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.
There is FAR MORE to a city then Population. Just look at MUCH SMALLER SF in Stats without Silicon Valley.
SF's population is not declining, it's booming. People want to and are moving to SF in record numbers. The city is attracting them.
Declining population means people are moving away from the city, this is not a sign of a healthy city.
A healthy city should be able to attract or at least retain residents. If a city cannot do this it speaks to underlying problems and is a key indicator of decline.
If a city is healthy and poweful and relevant and booming, more people should not be moving away from it.
Ok Mr. Burns. Let's put the population aside. I've already shown you GDP, household income, and unemployment numbers that show otherwise, as well as big, global companies moving TO Chicago from other cities outside of the region not to mention the global companies that are already based there as well as potentially the most important financial market in North America.
So, if you know so much about Chicago, then show it. NO population data. Strictly economic and business data from now on:
- Show actual data from either government agencies or articles with data from actual reputable source. NO opinion/editorial articles.
- Articles that state business movement must be objective. i.e. "_____ moves headquarters out of region" or "_____ moves big office out of region."
If you cannot understand why economic data is more important for showing the health of a city, then you do not deserve one bit to be in any discussion about this. Only a complete amateur would ignore numbers that indicate near 10 year low unemployment, a rising GDP, a rising median household income more than other cities and in the same range as others, a fast rising upper middle class (median household income), and a fast reducing lower class and think these don't mean a healthy city.
Last edited by marothisu; 11-12-2016 at 08:25 PM..
Ok Mr. Burns. Let's put the population aside. I've already shown you GDP, household income, and unemployment numbers that show otherwise, as well as big, global companies moving TO Chicago from other cities outside of the region not to mention the global companies that are already based there as well as potentially the most important financial market in North America.
So, if you know so much about Chicago, then show it. NO population data. Strictly economic and business data from now on:
- Show actual data from either government agencies or articles with data from actual reputable source. NO opinion/editorial articles.
- Articles that state business movement must be objective. i.e. "_____ moves headquarters out of region" or "_____ moves big office out of region."
If you cannot understand why economic data is more important for showing the health of a city, then you do not deserve one bit to be in any discussion about this. Only a complete amateur would ignore numbers that indicate near 10 year low unemployment, a rising GDP, a rising median household income more than other cities and in the same range as others, a fast rising upper middle class (median household income), and a fast reducing lower class and think these don't mean a healthy city.
Saying "let's put population aside" is saying "let's ignore the #1 indicator of decline".
You can't put it aside.
If Chicago is not in decline and a healthy city as you claim, then why is it losing residents every year? Why are people moving away from Chicago to other cities?
Why is Chicago the only city out of the US top 15 to show an annual decline in population?
Why aren't people flocking to Chicago in droves? They're flocking to San Francisco, they're flocking to NYC, Houston, Los Angeles...why not Chicago?
I for one do not believe that Chicago is declining but............I do think that it's a fairly well accepted fact that the city's relative importance has declined significantly and will continue to do so. It's not that it's population or economy is shrinking but rather that other cities have gained a lot of ground. It was only 45 years ago that greater LA overtook Chicago in population and back then Chicago and LA battled it out for 2nd place but now it's not a conversation. As SF and Wash/Baltimore, Dallas, Houston, continue to gain ground {and Toronto in the NA context}, Chicago relative importance will decline.
This is exactly what happened in Canada between Toronto and Montreal. Montreal never shrank in population but stagnated for 2 decades while Toronto soared ahead so as Montreal was once Canada's undisputed premier city, it is now Toronto. This happens all the time were city's may grow but other cities grow much faster and the original city's importance wanes........Detroit is an excellent example.
Importance of a city is not just facts and figures but also a relative term.
Saying "let's put population aside" is saying "let's ignore the #1 indicator of decline".
You cannot even answer a simple question, even after I set aside the population debate (which isn't even accurate, yet you can't even see that). You cannot even produce one official statistic besides population to back your own argument up. You're nothing less than a troll who is inept with understanding cities.
Really, go on thinking that the city is in decline when the GDP increased at a higher percentage in the last 5 years than NYC and the same as Boston. Go on thinking the city is in decline when the unemployment is at near 10 year lows and at the same levels as 1999 and 2000 when there was an economic boom across the country. Go on thinking the city is in decline when the richest man in Asia just broke ground last month on an 1100 foot tall tower with units minimum of $1M and over $200M worth of them went into contract before the ground breaking - and he picked Chicago for his first ever project in North America over NYC, LA, San Francisco, Toronto, etc. I'm sure the 18th richest man in the world, Wang Jianlin, would like to hear from Mr. Burns on City Data about why investing $1B in Chicago is not a good idea.
Quote:
If Chicago is not in decline and a healthy city as you claim, then why is it losing residents every year? Why are people moving away from Chicago to other cities?
What the bloody hell are you talking about? Every year from 2010 to 2014 grew. The only year since 2010 that did not have growth was from 2014 to 2015. The net from 2010 to 2015 is growth - a net growth of 24,958 people to be exact.
There are tons of parts of the city that are currently growing, as I've stated before - and no, not only just downtown or on the north side.
2010 (Decennial Census): 2,695,598 people
2011: 2,707,123 people
2012: 2,714,844 people
2013: 2,718,789 people
2014: 2,722,407 people
2015: 2,720,556 people
Honestly, you are embarassing yourself for people who actually understand what's happening in Chicago right now. You have ZERO idea about anything happening in the city. All you know is one number, which you don't even put it in context like above. You don't even understand why one HUGE part of the city is booming, another part is stagnant, and another part is losing people - but the net is still a gain. Do yourself and visit the city. You'll be surprised at how much is actually happening. But oh, Mr. Burns sitting in Toronto must know more than marothisu sitting in Chicago right now. Do you seriously think you know more about this **** than me?
Last edited by marothisu; 11-13-2016 at 01:19 AM..
Chicago might be in decline, I know other cities are catching up,
it is still ahead of both Toronto and Montreal but the gap is narrowing
with each passing year.
People like throwing around GDP numbers, but be careful,
2 different countries here, Canada tends to down play,
USA (ala Trump tends to pump up), remember stats can be skewed/manipulated.
Chicago GDP is obviously larger but not as much as some posters think.
Toronto is in the province of Ontario....Ontario GDP is in the 750 billion dollar range,
Ontario population is about 13.6 million,
Toronto Golden Horseshoe (approx equivalent to a US CSA) is about 3/4 of the Ontario population.
So it's GDP is probably around 500 billion.
Interestingly, Chicago is in Illinois, population similar to Ontario (a bit less),
and Chicago's ratio of population is also similar but with a slightly higher GDP.
Toronto will pass Chicago, probably in about 15 to 20 years.
You cannot even answer a simple question, even after I set aside the population debate (which isn't even accurate, yet you can't even see that). You cannot even produce one official statistic besides population to back your own argument up. You're nothing less than a troll who is inept with understanding cities.
Really, go on thinking that the city is in decline when the GDP increased at a higher percentage in the last 5 years than NYC and the same as Boston. Go on thinking the city is in decline when the unemployment is at near 10 year lows and at the same levels as 1999 and 2000 when there was an economic boom across the country. Go on thinking the city is in decline when the richest man in Asia just broke ground last month on an 1100 foot tall tower with units minimum of $1M and over $200M worth of them went into contract before the ground breaking - and he picked Chicago for his first ever project in North America over NYC, LA, San Francisco, Toronto, etc. I'm sure the 18th richest man in the world, Wang Jianlin, would like to hear from Mr. Burns on City Data about why investing $1B in Chicago is not a good idea.
What the bloody hell are you talking about? Every year from 2010 to 2014 grew. The only year since 2010 that did not have growth was from 2014 to 2015. The net from 2010 to 2015 is growth - a net growth of 24,958 people to be exact.
There are tons of parts of the city that are currently growing, as I've stated before - and no, not only just downtown or on the north side.
2010 (Decennial Census): 2,695,598 people
2011: 2,707,123 people
2012: 2,714,844 people
2013: 2,718,789 people
2014: 2,722,407 people
2015: 2,720,556 people
Honestly, you are embarassing yourself for people who actually understand what's happening in Chicago right now. You have ZERO idea about anything happening in the city. All you know is one number, which you don't even put it in context like above. You don't even understand why one HUGE part of the city is booming, another part is stagnant, and another part is losing people - but the net is still a gain. Do yourself and visit the city. You'll be surprised at how much is actually happening. But oh, Mr. Burns sitting in Toronto must know more than marothisu sitting in Chicago right now. Do you seriously think you know more about this **** than me?
Overnight international visitors:
Toronto is listed at 4th in North America. Chicago is 7th. Chicago is also behind Vancouver.
Looking at the chart on that same page in the link, Chicago is the only city in the top 10 to decline YOY (2014 to 2015) in overnight international visitors.
You can also see that Toronto has had more overnight international visitors dating back to 2011.
Yes, people do visit cities in decline. I visit Chicago at least once a year.
But there's nothing wrong with a city being in decline.
As for Chicago's level of international visitors. Torontonians like to declare their city is the NYC (main and largest, most important city in ALL of Canada). We all know Chicago is NOT the USA's Main and most important city. That is NYC. It gets FAR more then Toronto or Chicago. Also boasting Toronto has far more NEW international immigrants then Chicago. It gets family members from back in their homeland to visit.
Really For Chicago to STILL get 1.3 million as seen as just too much closest to NYC they Chose FIRST. Even LA with all Hollywood gives the world and SF as a city on many visitors to the US radar too.
Toronto is NOT doing far enough more then Chicago who has to split with MANY other US cities and even Orlando Fl. for Disneyworld, Vegas, Etc.
Seems there is also a reason? You leave out TOTAL yearly visitors tourist numbers. Maybe because Chicago has been increasing yearly, and to 52 million + now. Hitting that total in 2015 that was a rise of nearly 5 percent over the prior year It is becoming quite the tourist and business destination. Also for families.
Also your international stat for Chicago is OFF as of 2015 and from the publication of this article.
Chicago surpassed the 50 million mark for domestic visitors annually for the first time in 2015, with a rise of nearly 5 percent over the prior year, tourism officials said.
Choose Chicago, the city's convention and tourism bureau, said U.S. visitors to Chicago reached a record 50.97 million last year.
The total number of visitors, including international, is expected to exceed a record 52 million.
***International visits reached 1.55 million in 2014.***
Among domestic visitors to Chicago in 2015, 39.3 million were leisure visitors, with the rest business visitors. Chicago by the Numbers October 2016
***Key trends include:
The Chicago (city) economy has expanded by an estimated 12,016 jobs, a 1.0 percent year-over-year improvement since August 2015, driven by absolute gains in the leisure & hospitality (+5,655), business services (+3,018), and retail (+1,347) sectors. The construction sector experienced the largest YOY growth in percentage terms (+5.4%).
Unemployment insurance claims and unemployment rate decreased by a respective 9.1 percent and 0.3 percentage points.
The number of new hires in the Midwest increased by 85,000 year-over-year from 1.09M in July 2015 to 1.17M in July 2016.
The number of patents issued in Chicago (city) increased by 5.5%, from 1,264 in September 2015 YTD to 1,334 in September 2016 YTD.
.***NONE OF THIS SHOWS A CITY IN DECLINE.***, it is ALL about boosting for Torontonians that is it. But the problem is Demeaning Chicago to boast for Toronto. is getting old.
Stats continue to say otherwise for Chicago. It's like a inferiority complex to gain recognition for Toronto to keep lessening Chicago as Toronto keeps still getting compared to Chicago BY TORONTONIANS. Chicagoans have no need to boost their egos to even use any city to try to change perceptions. Stats and a visit change any stereotypes of a city in decline. But a city in transition continuing to erase its former Rust-belt status it is. The US is far to large and with many cities to have their recognition of arrival too. Why City-Data has so many comparisons to do threads on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marothisu
If you cannot understand why economic data is more important for showing the health of a city, then you do not deserve one bit to be in any discussion about this. Only a complete amateur would ignore numbers that indicate near 10 year low unemployment, a rising GDP, a rising median household income more than other cities and in the same range as others, a fast rising upper middle class (median household income), and a fast reducing lower class and think these don't mean a healthy city.
Totally correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Burns
Saying "let's put population aside" is saying "let's ignore the #1 indicator of decline".
You can't put it aside.
If Chicago is not in decline and a healthy city as you claim, then why is it losing residents every year? Why are people moving away from Chicago to other cities?
Why is Chicago the only city out of the US top 15 to show an annual decline in population?
Why aren't people flocking to Chicago in droves? They're flocking to San Francisco, they're flocking to NYC, Houston, Los Angeles...why not Chicago?
NYC is THE WORLD'S CITY TODAY. As for the rest you list? To escape the upper Midwest WINTERS. Is why the US Midwest is the less desirable region in growth in the US.
Toronto and especially Vancouver. Are your southern most Major cities. Just too much of the US to choose today with milder weather. Again Chi-Town is transitioning and changing in its demographics and showing "it ain't gonna decline no more as ALL Northern US cities did in these past decades". It is showing modest growth as previous decades show Up and down years since the 1950s.
Chicago happens to be in the USA's Rust-belt as it was called. It overcame declines of the 60s 70s Loss of Industry and Radical Racial change more then other cities in this Rust-belt extending from southern Wisconsin to Eastern Pennsylvania. But did not include East Coast cities. As said before too. NYC was bankrupt by 1975. The US government bilked it out with loans President Ford was pressured to agree to. It certainly never looked back with international investments that poured in. Chicago always had to rely on its OWN investing in itself and Corporate America never turned its back on the city. Heck, it got 3 of the World's Super-Tall buildings in 1968-1975. They anchored the downtown to fill-in and restore ever since. Most believe that 150 story+ Skyscraper is still coming.
SF's population is not declining, it's booming. People want to and are moving to SF in record numbers. The city is attracting them.
Declining population means people are moving away from the city, this is not a sign of a healthy city.
A healthy city should be able to attract or at least retain residents. If a city cannot do this it speaks to underlying problems and is a key indicator of decline.
If a city is healthy and poweful and relevant and booming, more people should not be moving away from it.
A healthy city needs to be able to provide for its citizens the basic necessities.Jobs are also the main determination of a cities health.
Yall in Toronto want to acknowledge a fault of slow growth as something more than it is but ignore the fact Chicago has a much larger employment sector in both industry and worker population and thats growing STILL.
If Toronto had Chicagos economy,Toronto would be another league almost with NYC as Chicago actually does compete heavily with NYC as does Boston when it comes to business,
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.
tends to pump up), remember stats can be skewed/manipulated.
Maybe because Chicago has been increasing yearly, and to 52 million + now. Hitting that total in 2015 that was a rise of nearly 5 percent over the prior year It is becoming quite the tourist and business destination. Also for families.
is getting old.
It's like a inferiority complex to gain recognition for Toronto to keep lessening Chicago as Toronto keeps still getting compared to Chicago BY TORONTONIANS. Chicagoans have no need to boost their egos to even use any city to try to change perceptions. Stats and a visit change any stereotypes of a city in decline. 
But a city in transition continuing to erase its former Rust-belt status it is. The US is far to large and with many cities to have their recognition of arrival too. Why City-Data has so many comparisons to do threads on.
Most believe that 150 story+ Skyscraper is still coming.