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.
Here's the difference that always gets overlooked: Chicago was a huge city that has had to retrofit itself to endure two separate economic revolutions, suburbanization, changing federal policy, changing consumer preferences, racial integration, etc. All the while, due to shrinking federal support over the last 35 years (and other factors), there has been deferred maintenance on things like roads and transportation due to white flight,changing economics, neighborhood type preferences, etc. It is all related.
That's not Dallas. Dallas is pretty new. I mean, sure it was still not an insignificant place after WWII. However, what was there has been far surpassed by what is now there. It hasn't had time for its own neglected problems catch up to it. Give Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston 20 more year to kick their policy/fiscal cans down the road and there will be issues. Wait until all of those new roadways have 30 years of age on them. Wait until the industries driving the job surge in those places go the way of AI and people who live there have to completely retool their careers the same way people in manufacturing did in the Midwest from 1965-1990. Atlanta's growth has really curbed in the last 15 years and they're facing their first "older city" problem: rapidly escalating suburban poverty that will really harm the entire region in the long term in terms of economic growth, productivity, transportation, and social costs.
I'm not saying that Chicago (and IL) don't need to take a deep look at their fiscal policies. I'm merely pointing out that it is absurd to compare older cities to places in the Sun Belt that haven't had to reinvent themselves as they hit the point where they begin to face "old city" problems. Someone who is 30 could move there right now, and I guarantee by the time they are 50, they're going to see the same tax creep.
Analogy: buy a house that will need 2K of upkeep annually to maintain it properly. Skimp on that and spend only 1K per year and tell me where you are in 10 years. That's Dallas. Drag that skimping out for 30 years and tell me where you are. That's Chicago.
I disagree. Of the top 10 MSAs, Chicago arguably provides more bang for the buck though. There actually *are* very small types of *social* services in Chicago that do not even exist in Dallas (or anywhere else in TX, mind you). Stop focusing so much on roads/sales taxes and you might actually widen your viewpoint a little.
Yes, Chicago has a very low cost of living for such a large city. It's one of the perks of living here compared to a place like NYC.
Re: the services thing... Everyone says "you get more services for the taxes you pay" but cannot actually provide any examples. Could you provide examples? What services have been added since the property tax and income tax increases.
Maybe if Chicago voters would elect people who focus more on minimizing taxes and balancing the budget, the city wouldn't be in the financial state it's currently in.
Yes, Chicago has a very low cost of living for such a large city. It's one of the perks of living here compared to a place like NYC.
Re: the services thing... Everyone says "you get more services for the taxes you pay" but cannot actually provide any examples. Could you provide examples? What services have been added since the property tax and income tax increases.
Maybe if Chicago voters would elect people who focus more on minimizing taxes and balancing the budget, the city wouldn't be in the financial state it's currently in.
I think rising property taxes in the city are going to cause some pushback. They've historically been lower than the suburbs since middle class people believe they can't use the public schools (CPS is only 9.9% white) and therefore haven't been willing to pay as much. Paying more and more for something you don't use is going to cause either more movement to the suburbs or voting for politicians who promise to better represent your interests.
The main reason Chicago and Illinois are in such a bad financial state is because of pensions. They overpromised to past generations without having the taxpayer base to fund the pensions. Pensioners get to live high on the hog while the current generation funds their retirement. As more people flee the state, it will continue to get worse. The only answer Illinois politicians know is to simply raise taxes.
Also, I don't ever see Dallas running into "old city" problems. The Texas way of handling age is to tear it down and rebuild (which is actually cheaper than refurbishing something old). Dallas is actually a very old city, but many of the old buildings were torn down and replaced in past decades.
As for the roads, I don't ever see Dallas roads being as bad as Chicago roads due to weather differences. Roads in Chicago require more upkeep because of cold and snow. Even if the city contributes the same amount as Dallas, they'll still look like crap because of the weather.
I'm not disagreeing that pensions are the big reason for the budget issue, both at the state and local level. This is about the local level, however, so we'll stick to that. What you're still not getting is that yes, while the pension issue has been dealt with irresponsibly, expenses across the board are largely a product of where the city is in its life cycle+reinvention process. Dallas is not a "very old" city. Metropolitan districts from pre-war census tallies are more or less the same thing as what the census now calls urban areas (not MSAs). Dallas didn't become one until 1910. Population: 121,000. About the same as Beaumont TX today. At the time, the Chicago metropolitan district already had 2.45 million people. Relative to its size and growth patterns today, the old portion of the city (what remains of it anyway) is insignificant. NE cities are old. MW cities of the formerly industrial variety are old. Relative to Dallas, cities like Seattle, Portland, LA, and San Francisco are old.
What happens when you have an old city? Well, there's a lot of old stuff that needs replacing. Bridges. Retrofitting roadways to accommodate modern traffic patterns in tight spaces. Things like sewer lines. Chicago is undertaking a massive project to replace 120 year old pipe that got put off the last 30 years. Those deferred expenses add up. Each year, the city is digging up and replacing 70 or so miles of the mains at a cost of $450 million. That is roughly equivalent to all of Dallas' capital budget for the year for everything (airport, roadway, sewer/water). Those are old city expenses. And as you grow, it becomes increasingly difficult to simply "tear the old stuff down" because there is more and more old stuff and less and less growth.
It's telling to me that Dallas ran up on their own pension problem to the tune of $5 billion per the GAO. Smaller than CHI, but in some ways its even more remarkable. New growth should be able to cover pre-existing liabilities pretty easily. That's where cities often run into trouble. They plan for growth that doesn't come to fruition. Except in Dallas' case they got the growth in tax base and still couldn't keep up. It got fixed--and the fix was easier--but it doesn't bode well for the city responsibly handling issues when the growth dries up. It always does for every large city. And they never "stay current on" all of those sewers, water lines, bridges, old schools, rail lines, streets, etc. Ever. The metro has grown more slowly in the last 10 year than it has in any 10 year period since WWII. It will likely grow <20% from 2010-20 census counts. A lot better than having zero growth like the Chicago region, but it points to the conclusion that growth doesn't last forever. Then there's this little thing called water/climate change. That's going to cost something and I'm going to go out on a limb and say the Great Lakes region has that under control.
There's some truth to the idea that cities like Dallas have not yet been forced to deal with the consequences of age, disappearing industry, uncontrolled sprawl, etc. Some of these Chicago vs Dallas threads have also ignored that fact that weather in Texas is unbearably hot and humid, and 6 months of 90-degree temps, with no let-up, is not something to be ignored..
Maybe I'm just being shortsighted, but I think there's more to it than "Chicago is old and is having to refurbish". NYC and Boston are much older than Chicago, yet they aren't facing the same "old stuff needs to be replaced" problems as Chicago.
I suspect that the financial problems in Chicago have been caused by:
1. Blue collar industries leaving the city. (NYC and Boston have never had the amount of factories like Chicago and Detroit have/had.)
2. Residents moving to the suburbs in past decades. More recently, residents leaving the state entirely. This means less tax revenue.
3. Corruption and mismanagement of funds.
4. Due to the demographic of Chicago, a school system that is VERY costly to operate.
I expect that growth in Dallas will slow as the cost of living continues to increase. Many people will no longer see the value in moving there.
Maybe I'm just being shortsighted, but I think there's more to it than "Chicago is old and is having to refurbish". NYC and Boston are much older than Chicago, yet they aren't facing the same "old stuff needs to be replaced" problems as Chicago.
I suspect that the financial problems in Chicago have been caused by:
1. Blue collar industries leaving the city. (NYC and Boston have never had the amount of factories like Chicago and Detroit have/had.)
2. Residents moving to the suburbs in past decades. More recently, residents leaving the state entirely. This means less tax revenue.
3. Corruption and mismanagement of funds.
4. Due to the demographic of Chicago, a school system that is VERY costly to operate.
I expect that growth in Dallas will slow as the cost of living continues to increase. Many people will no longer see the value in moving there.
EVERY major cities have these problems, especially #3. The cities rely on buying votes from the populace, and also providing patronage jobs with good salaries, excellent benefits, and large PENSIONS to workers as payoffs for political help.
The largest liability for many cities AND states are public employee pensions. Either taxes will have to be raised drastically, or Federal bailouts will be needed, or BOTH. It is going to happen, and it is all due to POLITICAL CORRUPTION.
dont agree that EVERY city has the same problems; we moved to the Phoenix area a month ago, and, so far, dont see ANY of these so called "major city "problems out here, and the taxes and fees are generally a TON lower, corruption isn't an issue here, NO UNIONS to speak of, so pricing of goods and services isn't controlled by a bunch of fat cat, union bosses, you can have an electrician come to your house on Sunday for the same price as Wednesday, you can buy a car on Sunday, you can get vouchers for your kids to pick what school they go to, and on and on..
Cities disintegrate when fat cat politicians allow the Unions and special interests to dictate how funding and prices are controlled; this is why Chicago AND Illinois in general has disintegrated over the last 25 + years, and, what is causing so many people to flee for their financial well being...and, I had lived in Illinois for 50+ years, so I know of what I speak..
Re: the services thing... Everyone says "you get more services for the taxes you pay" but cannot actually provide any examples. Could you provide examples? What services have been added since the property tax and income tax increases.
I am unable to provide an actual NAME of the services I know are unique to Chicago, but I can provide a decent example.
A work colleague has a son with s significant mental illness. He fell into what could best be described as a 'donut hole', or lack of mental health care (insurance coverage) based on some particular personal situation. I believe it was an age issue. Anyway, there was a program in Cook county that helped him out temporarily until he could find a job with the right health insurance he needed. You typically see very, very little of that type of thing down south, especially in TX. It's generally non-existent.
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.
