Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As they say in trials -- "Assumes facts not in evidence"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwaiter
Like the mighty Phoenix, Chicago will rise from the ashes and flourish.
It certainly seems like lawmakers from Chicago, Cook Co and most of all the State legislature are unwilling to do anything other than continue to raise taxes to attempt to squeeze more revenue into the money pits they've created.
Without changes in the overly generous benefits that flow equally to highly paid lawmakers and folks that have salaries well into the hundreds of thousands, as well as a veritable army of more modestly compensated employees, there is simply no way to avoid bankruptcy. Bankruptcy by itself is not really a viable way to undo the provisions of the Illinois Constitution, the State Supreme Court has made that clear. Heck, given that the jurists themselves have so much at stake, it would not surprise anyone that there would be invalidatation of any amendment to the constitution that would set a precedent for slimming down benefits made under prior agreements -- http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...pension-reform
The "ashes" will have to pile up much higher than they currently are, and the only "Phoenix" to rise will likely be decades in the future...
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,281,063 times
Reputation: 1483
I think what someone is saying is.... after he is gone. A Phoenix in FULL will rise. I won't use to words..from the ashes.
I believe in a few decades most of the housing will remain in vibrant neighborhoods as today. But the Southside where blight cause much to be lost in housing. Will have a new Chicago rise on their spots completed from the ashes. West Side first some started...
We will even see a New Detroit then too. Chicago shows no signs of succumbing to doomsayers. Winters are still its WORST FEATURE that slows a BOOM of movers to the city. I truly believe that.
I have read in forums many especially West Coasters and those from the South/Southwestern US say many times.... the LOVED THE CITY and would move there .... IF NOT FOR THE WINTERS. New Yorkers view the city inferior to NYC because of less very old architecture and layout the has neighborhoods more quiet then a content borage of people on streets.
Chicago IS NOT NYC. It also is not Houston. Chicago can be a more modern city with preserving much of its past too. But for Gold Coast Mansions and Near North Shore ones too. The city DID get preserved a decent MIX. The Loop surely has if not All that could have/should have been. THANKFULLY THERE WERE ENOUGH PRESERVATIONIST ACTIVE TO SAVE WHAT IT HAS. OTHERWISE..... it could have been much worst.
Manhattan which stayed more Art Deco in its Modern choices. But with much before that era too. Chicago did have its Great Fire and though did gain a few decades of New Gilded-age homes. Sadly MANY ON THE SHORE WAS SEEN TOO PRIME of a area to keep 3-story homes it seems sadly. If further inland..... they SURELY WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LOST.
No use holding it against the city today. The North Shore and other areas still have plenty of examples even if not all the grandest as the wealthiest built close to the Shore.
Time to dwell on what was saved and positives in new. Really, I have less problem with podium-style garage residential high-rises then some here. Because they still proved PEOPLE moving in and PEOPLE ARE THE LIFE anyway. Retail and businesses will come as needed. Many Loop parking garages were done with Retail street-level. A couple mimic Old School Chicago style façades. Till you look up and see its a garage.
Corridors of retail on main streets and intersections. Was ALWAYS how Chicago built. It did not have the MASSIVE population living in the Loop as Manhattan has. So Retail Streets had most. Rather then dispersed throughout but for eateries. But seems as MORE Living IN the Loop today....and Near North and River North is increasing INFILLING of businesses. It is a process and NEED NOT BE COMPARED TO NYC. Chains are a fact of life too.
Chicago is a MIX of East/West and its OWN STYLE and FLAIR to ARCHITECTURE. Is has still a MORE MODERN DOWNTOWN Then Eastern cities despised the Older saved even in the Loop. Chicago PENNED THE TERM.... MODERN AND NEW-SCHOOL CHICAGO ARCHITECTURE. From Frank Lloyd Wright to Louis Sullivan. IT WAS POST GUILDED-AGE of ARCHITECTURE that gave the Loop its Older Skyscrapers.
Far more in forums say they MUST LEAVE MANHATTAN BEING PRICED OUT. At least in Chicago you might only have to move a few blocks or the next neighborhood. In NYC forums.... many are steered to the next state. Like New Jersey.
Taking Chicago to GLOOM AND DOOM is some posters LIFE it seems. Again SHOOT ME IF I LIVE FOR THAT and will RELISH A DAY IF RIGHT.... No one should IGNORE POSITIVES to use Political blaming and debt alone to MOCK A STILL VERY VIBRANT CITY as it HAPPENED ALREADY.
I agree CHICAGO WILL HAVE A REAL MORE COMPLETE RENEWAL and the Midwest/Great Lakes region especially. If Global change and water issues get worst? Never say.... "Never again in the US of A". You generally are proved wrong.
I believe in a few decades most of the housing will remain in vibrant neighborhoods as today. But the Southside where blight cause much to be lost in housing. Will have a new Chicago rise on their spots completed from the ashes. West Side first some started...
Given our economy and the directions in which it is going, certainly as it relates to car ownership and running, I find it inconceivable that the real estate of Chicago's West and South sides will not rise in value and will not be reclaimed.
Public transportation and proximity to jobs will make these areas open to redevelopment.
Post WWII America built the polar opposite of Europe's model of expense cities and poorer regions in the periphery. And today we see wealth go to the city cores in our more successful urban centers (i.e. NY, SF, Boston).
Chicago's infrastructure, its extensive surface, heavy and computer rail systems, indeed its very centralization offers advantages that most cities can only dream of, particularly the sprawling, car oriented Sun Belt metropolises, particularly those of the southwest (Houston, Phoenix, etc.) could ever offer. And those advantages should be more apparent in this less auto-centric era.
The true worth of West and South Side real estate is far more valuable than it appears. It will comeback.
Given our economy and the directions in which it is going, certainly as it relates to car ownership and running, I find it inconceivable that the real estate of Chicago's West and South sides will not rise in value and will not be reclaimed.
Public transportation and proximity to jobs will make these areas open to redevelopment.
It will comeback.
I hope you're right! I know you may think I'm a smart a-- about the Job Fairy and all but I really do want to believe.
In what sectors will the jobs that fuel the revitalization of the West and South sides be in? How will the City attract them? It would seem the City and State's financial situation and resulting prospect for unpredictable tax increases (particularly on "evil" corporations as many Democrats call for) would make many companies pause before locating here, so how will the City and State get around this? It would also seem that the City's reputation as pro-union and its support of mandatory minimum wage laws coupled with the State's employee-favorable workers' compensation laws would also serve as a deterrent to a company weighing Chicago against, say, Nashville, Tennessee or Austin, Texas, which are more economically conservative and favor business over labor. So how will the City get around that?
Chicago has a lot going for it, including infrastructure, desirability to educated workforces due to amenities and culture, and its key benefits as a transportation hub (which matter less with information jobs but could certainly support increases in the manufacturing sector). But the obstacles are real. I wonder how they will be addressed, because I'm really not seeing any kind of focused drive to attract business and jobs from the State or the City.
I hope you're right! I know you may think I'm a smart a-- about the Job Fairy and all but I really do want to believe.
In what sectors will the jobs that fuel the revitalization of the West and South sides be in? How will the City attract them? It would seem the City and State's financial situation and resulting prospect for unpredictable tax increases (particularly on "evil" corporations as many Democrats call for) would make many companies pause before locating here, so how will the City and State get around this? It would also seem that the City's reputation as pro-union and its support of mandatory minimum wage laws coupled with the State's employee-favorable workers' compensation laws would also serve as a deterrent to a company weighing Chicago against, say, Nashville, Tennessee or Austin, Texas, which are more economically conservative and favor business over labor. So how will the City get around that?
Chicago has a lot going for it, including infrastructure, desirability to educated workforces due to amenities and culture, and its key benefits as a transportation hub (which matter less with information jobs but could certainly support increases in the manufacturing sector). But the obstacles are real. I wonder how they will be addressed, because I'm really not seeing any kind of focused drive to attract business and jobs from the State or the City.
Bru has excellent insight - he has seen what is holding back Berwyn, and now that he has moved into Pilsen the lack of employers that can sustain growth is even more apparent.
The fact is darned near EVERY state that has any kind of urban-ish city has massively invested in office type career base. From former rust belt downtowns in other Great Lakes states, to the "high plains" and former sleepy southern hamlets they've all worked hard to get banks, insurance firms, telecom and other employers. Some have very impressively swung into higher education & technology, as well healthcare.
Chicago has never really had a single sector that was over-weighted in its economy , with possible exception of commodities / futures, and thus probably has not worked as hard as say Pittsburgh to use tech as path away from steel or Nashville using healthcare as diversification from country music.
Yet each of those states has also done much to attract firms that do have big investments in capital intensive manufacturing. That was once where Chicago shined, from the old days of electronics powerhouses like Motorola, Zenith, Western Electric to east side mills / foundaries, there were once great jobs on the west, east & south sides
for people to support their family. Policies that made it too much of insiders game have seen these firms move to states eager to be more flexible.
Unless Chicago stops trying to protect insiders and wakes up to the reality that other states have decimated our labor base the "phoenix" won't rise here.
I've come to believe that many liberals, and of course those on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale, think that the only difference between the rich and poor is that the former got lucky or benefited from an unfair advantage of some kind. So, they reason, there will be no harm whatsoever in redistributing the wealth from the former to the latter. This would merely amount to correcting a grave injustice.
Of course, reality is much more complex than this. You need to attract wealth to grow job sectors, and there is stiff competition for that wealth from other regions, so you will have to offer that wealth certain incentives that might seem unfair to some (e.g. "tax breaks for the rich"). And there are always going to be people who are more motivated/talented/lucky/successful who will have more than others, which will lead to resentment. And it is easy to exploit these feelings of resentment, which is why I think it'll be very tough for a "no nonsense" pro-business candidate to even get elected, much less stay elected. Any economic recovery plan will be slow and will not benefit everyone right away. It will also result in losers who are organized and politically connected, and it'll be easy for these folks to exploit the angst of those who have yet to benefit and find their way back into power.
Hopefully I'm wrong and Chicagoans are more insightful than this. It'll take a special group to put their necks on the line to test it though, that's for dang sure!
I've come to believe that many liberals, and of course those on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale, think that the only difference between the rich and poor is that the former got lucky or benefited from an unfair advantage of some kind. So, they reason, there will be no harm whatsoever in redistributing the wealth from the former to the latter. This would merely amount to correcting a grave injustice.
Of course, reality is much more complex than this. You need to attract wealth to grow job sectors, and there is stiff competition for that wealth from other regions, so you will have to offer that wealth certain incentives that might seem unfair to some (e.g. "tax breaks for the rich"). And there are always going to be people who are more motivated/talented/lucky/successful who will have more than others, which will lead to resentment. And it is easy to exploit these feelings of resentment, which is why I think it'll be very tough for a "no nonsense" pro-business candidate to even get elected, much less stay elected. Any economic recovery plan will be slow and will not benefit everyone right away. It will also result in losers who are organized and politically connected, and it'll be easy for these folks to exploit the angst of those who have yet to benefit and find their way back into power.
Hopefully I'm wrong and Chicagoans are more insightful than this. It'll take a special group to put their necks on the line to test it though, that's for dang sure!
There are both small-minded liberals and small-minded conservatives. Believing that wealth is only, or even primarily, achieved through actions of individuals is just as much of a fallacy as believing that wealth is only the results of luck or unfair advantage. I think that an honest assessment of how wealth is created would lead most to believe that insomuch as wealth is accumulated through shared advantages created by a social, cultural, political or legal system, the results should be shared with others in that social, cultural, political or legal system. At their best, that is part of what unions negotiate.
Most people, even the most liberal, believe that the man with a good idea does deserve more than men without ideas, but if no one worked for Henry Ford the idea of an assembly line would have been for nothing. The sharing of success with the greater body of those who enable it or enabled the setting in which is was possible also serves to enable more people to be willing to try ideas. Even ideas everyone believes are good ideas don't always turn out to be workable and it's not necessarily in anyone's interest that people with good idea have to risk everything to test them because then many ideas will never be tested. If ideas are the currency of the future, it benefits everyone to have as many worthy ideas tested as possible, and using the success of ideas that pan out to enable the testing of new ideas is, regardless of ideology, just good fiscal practice. Smart companies do that all the time internally by funding R&D projects with profits from past successes. Why anyone thinks it's smart business to do that in a select number of private businesses, but bad business to do the same thing as a nation is beyond me.
I hope you're right! I know you may think I'm a smart a-- about the Job Fairy and all but I really do want to believe.
In what sectors will the jobs that fuel the revitalization of the West and South sides be in? How will the City attract them?
a good question, BRU, and I wish I had the answer. Frankly I don't. But when I suggested the redevelopment of the South and West Side, I wasn't really thinking about city/metro growth, but just redistribution. I'm suggesting that the advantages of that well developed transpiration system of surface lines, heavy rail, and commuter rail offers the very opportunities for living without the dependence on the car (which has become somewhat of a negative) .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As they say in trials -- "Assumes facts not in evidence"...
I think what someone is saying is.... after he is gone. A Phoenix in FULL will rise. I won't use to words..from the ashes. 
No one should IGNORE POSITIVES to use Political blaming and debt alone to MOCK A STILL VERY VIBRANT CITY as it HAPPENED ALREADY. 
