Chicago 7th most expensive city in the world? (Lincoln, Warsaw: prices, suburbs)

[Larry Siegel]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The relative isolation that UofC somewhat encourages even today is largely a product of the urban violence erupted during the late 60s / early 70s. Though the scars of that violence do remain nearly 50 years later, the true extent of the actual threat to safety was rather limited geographically.

Two of my fellow undergraduates were murdered. My roommate was abducted at gunpoint. My girlfriend was raped at gunpoint. I was mugged. These experiences were typical of the U of C in the late 1960s and early 1970s, not aberrations.

[Lookout Kid]

Originally Posted by Larry Siegel

Two of my fellow undergraduates were murdered. My roommate was abducted at gunpoint. My girlfriend was raped at gunpoint. I was mugged. These experiences were typical of the U of C in the late 1960s and early 1970s, not aberrations.

A friend of mine was mugged twice within six weeks of moving to Hyde Park in the early 2000's. She lived near U of C and used the Metra to commute to a job downtown. Both muggings occurred while she was walking home from the Metra.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by chet everett

The unemployment rate is only way to look at who is "out looking for work".

The labor force participation rate gives a much better sense for who truly "not working".

National labor force participation is trending in a disturbing way --

Economists from the Chicago Federal Reserve have been at the forefront of showing how these trends, which are particularly troubling for males of low educational attainment, will snowball -- https://www.chicagofed.org/~/media/p...n-etal-pdf.pdf

Originally Posted by marothisu

Yep, this is true. I'm actually not sure of how Business Insider/BLS is accurately getting monthly data about the number of 16+ year olds since these numbers aren't necessarily published, especially every month. The closest thing we have is the yearly ACS. I guess there's other ways to predict it but still not totally accurate.

In any case, luckily for Chicago, the July 2015 count of employed persons in the city is the highest it's been since July 2001.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics Local Area Unemployment Statistics Local Area Unemployment Statistics Home Page

Labor force participation is tricky thing to use. As you could see on the chart, labor force participation was much lower in the era of our grandparents. This is partly because of women not typically working. And now part of the reason it's declining is due to retirement, either natural retirement rates as the demographics show older people taking up a greater and greater portion of our population, or some early retirement due to an inability to find work and a sense that learning a new trade when you're only a few years from retirement anyway is, if not exactly a waste of time, an endeavor with rapidly diminishing returns. Some portion of it is also a greater number of people availing themselves of disability support. The disability system is controversial and some people think it's abused or else the numbers wouldn't be rising.

But it's also possible that the economic sustainability of hiring marginally capable workers really has made jobs for classes of workers much harder to find. After a recession, companies learn that they can get by without an extra worker who uses a lot of sick time, and so they can afford to be pickier. And after a recession it takes time for workers to push back against excessive overtime, to lose the fear of losing their job just because they'd rather work 45 hours than 55 hours, or 40 hours instead of 45.

[williepotatoes]

Originally Posted by emathias

Labor force participation is tricky thing to use. As you could see on the chart, labor force participation was much lower in the era of our grandparents. This is partly because of women not typically working. And now part of the reason it's declining is due to retirement, either natural retirement rates as the demographics show older people taking up a greater and greater portion of our population, or some early retirement due to an inability to find work and a sense that learning a new trade when you're only a few years from retirement anyway is, if not exactly a waste of time, an endeavor with rapidly diminishing returns. Some portion of it is also a greater number of people availing themselves of disability support. The disability system is controversial and some people think it's abused or else the numbers wouldn't be rising.

But it's also possible that the economic sustainability of hiring marginally capable workers really has made jobs for classes of workers much harder to find. After a recession, companies learn that they can get by without an extra worker who uses a lot of sick time, and so they can afford to be pickier. And after a recession it takes time for workers to push back against excessive overtime, to lose the fear of losing their job just because they'd rather work 45 hours than 55 hours, or 40 hours instead of 45.

Yes, the boomers are retiring fast and furious these days. I've had three good friends retire since June and another one is out come this february when she turns sixty-two. The boomer retirement curve has just started and will most certainly climb for years to come.

[MassVt]

Originally Posted by williepotatoes

Yes, the boomers are retiring fast and furious these days. I've had three good friends retire since June and another one is out come this february when she turns sixty-two. The boomer retirement curve has just started and will most certainly climb for years to come.

The older ones, yes, but the younger members have another decade, or more, in the workforce. Without immigration, legal or not, the workforce percentage would be even lower. There are likely more early retirements due to outsourcing/cutbacks, as many can't find new jobs, and taking a lower Social Security check seems to be the only option..

[Drackoe]

Any list like this that doesn't have San Francisco above Chicago is a joke. I'm not even sure Chicago is the 7th most expensive city in the US. NYC, DC, Boston, San Francisco, Miami, LA, San Diego - they're all more expensive and I'm probably missing some.

[knitgirl]

I don't know if this is any more accurate, but it gives an entirely different picture of how expensive Chicago is relative to other US cities: America’s Most Overpriced Cities In 2015 | Forbes

[nana053]

Lots of those are in California.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by knitgirl

I don't know if this is any more accurate, but it gives an entirely different picture of how expensive Chicago is relative to other US cities: America’s Most Overpriced Cities In 2015 | Forbes

Not surprised by some of these. Of course, Chicago nowhere to be found. One thing that these lists don't often take into consideration is income tax, which for many states takes up usually a pretty large percentage compared to other taxes. You could have a situation where you get paid $60K in Minneapolis versus $70K in Chicago, with $700/month average Minneapolis rent versus $1000/month average Chicago rent - and when you consider what you'll pay for rent and factor in the income tax per year, the percentage you pay to your gross annual income in these is actually very slightly higher in Minneapolis due to the higher income tax rate.

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by knitgirl

I don't know if this is any more accurate, but it gives an entirely different picture of how expensive Chicago is relative to other US cities: America’s Most Overpriced Cities In 2015 | Forbes

I often find the info turned out by the NAR to paint a rather different picture than data that focuses on rentals because, as is clearly stated:

...homes sold against median income levels to determine the percentage of homes that are affordable to residents making the median income.

Kind of big DUH on that...