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

[chet everett]

Well if some one says "world class" I think Hong Kong or Paris so now who needs to get with the reality?

[linicx]

Well.. according to Money-Rates the #1 best state to earn a living is in Illinois. None of the states around us are ranked Top 10 or Bottom 10. Texas is two behind Illinois at #3, and California is in the bottom 10.

What I do not know is if any of thosee "other" Chicago taxes Chet mentioned (not property taxes) were factored in. Probably not since they are particular to Chicago residents. .

//www.city-data.com/forum/19038125-post1.html

[grapico]

Originally Posted by smallvillejane

I have friends moving from california to chicago and they complain that Chicago is not as "affordable" as they originally thought. For instance, homes in some of the nice north side neighborhoods (lincoln park, old town, lakeview, river north, streeterville, gold coast etc come to mind) can easily cost $300-400 per sf, and go up to over a $1000 per sf in some of the premier buildings (Trump Tower, Ritz Residences, etc come to mind). Price of renting a 2-3 bedroom home can easily cost $2000-$3000 if not more.

Adding insult to injury is the sale tax which is among the highest in the country; gas price, among the highest in the country; income tax, which just had a 50% increase last year. According to a recent study (10 Most Expensive Cities | Made Manual), Chicago is the 4th most expensive city to live in the US, ahead of such crunchy names as San Francisco, Boston, DC, etc.

Is it a popular misconception for ppl to think of Chicago as an affordable city just because it's in the midwest?

No way that is right... Prices were much more expensive in SF for the same property, in fact, almost double...and expensive into the suburbs as well, often more so.
Boston is also w/o a doubt more expensive.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by chet everett

...
I will drill into em as I feel like it.

Measuring Productivity at the Chicago Transit Authority | The Civic Federation

http://www.nctr.usf.edu/jpt/pdf/JPT11-4Raju.pdf
...

Okay, so the first one mostly talks about cost per trip. That's not a very useful metric for comparing efficiency, because a bunch of short trips are going to be cheaper than a bunch of long trips. That's why I specifically cited cost per passenger mile.

Where the first one talks about the cost per passenger mile, their number are so far off the numbers I see from using original sources that even though in general I trust the Civic Federation, I would need to know more about how they do their calculations in order to discuss them. I'd prefer to stick with original sources unless the secondary source has a detailed description of how they calculate their cost estimates.

Finally for the first one, your original complaint was that Chicago was not efficient compared to other midwestern cities, yet that article lists other large cities, none of which are in the midwest.

The second article is just a silly thing to cite in a discussion comparing efficiency of systems, since it primarily discusses the funding of a single proposed (in other words, non-existent) light rail line. I'm not sure how that's relevant.

[speedygonzales]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Well if some one says "world class" I think Hong Kong or Paris so now who needs to get with the reality?

Here you are evading the original issue you brought up. I can't say I am surprised.

[prelude91]

Originally Posted by smallvillejane

I have friends moving from california to chicago and they complain that Chicago is not as "affordable" as they originally thought. For instance, homes in some of the nice north side neighborhoods (lincoln park, old town, lakeview, river north, streeterville, gold coast etc come to mind) can easily cost $300-400 per sf, and go up to over a $1000 per sf in some of the premier buildings (Trump Tower, Ritz Residences, etc come to mind). Price of renting a 2-3 bedroom home can easily cost $2000-$3000 if not more.

Adding insult to injury is the sale tax which is among the highest in the country; gas price, among the highest in the country; income tax, which just had a 50% increase last year. According to a recent study (10 Most Expensive Cities | Made Manual), Chicago is the 4th most expensive city to live in the US, ahead of such crunchy names as San Francisco, Boston, DC, etc.

Is it a popular misconception for ppl to think of Chicago as an affordable city just because it's in the midwest?

Couple of comments:

1. I can probably name the number of buildings that cost $1,000 per sq foot on one hand, and those are about as high end as you can get in Chicago. Manhattan apartments AVERAGE about $1,000 per sq foot, those same $1,000 sq foot buildings in Chicago would be $4,000-5,000 sq ft in New York. $300-400 per sq foot seems to be about right for new construction for high end real estate in desirable neighborhoods (good luck finding those prices in NYC, Boston, DC, SF)

2. While Sales tax and gas are high in Chicago, It isn't really that noticable compared to other Cities (at least that's been my experience)

3. NYC, LA, DC, SF, Boston, Seattle, Miami are all more expensive cities than Chicago.

Lets be honest, while Chicago is an awesome city, it is viewed as less desirable to many because of it's midwest location. I honestly think that is a huge factor to its awsomeness, the avg Joe can afford to live in great neighborhoods!

[jdiddy]

Originally Posted by speedygonzales

Here you are evading the original issue you brought up. I can't say I am surprised.

As a new member, you probably should be surprised.

[Vlajos]

So St. Louis has a better transit system than Chicago? Wow, that's breaking news!

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by chet everett

I swear,you people are going to drive to drink -- NY has a graduated income tax -- higher income brackets get a higher rate. Illinois has the same rate for all. There is no "soak the rich" only "allow Madigan and Quinn to tighten the noose tighter".

If you are not smart enough to take a flat tax rate out of your income stream how can it possibility be easier to budget a rising rate???

You can't budget for property taxes as they are based on an assessed value you have no control over (and which turned out to be sheer fantasy when viewed over the past 10 years).

Did you miss the memo in the early Oughts of people's taxes going up 30 - 50%+ overnight?

This is very simple. Income taxes are based on actual income. Property taxes are based on unrealized gains in times of prosperity, and on a bloated City levy.

If you want to reign in moronic City spending, the first thing to do is get people to understand how the budgets are funded - and nobody on earth is currently able to reconcile the TIF shell game as it doesn't exist on property tax bills, it's basically a shadow tax.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

...
Did you miss the memo in the early Oughts of people's taxes going up 30 - 50%+ overnight?
...

Yeah, but it wasnt' just the early 00's. Mine have gone up approximately 45% over 7 years, and 90% of that increase was in the past 2 years. It wouldn't necessarily be terrible if a) my property was actually gaining value and b) everyone's went up by about the same amount and c) the money was for some sort of useful new city service instead of just propping up an unsustainable system. But none of those things happened so it's quite galling.