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.
I'm amazed at the people who look at Chicago's population and see a worrisome drop. Chicago is not a city as far as most people are concerned. Chicago is a metropolitan area. And Chicagoland does nothing but grow.
Population dropping within the city? Well, maybe. And it is a sad thing. Why? Because Chicago is losing poor people and people of color. Chicago becomes richer, is a place with extensive gentrification that has transformed most of the North Side. For those who don't realize it, that spread of gentrification goes on westward and southward from the Loop as the city's core expands. Do I like the trend? I like to see conditions improve; I dislike poor and middle class people being squeezed out.
Most of Chicago's growth is single people and married without children. So the numbers, of course, will be down from an earlier era when families were the main mix in our cities.
honestly, I don't get this fixation we have about population. Is bigger really better. I love NYC, but I wouldn't want to live there: way too big, too crowded for me. And I can't think of a more ideal city than the one with 800,000 or so (that's under a million, for the record) that is San Francisco.
If I had a dollar for every time Chicago was "written off" (yep, we are the energizer bunny city), I'd be a very rich man. Chicago is a colossal, dynamic, blockbuster city (yes, I'm a Chicagoan, damned proud of it, but I believe that….just as I believe in not putting down other cities). And since life is far more about economics and since we dwell on economics (and population) at the exclusion of everything else, I'll go to bat for Chicago in the areas of entertainment, the arts, culture in general, restaurants, higher education, research, hospitality, urban beauty, tourism, architecture, etc.
then again, we also have a pretty damned robust business sector as well.
I'm amazed at the people who look at Chicago's population and see a worrisome drop. Chicago is not a city as far as most people are concerned. Chicago is a metropolitan area. And Chicagoland does nothing but grow.
Especially that it's being said in this thread of all of them. Minors under the age of 18 and senior citizens were 160,000 (80%) of the total 200,000 drop in population. Probably not the biggest indicator of the financial/business/economic standing of the city on the world stage. Just having a huge number of warm bodies in your city isn't going to explain everything.
The spread was certainly not equal - some of the big movements or changes from the past:
114,000 (57%) of the total loss was just one demogrphic group, black people under the age of 19. Pretty much no impact on the business environment.
45,000 (23%) of the total loss was white people over the age of 70, while there was a 60,000 growth in the number of white people ages 25-34. That's definitely a huge reversal from the 60s through 80s.
Especially that it's being said in this thread of all of them. Minors under the age of 18 and senior citizens were 160,000 (80%) of the total 200,000 drop in population. Probably not the biggest indicator of the financial/business/economic standing of the city on the world stage. Just having a huge number of warm bodies in your city isn't going to explain everything.
The spread was certainly not equal - some of the big movements or changes from the past:
114,000 (57%) of the total loss was just one demogrphic group, black people under the age of 19. Pretty much no impact on the business environment.
45,000 (23%) of the total loss was white people over the age of 70, while there was a 60,000 growth in the number of white people ages 25-34. That's definitely a huge reversal from the 60s through 80s.
do you see any irony, 606? Chicago often got criticized for having a big black population by the bigots out there. now that blacks are leaving what is essentially a gentrifying city, but losing population with the reverse migration (those south and west side neighborhoods that are emptying out will be attractive to those who want to move to the city, ease care expenses and enjoy the lifestyle. I think you're going to see a lot of redevelopment in south and west side neighborhoods, especially those near el stops. Indeed the Orange Line itself during construction, built considerable growth in areas around the stations.
my sense: as Bridgeport turned and gentrified going south, areas further south will do the same (no taylor homes will help) and the west side expansion will certainly go west from the United Center. Could it in time reach Austin and the OP city limits? I think it could. the fill in along the south lakeshore, an area the city is committed to getting to a status more like the north side lakefront will at some point fill in from McCPl to Hyde Park.
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.
