This doesn't bode well for Chicago (Norridge, Irving: middle-class, real estate, apartments)

[wase4711]

https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news...STSkiaEXt7Qq38

[Chicago_Person]

You could of at least put a description.
I could have been opening a pornographic link for all I knew.

Anyway.
That's not a Chicago problem. It's a national problem.

[DavePa]

Originally Posted by Chicago_Person

You could of at least put a description.
I could have been opening a pornographic link for all I knew.

Anyway.
That's not a Chicago problem. It's a national problem.

Exactly, It's Nationally a decline, with most need two-incomes to be even in the middle-class today, unless higher income. No surprise. The crash did not help in 08 either it sped it up .... despite even in dropped housing prices effecting most who own becoming poorer.

Cities that are becoming more highly educated too as link cites... but still a much poorer side too. Are having this more. Add areas of gentrification moving and spreading. You got even more to occur.

Look at mighty NYC. Gentrifying into Harlem and the Bronx even. Corruption aplenty there too and taxation. But it's loved.

[Chicago_Person]

The middle class is moving to the suburbs where they will slave away traceling far commutes to make ends meet

[Thefuturehereanow]

I think the middle class in chicago mostly lives in apartments or holding on to old houses because middle class cannot afford to buy home in most of chicago in a decent neighborhood.

And don't go posting cheaper houses in east Garfield, norridge, or McKinley park . Norridge is pretty much a suburb and the other two have ways to go before I would live there

[DavePa]

Originally Posted by Thefuturehereanow

I think the middle class in chicago mostly lives in apartments or holding on to old houses because middle class cannot afford to buy home in most of chicago in a decent neighborhood.

And don't go posting cheaper houses in east Garfield, norridge, or McKinley park . Norridge is pretty much a suburb and the other two have ways to go before I would live there

What's wrong with Norridge? I lived there a couple years in 79 80. Live the housing and it still looms god to me. If its cheap enough for lower-middle class folk today .... good for them. Schools should still be good.

[Thefuturehereanow]

Originally Posted by DavePa

What's wrong with Norridge? I lived there a couple years in 79 80. Live the housing and it still looms god to me. If its cheap enough for lower-middle class folk today .... good for them. Schools should still be good.

Well I was talking about area around Harlem and Irving I think it's dunning. I like it there I think it feels like chicago when it comes to the people but the infrastructure on the outskirts of the city is more suburban to me so I just don't include it in city living like say northcenter where you are close to the lake, the L not gonna find a home under 600,000 in a decent chicago neighborhood that is more urban.

[fusillirob1983]

There were some strange choices in that article.

-The color schemes in the map are opposite the color schemes in the bar graph.

-I get that UIC did the study, but I would think to the general population that median income is more understandable than per capita income.

-They only define in the article what is considered middle class per capita income, (yellow) but none of the other categories 4 categories.

-Then they mention median income, but they use the median income for the Chicago metro area, not the city limits.

-Maps use 5 colors, but bar graph uses 3 colors.

[dtcbnd03]

Originally Posted by Thefuturehereanow

I think the middle class in chicago mostly lives in apartments or holding on to old houses because middle class cannot afford to buy home in most of chicago in a decent neighborhood.

And don't go posting cheaper houses in east Garfield, norridge, or McKinley park . Norridge is pretty much a suburb and the other two have ways to go before I would live there

This is the problem. You have hundreds of homes within 15 minutes of downtown for under $300k yet people claim the middle class can't afford a house or that Chicago doesn't have enough affordable housing. The concept of a "starter home" is gone for today's middle class. Even for the upper middle class most of my friends are renting expensive apartments in the ritziest areas and then jumping to the "forever home" with 5 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms even though they have 0-1 kids. Use real estate to ladder up to the house/neighborhood you want. Buy a crappy fixer upper and live there for a few years fixing it up with some sweat equity. Then ladder up to the next bigger house or nicer neighborhood nearby. If you simply wait for the neighborhood to turn the houses will be $750k-$1M and you'll have missed out and be back to complaining about lack of affordable housing.

[damba]

Originally Posted by fusillirob1983

There were some strange choices in that article.

-The color schemes in the map are opposite the color schemes in the bar graph.

-I get that UIC did the study, but I would think to the general population that median income is more understandable than per capita income.

-They only define in the article what is considered middle class per capita income, (yellow) but none of the other categories 4 categories.

-Then they mention median income, but they use the median income for the Chicago metro area, not the city limits.

-Maps use 5 colors, but bar graph uses 3 colors.

Not necessarily. Only at first glance perhaps. Remember, maps/data that get pushed out to the public have to be palatable.

Looking at the Toronto three cities methodology used (referenced at the embedded links to the Voorhees Center), it does not appear to be anything nefarious.