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.
That poster didn't say "a lot." He said "90-95 percent of those after visiting both cities would choose Chicago if no family members in the area."
The Lower Northeastern U.S. has milder winters than Chicago though the summers can be quite hot.
Anyone who visited Chicago knows the Lake moderates the Core and neighborhoods near the lake much of the summer. The breezes cool these areas and anyone going on the lake for a tour knows once on the lake the BIG difference further.
So if summers and ---> the core are the topic. Summers are moderated near the shore and warmer in the winter. The drawback is the lake can increase snowfall. Every decade a year is like Buffalo's the winds reverse going across the lake more and western side of Lake Michigan increases in snow.
But SUMMER ROCKS still in Chicago. ESPECIALLY IT CORE and Lakefront.
What it says:
- Who cares if there’s no ocean in Chicago? People still find beachy fun on the lakeshores, soaking up rays and spiking volleyballs. The Windy City also landed in the top 5 for being pedestrian-friendly—a nice way to take in the great skyline views.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingtutaaa
Philly becoming a major player in the Bio / Life Science Industry also known for it's Eds and Meds sector . Philly had the largest % increase in B. degrees than any large city in the U.S. . As far as population growth in it's CBD , Philly had the largest millennial increase which gives Philly a more youthful and vibrant feel . Over 66% of Philly college grads desire to remain in Philly . Jll 2017 report on the Bio Tech puts Philly at 5th place up two places from last year over taking Seattle and DC .Philly Now a Top 5 City for Life Sciences, Study Says
I stand by my claim. Knowing people in Philly and having been there many times it is a fine city. Yes Illinois is in the news for bad reasons. Let me clarify them
1. Almost all violence in Chicago is in a small amount of neighborhoods on the south and west sides
2. People leaving Chicago is on those sides as well
3. Budget tax increase raises Illinois a little over 1%. Am I happy about this? Hell no, but at almost 5% its not California state taxes.
I am talking those who makes a household income of 80K-200K+, those wanting to live in cities would overwhelming chose Chicago over Philadelphia. The vast majority of people who live in cities do not want to live in regions or care much, but care more about the city. I personally love the midwest and find weekends in Western Michigan and Up north amazing. My opinion
In my opinion Chicago the city has better restaurants, shoppings, summer beaches, museums, nightlife, architecture, and parks than Philly. Philly has better history and I would give the sports team a tie. Both cities have rabid fans and have all professional teams.
Chicago and Chicagoland is just much bigger. Does that mean better? Of course not, there is no best city. My opinion is the vast majority of people visiting each city with my criteria would rather live in Chicago.
We all have opinions about any city's offerings--no shock or offense there.
But what doesn't fall under the opinion column is the extent to which folks actually prefer one city over another, particularly if you are referring to a certain income segment of the population. That would fall under the statistics column, as in actual methodologically-derived numbers needed to back up such a claim.
...
Philly had the largest % increase in B. degrees than any large city in the U.S. .
...
The entire country has been seeing increases in college degrees.
Philly had the biggest percentage increase likely because it started from such a low starting point.
Among 25-34 year olds, Philly has 23.9% with bachelor's degrees, which is still lower than Pennsylvania overall. In fact, only for professional degrees does Philly have a higher percentage than its state overall.
Overall 23.9% of all Philly residents have some sort of bachelor's or higher college degree.
For Chicagoans aged 25-34, 32.8% have a bachelor's degree, significantly higher than Illinois overall. 34.1% of Chicagoans have a bachelors degree or better, better than Illinois overall in all categories.
Associates degrees are of limited use, but even there 5.5% of Chicagoans have one vs 5.1% of Philly residents. This is the only post-secondary stat for Chicago that's lower than Illinois overall.
Earnings-wise, Chicagoans with a graduate degree average $8,500/year more than Philadelphia residents with a graduate degree. For bachelor's, the difference is $7,000. Both of those are more than 10% difference and Moderator cut: Link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed says Philly is 10% cheaper than Chicago, so it costs less to live there, but you lose more than 10% of your income, on average.
Overall, one thing becomes apparent looking at stats comparing Philly and Chicago: Chicago is a dominant, major regional capital. Philly is a secondary city in a highly competitive corridor.
The entire country has been seeing increases in college degrees.
You're correct, but some places have been seeing much faster increases than others, specifically large metro areas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias
Philly had the biggest percentage increase likely because it started from such a low starting point.
Among 25-34 year olds, Philly has 23.9% with bachelor's degrees, which is still lower than Pennsylvania overall. In fact, only for professional degrees does Philly have a higher percentage than its state overall.
Not sure where your data is sourced, but it seems incredibly outdated.
The latest American Community Survey (Census Bureau) numbers place Bachelor's or higher % for the 25-34 population in Philly proper at 41.3% as of 2015, which is obviously much higher than your source.
Chicago is pegged at 52.1% for the same age cohort, so still an edge to Chicago for educational attainment for the young adults in the city proper, although both numbers are very respectable on a national level: https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/...prodType=table
Interestingly, at the metro level, however, both Philly and Chicago, have exactly the same educational attainment (BA+) for 25-34 year olds, at 43.1% as of 2015: https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/...prodType=table
Other reports in recent years show that both cities are attracting impressive numbers of college grads to the urban core, both in raw numbers and percentages, and in fact Philly seems to be a bit more successful based on population size differences: http://cityobservatory.org/wp-conten...port-Final.pdf
Increase in BA+ population 2000-2012
Chicago "close-in neighborhoods": 26,849 (+55%)
Philly "close-in neighborhoods": 21,956 (+78%)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias
Earnings-wise, Chicagoans with a graduate degree average $8,500/year more than Philadelphia residents with a graduate degree. For bachelor's, the difference is $7,000. Both of those are more than 10% difference and [Moderator cut: Link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed says Philly is 10% cheaper than Chicago, so it costs less to live there, but you lose more than 10% of your income, on average.
Your data is likely again very outdated. Also, for the job market, I think most prefer metro level measures, as that gives a more holistic view of how local economies function. Cities and suburbs do not exist in a vacuum.
In terms of incomes, both areas are almost identical, with the slightest of edges to Philly (all data sourced from 2015 ACS):
Median wages (all individuals aged 25+)(2015):
Chicago metro: $41,225
Philly metro: $42,475
Median wages (all individuals with Bachelor's only)(2015):
Chicago metro: $55,694
Philly metro: $55,975
Median wages (all individuals with Master's only)(2015):
Overall, one thing becomes apparent looking at stats comparing Philly and Chicago: Chicago is a dominant, major regional capital. Philly is a secondary city in a highly competitive corridor.
Labels are superficial. Demographically, I think both cities/metros are much more similar than some may care to admit.
- studies data gathered by the U.S. Postal Service and 2016 Census, Chicago has become noticeably more dense in the last several years. However, many other cities witnessing major construction booms have not experienced the same trend.
- Between 2010 and 2016, Chicago’s density has increased by 1.2%. It may not seem like much, but considering Chicago’s stagnant population growth, the report suggests that the Windy City’s population is shifting and refocusing in the city center. Middle class black families are leaving Chicago while younger, more affluent residents are flocking into areas like the Loop, the West Loop, and Wicker Park. The only major city that has become more dense in the same time period? Seattle.
Density growth
Seattle + 3.0%
CHICAGO + 1.2%
Philly + .5%
Chicago creating new neighborhoods in the core (like warehousing areas now lofts/high-rises and new deluxe town-housing) and adding more infill amounts are adding density. Gentrification alone ..... can lower density if urban professionals replace a neighborhood that had more families. Infill can make up for it too anyway.
For the 4th year in a roll. Sight Selection magazine
Chicago named TOP CITY FOR CORPORATE INVESTMENT in 2017.
https://chicago.curbed.com/2017/3/24...r-construction
2017 Chicago witnessing more residential tower construction than any other US city.
It’s expected that 33 new buildings are to deliver well over 6,000 rental units this year alone
- the Second City can claim first place when it comes to the number of active tower cranes constructing new apartment buildings.
- the Chicago market claimed the top spot with 66 percent of its space qualified as green certified according to the fourth annual Green Building Adoption Index study by CBRE and Maastricht University. San Francisco slipped to second, while Atlanta, Houston and Minneapolis again claimed spots in the top five in the 2017 report. “Green” office buildings in the U.S. are defined as those that hold either an EPA ENERGY STAR label, USGBC LEED certification or both.
Chicago #1 2017. NYC #2 with Philly under #9 for list of the rest.
Link comment:
- Chicago, Illinois has been called the Birthplace of the Skyscraper. Some call it the home of American architecture itself. Chicago has long been connected with some of architecture's biggest names, including Frank Lloyd Wright, Louis Sullivan, Mies van der Rohe, William Le Baron Jenney, Holabird & Root and Daniel H. Burnham.
I stand by my claim. Knowing people in Philly and having been there many times it is a fine city. Yes Illinois is in the news for bad reasons. Let me clarify them
1. Almost all violence in Chicago is in a small amount of neighborhoods on the south and west sides
2. People leaving Chicago is on those sides as well
3. Budget tax increase raises Illinois a little over 1%. Am I happy about this? Hell no, but at almost 5% its not California state taxes.
I am talking those who makes a household income of 80K-200K+, those wanting to live in cities would overwhelming chose Chicago over Philadelphia. The vast majority of people who live in cities do not want to live in regions or care much, but care more about the city. I personally love the midwest and find weekends in Western Michigan and Up north amazing. My opinion
In my opinion Chicago the city has better restaurants, shoppings, summer beaches, museums, nightlife, architecture, and parks than Philly. Philly has better history and I would give the sports team a tie. Both cities have rabid fans and have all professional teams.
Chicago and Chicagoland is just much bigger. Does that mean better? Of course not, there is no best city. My opinion is the vast majority of people visiting each city with my criteria would rather live in Chicago.
While the IL income tax rate went from 3.75% to 4.95%, the corporate rate went from 5.25% to 7.00%. How else is the state and city of Chicago going to fix the financial mess and junk bond ratings? The exodus from Chicago and Illinois will only increase.
Anyway, the thread relates to Philly having the 2nd largest residential population; the fact or opinion that Chicago has better restaurants, shopping, summer beaches etc does not defeat the fact that Philly has the 2nd largest downtown residential population.
While the IL income tax rate went from 3.75% to 4.95%, the corporate rate went from 5.25% to 7.00%. How else is the state and city of Chicago going to fix the financial mess and junk bond ratings? The exodus from Chicago and Illinois will only increase.
Anyway, the thread relates to Philly having the 2nd largest residential population; the fact or opinion that Chicago has better restaurants, shopping, summer beaches etc does not defeat the fact that Philly has the 2nd largest downtown residential population.
Maybe you didn't realize that Philly has a CITY income tax of 4%, on top of the state income tax.
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.
