Will Chicago's population pass 3 million by the 2030 census? (Manhattan, Pittsburg: mortgages, school district)

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by Curly Q. Bobalink

Yeah, you say that now, but wait until Milwaukee gets its own NFL team. Maybe the Raiders? I heard once that Swiss Colony was thinking of purchasing the Green Bay team and moving it down to Milwaukee. The only problem was, they were going to rename them "The Fudge Packers".

Finally, I'm sure you are familiar with "How do you keep bears out of your yard in Wisconsin? You install goal posts". Not as true this year, but we'll find out in a week or two.

My only experience with Milwaukee was to travel to Waukesha to purchase some specialized adhesive (Sika Flex) my company needed for a project twenty years ago. That, and my Dept. visited a manufacturer up there to look at a cooling tower we were considering purchasing. Seemed like a nice enough place, folks treated us well. I'm sure I don't have to explain the difference between Cheeseheads and S***theads to you, LOL.

Keep up the Good Work, "Blessed are the Peacemakers".

Someone is getting pumped for Bear-Packer week (the best Bear-Packer week to look forward to since, I dunno, Halas and Lombardi).

The Packers are a wonderful franchise (and I say this as a Bear fan) in being the only one I know in any sport that is owned by its community. It will never move anywhere. (I wish the folks in Oakland had only owned the Raiders)

And Milwaukee will never get an NFL team. The Packers are not Green Bay's team; they are Wisconsin's. Milwaukee has a team in the Packers....even with them no longer playing games at County Stad.....er...yes, it's gone. Putting a franchise in Milwaukee would have a negative effect on the Packers. Among other things, it would certainly eliminate the only major market (for media...tv, newspapers, the work) in their attendance area, the state of WI. Not good. And metro Milwaukee would not be able to support such a hypothetical team on its own...and I think I could fairly assure you that the folks in Racine or Sheybogan or Madison will still be in the Packer fold.

As I said, the Pack is Wisconsin's team, short of the areas east of the St.Croix that are the fringe of the Twin Cities metro and are Viking fans....or the split nature of Kenosha County where both Bear and Packer fans co-exist. Sorta.

Meanwhile, I hold to what I've said on this forum for an eternity......Despite my being a Bears fan, I believe that Chicago would and could support a second NFL franchise....a lot better than LA can support two. The time the city lost the Cardinals was the era of the beginning of the AFL and there was a real competition between the NFL and AFL over open territories. The Cards moved to StL in part to keep the AFL out. And also, in part, bc the NFL had a contract with CBS on broadcasting games and having two cities in the same league adversely affected the ability to do just that. True, the Bears were Chicago's team, no ands, ifs, or buts about it....the dynamic was far different than Cubs-Sox. But the NFL was not the true major league that it became back at the time (circa 1960) when the Cards moved. MLB (which at that time didn't really exist since there were two independent leagues, NL, AL) was the dominant sport by far. Attendance at NFL games was not all that great. I have no question Chicago would do well with an AFC team...and the Bears would be better due to the competition from it.

[BRU67]

I am willing to conclude the back and forth on the issues raised by Ed's posts regarding the South and West sides. I think everybody said everything they're going to productivly say, to put it mildly.

To get back to point, we continue to do stellar work in poaching hundreds of jobs from suburbs like Deerfield and Oak Brook Terrace. Sadly, we lost another big one to Austin. This one might have brought us up to 15,000 Emerald Citians. Instead we will get none.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...nt=oft02a-1li3

This goes to my earlier comment that it's very risky to go all-in with professional jobs. High-paying white collar degreed jobs are great but there's a lot of competition for them, a lot of which is more appealing than we are right now with our lack of fiscal responsibility. We will continue to decline in population, much less hit 3 million, if we don't get a more diversified economy.

[DavePa]

Originally Posted by BRU67

I am willing to conclude the back and forth on the issues raised by Ed's posts regarding the South and West sides. I think everybody said everything they're going to productivly say, to put it mildly.

To get back to point, we continue to do stellar work in poaching hundreds of jobs from suburbs like Deerfield and Oak Brook Terrace. Sadly, we lost another big one to Austin. This one might have brought us up to 15,000 Emerald Citians. Instead we will get none.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...nt=oft02a-1li3

This goes to my earlier comment that it's very risky to go all-in with professional jobs. High-paying white collar degreed jobs are great but there's a lot of competition for them, a lot of which is more appealing than we are right now with our lack of fiscal responsibility. We will continue to decline in population, much less hit 3 million, if we don't get a more diversified economy.

All I read on Apple's search.... was to be more a suburban type office campus. So most likely suburban Chicago lost it. Probably the former McDonald's campus was hoped to have a shot. Few expected a downtown campus for Apple. Amazon .... for sure.

I read the mayor said the Corporate welfare (incentives) the state was offering.... was not enough for Amazon basically. What his statement gave as part of a reason. Of course you wouldn't believe the mayor anyway....

Atlanta was the city who boasted Amazon was theirs ...... So even they did not get Apple either. I'm sure they sought it too.

With so many cities hopeful. Chicago still was one of many and Apple was more expected to choose a sunbelt city too.

You love to rub it in Chicago's forever going to loose population .... If you remain in the city and state. I sure do not know why...... unless poorer without degrees to take wherever. Why bother to stay and be a NegaChicagoan. There is a term in Philly for one who is negative on everything of that city.... a Negadelphian.

I think Chicago will reach the 3-million mark after 2030. But it will gradually increase again.

[BRU67]

Well, we still didn't get it and the city competed for it. I think I'm less of a Negachicagoan and more of a cynic towards people who think Chicago is going to become one big young and wealthy playground. I think this is a piece of evidence showing that such isn't a viable idea.

[joee5]

Not if the gangs keep offing each other off, no.

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by BRU67

I am willing to conclude the back and forth on the issues raised by Ed's posts regarding the South and West sides. I think everybody said everything they're going to productivly say, to put it mildly.

To get back to point, we continue to do stellar work in poaching hundreds of jobs from suburbs like Deerfield and Oak Brook Terrace. Sadly, we lost another big one to Austin. This one might have brought us up to 15,000 Emerald Citians. Instead we will get none.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...nt=oft02a-1li3

This goes to my earlier comment that it's very risky to go all-in with professional jobs. High-paying white collar degreed jobs are great but there's a lot of competition for them, a lot of which is more appealing than we are right now with our lack of fiscal responsibility. We will continue to decline in population, much less hit 3 million, if we don't get a more diversified economy.

Google and Facebook already announced expansions in Chicago earlier in the year, so it’s not like this sort of thing isn’t happening in Chicago.

[smegmatite]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

Google and Facebook already announced expansions in Chicago earlier in the year, so it’s not like this sort of thing isn’t happening in Chicago.

well its happening everywhere because the overall economy and labor market is so good, so Chicago isn't exactly special, its how they stack up by comparison to other large cities that is troubling

[BRU67]

Originally Posted by smegmatite

well its happening everywhere because the overall economy and labor market is so good, so Chicago isn't exactly special, its how they stack up by comparison to other large cities that is troubling

This is purely 100% anecdotal but many young people I know are talking about Austin and Nashville now and at least a few are planning on moving to one or the other. Now, it's not like a few people that BRU67 knows means much of anything, but it is a little troubling. Chicago just feels different than it did in the 1990s when it was red hot, organic and cool.

I don't think that's going to get better as other cities emerge as tech hubs with high paying jobs and low costs of living, while the cost of living in Chicago and Illinois skyrockets as we struggle to meet pension obligations that our 100% Democrat controlled state and city governments will not dream of addressing.

[Vlajos]

We just hired two recent college grads, one from Philly and the other from Atlanta. We now have hired 9 new recent college grads over the last year. Kids that went to Cornell, Miami of Ohio, Ohio State, UW Madison and UofI.

In the last two years Chicago's 4 year college educated population increased by 7% (over 46,000 people). In that time, college educated aged 25-34 by over 17,000 people.

Chicago has no problem attracting well educated young folks from around the country.

[smegmatite]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

We just hired two recent college grads, one from Philly and the other from Atlanta. We now have hired 9 new recent college grads over the last year. Kids that went to Cornell, Miami of Ohio, Ohio State, UW Madison and UofI.

In the last two years Chicago's 4 year college educated population increased by 7% (over 46,000 people). In that time, college educated aged 25-34 by over 17,000 people.

Chicago has no problem attracting well educated young folks from around the country.

more people in general have college degrees these days (basically like having a HS diploma, nothing special) so I'm not sure how much that metric actually means compared to the overall trend in a massive amount of millenials (the biggest generation, most have college degrees)

Just a quick google search of NYC led to this
"New York is getting smarter: The number of people with college degrees rose in all five boroughs over the last decade. For the first time, more than 50% of Manhattan residents over 25 have at least a bachelor's degree,"

like I said before its how Chicago is doing compared to other large cities, I would like to see the numbers for LA, NYC, Houston, philly, phoenix, etc.