Chicago's "brain drain" and culture of "mediocrity" (Paris: houses, tech jobs)

[thefallensrvnge]

Originally Posted by marothisu

There is some definite brain drain, and not all the smartest people in the midwest move to Chicago, trust me. One of the things that Chicago could do is encourage companies to sponsor international people. I know literally 15 people in Chicago who moved back home because companies didn't want to sponsor them, because they'd never done it before and were afraid of doing so. It's really sad because most of them were very intelligent.

I agree. A lot of talent is coming from overseas, and it would be beneficial for Chicago to keep hold of these individuals. I would like to see the city take a larger hold of the tech market, and welcome individuals with the degrees in demand as there doesn't seem to be enough to go around in the US.

The way I see the brain drain is Chicago has the resources (universities, local theater, architecture firms, etc) to nurture talent, but the city just has a problem keeping it. For instance, the Art Institute is a top school that turns out talented fashion designers/artists every year, but they often flock to the East and West Coast not for simply better opportunity, just more of it. If the city could provide (the graduates or even the school) affordable studios in a centralized location near a shopping district (like the Mag Mile) and do a little to promote these individuals, Chicago might see a spike in a new market as well as an increase of tourism as Chicago becomes seen as a city that supports both well-known designers and local designers.

[Chi-town Native]

About Me | CHICAGO CARLESS

It's an opinion piece by a fella who seems frustrated that Chicago isn't embracing the "New Urbanism" principles fast enough for his liking.

He has some interesting observations, but there are much better places to go for actual analysis.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by Chicago60614

It loses people to the coasts as well, but the article seems to be taking something and then focusing on just one aspect only to try and push their point.

I have to agree with your analysis.

Sure, people in theater, entertainment, and fashion design leave Chicago.
And Silicon Valley is a bigger draw for tech jobs.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by thefallensrvnge

I agree. A lot of talent is coming from overseas, and it would be beneficial for Chicago to keep hold of these individuals. I would like to see the city take a larger hold of the tech market, and welcome individuals with the degrees in demand as there doesn't seem to be enough to go around in the US.

The way I see the brain drain is Chicago has the resources (universities, local theater, architecture firms, etc) to nurture talent, but the city just has a problem keeping it. For instance, the Art Institute is a top school that turns out talented fashion designers/artists every year, but they often flock to the East and West Coast not for simply better opportunity, just more of it. If the city could provide (the graduates or even the school) affordable studios in a centralized location near a shopping district (like the Mag Mile) and do a little to promote these individuals, Chicago might see a spike in a new market as well as an increase of tourism as Chicago becomes seen as a city that supports both well-known designers and local designers.

The bad part about it is an example with my ex girlfriend. She was one of these people who the company was like "Nope, we won't sponsor anybody" after she moved to a new company. The bad part is that she comes from a wealthy family and her dad was going to open up a business in Chicago, buy a house and rent it out, and possibly build a small apartment building. Because she went back to her home country, none of that ever happened. Some of her friends' parents were in the same boat and wanted to open up businesses in Chicago just because their kid(s) were here. It's like the city doesn't realize that there's a bunch of foreign people in this city who come from well off families and are willing to invest in our economy, but don't do it because companies are too stupid to hold onto the talent. It's basically an insurance policy for their kids, but since the kids move on, they don't end up doing it.y

The city should be offering an incentive to companies who are willing to sponsor especially if it has benefits for our economy.

[Lookout Kid]

It's supply and demand, Marothisu. If they needed this type of worker, they would sponsor them. I worked for an international firm with dual headquarters in NYC and Chicago that sponsored many employees from China, Korea, and the Middle East--even Europe. We had projects in those areas and the workers were valued. This does indeed happen in Chicago, maybe just not in your field.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Lookout Kid

It's supply and demand, Marothisu. If they needed this type of worker, they would sponsor them. I worked for an international firm with dual headquarters in NYC and Chicago that sponsored many employees from China, Korea, and the Middle East--even Europe. We had projects in those areas and the workers were valued. This does indeed happen in Chicago, maybe just not in your field.

I never said it doesn't happen in Chicago, and yes my field does sponsor people. I work directly with a large handful of people from other countries living in Chicago. However, as my example..my ex girlfriend's field was not the same as mine, nor were her friends'. Most of them not being sponsored wasn't even because they were bad workers. My ex was on the fast track to becoming a VP in her company and they were all upset when she had to leave. The CEO basically said "we've never sponsored anybody before and don't know what to do, so we can't do it."

My point is that Chicago sponsors less than other major cities do. If these people I knew were in NYC or LA, they would have had a much better chance of being sponsored. And that if companies here sponsored more, it may have greater impact on our economy in ways they aren't thinking of (i.e. families overseas wanting to set up business or buy homes).

[Attrill]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

About Me | CHICAGO CARLESS

It's an opinion piece by a fella who seems frustrated that Chicago isn't embracing the "New Urbanism" principles fast enough for his liking.

Yeah, that blog is pretty much just opinion pieces with no data to back anything up. A few years ago his blog shifted from opinions on urban planning to opinions about converting to Judaism. I'm sure he has a friend who's moving to NYC and so he's writing about how everyone is moving to NYC. Ultimately it's just his personal opinion with no data.

From my personal perspective it feels like no one moves to NYC, but I grew up in Boston where it seems like everyone leaves for NYC.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by Attrill

From my personal perspective it feels like no one moves to NYC, but I grew up in Boston where it seems like everyone leaves for NYC.

Anecdotal evidence is just that... Chicago is pretty widely understood to be an attractive option for young talent. NYC, LA, and SF are more prominently known as such, but that doesn't mean no one is moving here.

Anecdotally, I have never known a lot of people to leave Chicago for New York, but have know several that have gone to the West Coast over the years or places like Denver. And now I'm nearly 40, and know multiple families that have left NYC and the northeast for Chicago to raise their families. The average American moves every three years, so I'm sure we all know plenty of people who have relocated for various reasons.

[emathias]

I have said this before, and I will say it again:

Anyone who thinks of Aaron Renn's commentary as serious urbanism is a fool.

I'm sorry to be so blunt, but Aaron's pieces are replete with huge gaps in logic, with the twisting of data to fit a preconceived notion, and a desire to excuse his own lack of success in Chicago by making Chicago look bad instead of accepting and accounting for his own weaknesses. His bitterness over his lot in life was transparently bald the closer he got to leaving and, as much as I love small market America (and I do, I grew up there), leaving Chicago for Rhode Island does not support the idea that there is "brain drain". People who choose to live in Rhode Island are fundamentally not city people and, of course, would not feel at home in a big city such as Chicago. The author of the article in this thread identifies with Renn and, while considering other actual big cities, seems to be confusing a lack of personal success with some sort of systemic problem.

I've considered moving to most of the other big cities in the U.S., but I manage to earn as much here as I likely would anywhere else except San Francisco, and my cost of living in San Francisco would easily eclipse the extra money I might make on paper. And I love Chicago. I like San Francisco, too, and New York and even, gasp, L.A., but as far as my career goes, I'm doing fine here, and enjoying a wonderful standard of living while I do it.

Is any city perfect? Of course not. But Chicago's problems are rarely unique, and it has a lot of great strong points that, for me and others like me, draw us in. I always sound like an a-hole defending Chicago's ability to lure people, but I have a masters degree from one of the few universities in the world that anyone who knows the names of any universities at all has heard of, so I think my having moved here is one pretty good anecdote of brain gain for the City of Chicago.

[TheSunshineKid]

Originally Posted by mjtinmemphis

The segregation takes its toll on many Black American transplants especially after they find out how limiting it can be on their lives to the point where we leave for smaller cities to thrive socially and professionally.

You bring up the segregation issue ... like all the time.