastBoundandDownChick

I think Chicago is a good value especially for people who are looking to start their careers. It provides opportunities not available in smaller markets and is still affordable enough that someone can live decently on an entry-level salary. Having lived in NYC I appreciate that someone can be starting out and still have their own place in a decent neighborhood. This isn't realistic for most individuals in NYC.

I did entry level in NYC, that usually means lots of 3 or 4 roomates living in a 900 sq ft apartment, with a make shift 'bedroom"

[EastBoundandDownChick]

Originally Posted by MassVt

Yes, people from Columbus and Omaha will find Chicago expensive; those from NYC, SF and Boston will think that Chicago is a bargain..

It might be said, though, that the overshadowing of Chicago might be a benefit to its own residents in that its prices will remain somewhat affordable. If it ever truly became "discovered", then...there goes the neighborhood...

I hope that never happens. I don't think it will, honestly, because Chicago has an entirely different set of dynamics than coastal cities such as the ones you mentioned. Chicago tends to attract and retain mainly individuals from the Midwest whereas NYC attracts people from EVERYWHERE. This means foreign investors buy up their property and jack up the housing prices. It also means tons of immigrants in places like NYC who are attracted to it because they know it's a 'sanctuary city'. Unfortunately, a lot of (not all) of these people do undocumented work and live off the social assistance from the government (Section 8) jacking up rents. Of course these things occur in Chicago, but not nearly on that level. I can see Chicago gentrifying further in the years to come simply because the price of oil is going to go berserk and people will again see the value of public transit and city living as opposed to suburban sprawl and cost-inefficient housing. But Chicago is a large city geographically and can sustain the impact of that rather well, which is another reason why I don't see the COL becoming stratospheric.

[5Lakes]

Originally Posted by prelude91

But don't you think Chicago should be compared to cities of similar urban caliber? What is the point of comparing COL between Chicago and Tulsa? Chicago can easily match SF, DC, Boston, Seattle on ammenities at a much lower COL.

Probably, but most of American does not care about urban amenities. Yeah, some urbanist might say "wow, Chicago is a real deal compared to Boston," but the majority of people don't care about this and will just see Chicago as a more expensive place than where they live.

[oakparkV]

Originally Posted by chet everett

It is the exactly the kind of detachment from reality that allows pols to boost taxes when there are people that believe this nonsense:




FOR THE LOVE OF ....!! -- sales taxes ARE THE SAME AT WHOLE FOODS, JEWEL OR DON Saddam Nikolpolis-Ngyuen's All Ethnic Mini-Mart the STATE COUNTRY AND CITY take just as BIG a bite no matter what sort of "coupon clipping" you do.

Chicago does not even a "best in the Midwest" public transit system if cost efficiency is factored in.

Originally Posted by chet everett

It is the exactly the kind of detachment from reality that allows pols to boost taxes when there are people that believe this nonsense:




FOR THE LOVE OF ....!! -- sales taxes ARE THE SAME AT WHOLE FOODS, JEWEL OR DON Saddam Nikolpolis-Ngyuen's All Ethnic Mini-Mart the STATE COUNTRY AND CITY take just as BIG a bite no matter what sort of "coupon clipping" you do.

Chicago does not even a "best in the Midwest" public transit system if cost efficiency is factored in.

Wow, excuse the !#$%^& out of me... Yes, the sales taxes are the same, but prices tend to be lower at [Insert Pejorative Ethnic Name Here], thus offsetting the consumer's final cost.

And fine, maybe I was exaggerating when I called the public transit system here "world-class" but I hardly think I'm in the minority because I'd rather pay $4.50 a day than $4.50 a gallon to get to and from work.

So, pardon my "lunacy" and "detached sense of reality" Mr. Everett, but was that really, really necessary of you?

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by oakparkV

Wow, excuse the !#$%^& out of me... Yes, the sales taxes are the same, but prices tend to be lower at [Insert Pejorative Ethnic Name Here], thus offsetting the consumer's final cost.

And fine, maybe I was exaggerating when I called the public transit system here "world-class" but I hardly think I'm in the minority because I'd rather pay $4.50 a day than $4.50 a gallon to get to and from work.

So, pardon my "lunacy" and "detached sense of reality" Mr. Everett, but was that really, really necessary of you?

Forgive Chet

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Chicago is an affordable city for what it offers. I don't care where it is

[chris72]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

I think the focus of desirability is different in Chicago versus California or even New York or possibly DC.

The attraction of Chicago is all about downtown. There is a HUGE gradient in cost of living/price of housing in the greater Chicagoland area. Especially if you think about that gradient between the loop and points south all the way to the south suburbs or northwest Indiana.

Whereas in California, the attraction is more about "California" than it is about the downtown of any city.

New York may even be the same way. While all those coastal metro areas certainly have run-down, non desirable areas, or really sedate, boring areas, the highly sought after, desirableness of those areas are more widespread throughout the metro areas. Its less the case in Chicago.

In Chicagoland there are two Chicagos: Theres downtown/north side which is the slice of the New York lifestyle in the middle of a midwestern metropolis, and there is the rest of Chicagoland, which is more like the other metropolitan areas of the midwest, just a little more expensive, more hispanic presence, and a little better economy, otherwise outside of downtown and north side, its essentiall urban Ohio/Michigan.

A lot of people that move to New York though insist on living in Manhattan

[Aleking]

Originally Posted by oakparkV

And fine, maybe I was exaggerating when I called the public transit system here "world-class" but I hardly think I'm in the minority because I'd rather pay $4.50 a day than $4.50 a gallon to get to and from work.

I'm saving a couple hundred dollars a month from what i was a few years back before my company moved to the loop and gas wasn't even $4+ then.