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.
No.I welcome the debate but when it comes to Toronto its ALWAYS defensive from the moment dont agree with you.
The whole things started when "Mr.Burns" made remarks about Chicago in "decline" do to population loss and crime.
while I agree that will slow growth and eventually prosperity,this is not the case with Chicago now.
*****"Evidence of other cities success is not evidence of Chicago declining."*****
Mjun18 tried to bolster the argument by incorrectly saying that nicer parts of the city are now decaying when in reality,the area he mentioned was experiencing redevelopment.
I'm a very logical person and dont mind being wrong because I dont know everything. One of the reason I love C-D so much as I do learn things that I did know know before as well as I share my knowledge.
** So if you say to me "Chicago is in decline" only to show crime statistics,very minor population loss or stagnation in mainly already depressed areas such as the Southside, but then ignore job growth,corporate relocations,re-gentrification of several neighborhoods and construction projects that rank among the most in the country,
** then what apparently is a logical assumption is met with resistance because any admission would somehow invalidate Toronto as a world city is absurd.
In fact as I have said in the beginning of this entire thread,
**Chicago has crime issues and population loss/stagnation is part of that but lets be clear,we are talking about the "Chicagoland" meaning not just in the city but the equivalent of Toronto and places like Mississauga. Many of the core areas of the city are booming, **
as what I provided in several pages with links showing how much construction and re gentrification is going on.
****Far cry from Detroit or a city in "decline" indeed ****.
Sorry I got carried away highlighting MOST parts of your post. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH THEM.
But Honestly, we can't have a civil discussion and do any POSITIVE comments on CHICAGO with this guy. You get TOTALLY MOCKED AND LAUGHED AT. Semis like this guy below in particular is 25 going on 15. Really he has no respect. If I'm told by him he is over 40? I think this will be the first time I actually might laugh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrjun18
LOL. Typical.
"Oh there is population growth in this neighbourhood" .... "Oh there is only crime in this area".
Nitpicking Chicago neighbourhoods and neglecting others to hide the overall decline in the city of Chicago isn't going to work unfortunately.
This is a city vs city thread. Not a "neighbourhood vs neighbourhood" thread.
And looking at the city of Chicago as a whole, things are declining. Again, there is nothing wrong with decline and I'm not sure why you have an issue with this.
You can ask with the thousands of people that are leaving/have left , the ones that complaining about the insane crime rate, declining public school system, nearly 700 homicides, super high property taxes, etc. and so on. I can keep going but I'll stop right there.
Choosing the small amount of Chicago neighbourhoods that are not declining and focusing your replies on those ones... in a city vs city discussion... isn't going to cut it.
And pointing out the 44 buildings under construction to portray the city is not in decline = lol. Are a large majority of those buildings not all within the loop area? The area you nitpicked? How many of those 44 buildings are outside the loop?
There you go again. belittling instead of a civil NON-MOCKING REPLY. Did he or anyone compare ANY of Chicago's neighborhoods to Toronto's? No
As for the Chicago neighborhoods not declining. They are those that are lower in crime and far more employed residents then on Welfare or sadly the lowest incomes. Many split in race. Virtually a 1/3 of the cities population is Latino. Mexico to South America and Puerto Rico and Cuba and generally from Spanish speaking nations. Generally their neighborhoods are cheaper to buy and rent, but still have good housing as much of Chicago's housing held up well.
Chicago is a city of front green-space to lawns and it is the city with the MOST and LARGEST full-sized alleyway system in the world 1900 miles of just alleys with garages and power-lines that do not nee to be in home fronts. A great decision early city developers chose.
Sadly poorest areas are predominately African-American. Why it is a TALE OF TWO CITIES IN ONE. I've posted streetview360's of high-crime Southside Chicago African-American neighborhoods. I'M SURE YOU LOOKED AT NONE. But I AM IMPRESSED HOW CLEAN MOST ARE and great housing stock. Then you have the 50s early 60s neighborhoods that still are awesome too. Its Bungalow belt is a 1/3 of the city homes with lawns started in 1910-1940. Such a strong housing base that holds up well.
Ironically, neither "Othello Is Here" or I are from Chicago or live in the Midwest. He is by Atlanta and I am in central small town Pennsylvania. BUT KNOWING CHICAGO KNOW THE STRONG HOUSING IN NEIGHBORHOODS AND CORE IT HAS.
WE ARE NOT BOASTING HOMMIES who can't see all is not perfect in Chicago as seems some Torontonians as yourself MUST THINK SO? Because any issue in the news or link we found noting some Toronto issues? You bombard them with belittlement and NO ADMITTING ANYTHING NOT PERFECT.
If you read through many of our post. LIKE "Othello Is Here's " above? You would see there IS ADMITING THE GANGLAND CRIME ISSUES, ITS DEPRESSED AREAS and POPULATION LOSS IN SOME YEARS AND ESPECIALLY CERTIAN AREAS OF THE CITY ESPECIALLY. This is the UPPER-MIDWEST OF THE USA. It is the SLOWEST GROWING REGION. Minneapolis showed the better growth it actually is NOT IN THE RUST-BELT or has the RACIAL ISDUES OR DIVIDES of a Cleveland to Milwaukee. THE MIDWEST RUST-BELT.
Just try to be a LITTLE MORE RESPECTFUL AND BE HAPPY FOR ANY BIG CITY HAVING GOOD THINGS HAPPEN AMONG SADLY OTHER ISSUES. Chicago is a US city and another Nation bombarded with ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS OF LOW EDUCATION IN OUR NATION that is THE WHOLE POPULATION OF CANADA? Along with RACIAL DIVIDES and RADICAL CHANGE to our cities during the same period of DE-INDUSTRIALATION and INDUSTRY MOVING TO JAPAN FIRST THEN CHINA ESPECIALLY.
So to understand this should NOT BE THROWN IN OUR FACE ANYTIME WE POST A POSITIVE HPPENING IN CHICAGO.
We have found we CAN'T SEEM TO HAVE CIVIL DISCUSSION WITH YOU. I PLAN ON POSTING NEXT. Some of Chicago's TALL SKYSCRAPERS GOING UP. I'd appreciate YOU NOT LAUGHING AT IT AS IF NOTHING, BECAUSE CHICAGO IS STILL IN DECLINE AND THATS IT.
I enjoyed ALL the pictures and seeing some of Toronto's new buildings. I RESPECT ITS COMING OF AGE. But you surely should not expect other cities to just SAY YOU DEFEATED MOST USA CITIES, NEXT NYC AND THE WORLDS CITIES.
I'd like to see a Toronto vs . Sydney thread. They have been rising STEADILY WITHOUT RACIL ISSUES. See how RADICAL SOME MIGHT GET AGAINST THEIR CLAIMS FOR THEIR CITY?
Last edited by UScityUrbanCores; 11-16-2016 at 04:48 PM..
Showing pictures of 44 skyscrapers and high-rises currently under-construction in Chicago. (For Chicago and American cities I believe only NYC has more?)
BELOW IS ANOTHER almost nearly a SUPER-TALL ABOUT TO BREAK GROWN ANNOUNCED in Chicago. Foundation permits have been approved for the FIRST 829-feet tower. Its first phase at 829 feet tall, with 12,000 square feet of retail space. Shorter side built first. Shy of the over 900+ Ft. to be super-tall. The SECOND PHASE IS THE TALLER TOWER TO COME.
Architect Rafael Viñoly
Also OFFICIAL DOWNTOWN BOUNDARIES end at the street these buildings face at Grant Park. So these in picture with the rendering and beyond of this new skyscraper. ARE NOT officially in the downtown.
Another super-tall nearby on South Michigan Ave. THIRD RENDERING ABOVE ^^^^WAS TO BE OVER 1000 ft.
But was scaled to a 800+ft. one. Less then a Required 900+ Ft. To be be a super-tall, still did not seek a permit. FOURTH above^^^^had its first shorter skyscraper just about finished the Tall one in rendering did not get started yet. It is to be super-tall height.
Worlds tallest TIMBER (wooden) TOWER planned for 62 acre. South Loop's River-Line mega-development that JUST BROKE GROUND. This would be added to the development as its tallest. I can't believe it will be made of wood.
At 80 stories tall, the conceptual brief caters for 300 duplex units and multi-story penetrations that form communal spaces.
CHICAGO DOES NOT DO WHOLE SKYLINE RENDERINGS OF ITS CHANGING SKYLINE. WITH PROPOSED ONES AND CURRENTLY BEING BUILT. THAT I KNOW OF. BECAUSE MORE PROPOSED PROBABLY DO NOT GET BUILT THEN DO. Once all the Hotel rooms, Apartments and Condo's getting built and starting. After 2018. It might slow. These too many cause selling and renting profits to drop. NO DEVELOPERS WANT THAT. International development does not pour in as Toronto nor international professional immigration to support over-building possibilities.
****TORONTO'S NEW BUILDINGS PROPOSED OR BUILDING ARE IMPRESSIVE INDEED. BUT PLEASE, SPARE ME SOME KIND OF INSULT TO DARE THINK CHICAGO'S ARE BETTER. I NEVER SAID THAT.
Last edited by JMT; 11-17-2016 at 01:18 PM..
Reason: Violation of rules for posting images.
"Oh there is population growth in this neighbourhood" .... "Oh there is only crime in this area".
Nitpicking Chicago neighbourhoods and neglecting others to hide the overall decline in the city of Chicago isn't going to work unfortunately.
This is a city vs city thread. Not a "neighbourhood vs neighbourhood" thread.
And looking at the city of Chicago as a whole, things are decling. Again, there is nothing wrong with decline and I'm not sure why you have an issue with this.
You can ask with the thousands of people that are leaving/have left , the ones that complaining about the insane crime rate, declining public school system, nearly 700 homicides, super high property taxes, etc. and so on. I can keep going but I'll stop right there.
Choosing the small amount of Chicago neighbourhoods that are not declining and focusing your replies on those ones... in a city vs city discussion... isn't going to cut it.
And pointing out the 44 buildings under construction to portray the city is not in decline = lol.
Are a large majority of those buildings not all within the loop area?The area you nitpicked? How many of those 44 buildings are outside the loop?
Obviously you have an agenda.I just made a statement about what is happening and why.Now if a CITY is in decline then THE WHOLE CITY IS IN DECLINE!!!!
Seriously dude!Every city major city has declining neighborhoods,Even Toronto does.
Its obviously "typical" that you can't handle the fact that Chicago is what it is.
As far as crime gooes,Are you not aware that crime in Chicago has been a constant since the days of Capone?Particularly violent crime?
I live in the South and yes there are MANY people from Chicago that have left.Majority is for cold and cheaper cost of living or a job in that order.Its not often people say its ONLY because of crime or politics.
Why in the hell would somebody leave Chicago due to crime and move to any Southern metro or even L.A.?
The VAST majority of people movin from Chicago are moving to the Sunbelt.Mainly 4 states.Texas,Georgia,Florida.North Carolina.So what logical person would conclude:"Oh it must be all crime and corruption related!!"
The majority of those buildings are in the loop and most of those gentrifying areas as well as the ones declining.Did you bother to read anything?
Let me be clear,I dont think Toronto is ""small time".
You guys go overboard with th e extremes and generalizations about what I and other posters have said.
However cities like Chicago are entrenched in the worlds financial,economic,scientific ,research communities and cultural institutional societies at large.
I agree overall, Chicago is solidly well-established as a major metropolis in the Western Hemisphere and I don't think you'll get any argument from any objective observer. I've been to Chicago many times for work, and the urban planning, and the grandiose size of municipal infrastructure and architecture, certainly demonstrates Chicago's vision and standing as a major world city.
I think Toronto has a lot of catching up to do, especially in terms of urban planning and better provisions for public realms like more open public spaces, better-designed architecture that reflects its unique multicultural heritage and as a growing city in the 21st century. Toronto's pipeline of proposed buildings is impressive, and probably only surpassed by NYC in terms of quantity in North America, but it needs to focus more on urban integration and providing provisions for multi-use housing stock (high rise as well as midrise, low-rise, and street retail/office). And thinking back, maybe "catching up" is not quite the right word to use here - it should be less of a race/competition and more of a learning process where Toronto learns (and/or copies) from the best aspects of Chicago.
Very much like Chicago, Toronto's strength lies in its status as the center of economy, finance, transport, research, technology, and education in Canada. The GTA is home to 3/4 of the highest ranked public universities and colleges in Canada (University of Toronto, University of Waterloo, York University, University of Western Ontario, Ryerson University, Sheridan, and Queen's University's Business School) - all of which have impressive and well-established science and research bases in Toronto. Very much like Chicago, Toronto is also the center for finance and professional services (consulting, accounting) - HQs to 4 of the largest universal banks in the world (Royal Bank of Canada, Bank of Montreal, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, and Scotiabank), and the Canadian HQs for 4 of the largest consulting and accounting firms (Deloitte, EY, Accenture, and PwC). With all that said, I personally don't think Toronto would ever become Chicago in anyway shape or form, simply because they occupy different positions in their respective nations, and they have very different histories of development: Chicago has already become a solidly established global city for the last 100 years while Toronto has only recently come of age in the last 15 years and is still in the midst of drastic transitions, a big difference. Chicago already boasts a world class cultural and music scene, and the Chicago skyline and Chicago School of Architecture is world renowned (I was a civil engineering minor in university, so spent a lot of time studying Chicago's contribution to modern structural engineering i.e. John Hancock Tower, etc.). At the same time, Toronto is still midst of establishing its cultural identity while experiencing an explosive influx of immigration (100,000+ on an annual basis). To sum it up, I think there are some areas where both cities are alike, but even more areas where both cities are far apart and will probably never reconcile due to differences in history, culture, and historical patterns of development and their respective roles in each country.
Last edited by bostonkid123; 11-17-2016 at 08:37 AM..
I agree overall, Chicago is solidly well-established as a major metropolis in the Western Hemisphere and I don't think you'll get any argument from any objective observer. I've been to Chicago many times for work, and the urban planning, and the grandiose size of municipal infrastructure and architecture, certainly demonstrates Chicago's vision and standing as a major world city.
I think Toronto has a lot of catching up to do, especially in terms of urban planning and better provisions for public realms like more open public spaces, better-designed architecture that reflects its unique multicultural heritage and as a growing city in the 21st century. Toronto's pipeline of proposed buildings is impressive, and probably only surpassed by NYC in terms of quantity in North America, but it needs to focus more on urban integration and providing provisions for multi-use housing stock (high rise as well as midrise, low-rise, and street retail/office). And thinking back, maybe "catching up" is not quite the right word to use here - it should be less of a race/competition and more of a learning process where Toronto learns (and/or copies) from the best aspects of Chicago.
Very much like Chicago, Toronto's strength lies in its status as the center of economy, finance, transport, research, technology, and education in Canada. The GTA is home to 3/4 of the highest ranked public universities and colleges in Canada (University of Toronto, University of Waterloo, York University, University of Western Ontario, Ryerson University, Sheridan, and Queen's University's Business School) - all of which have impressive and well-established science and research bases in Toronto. Very much like Chicago, Toronto is also the center for finance and professional services (consulting, accounting) - HQs to 4 of the largest universal banks in the world (Royal Bank of Canada, Bank of Montreal, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, and Scotiabank), and the Canadian HQs for 4 of the largest consulting and accounting firms (Deloitte, EY, Accenture, and PwC). With all that said, I personally don't think Toronto would ever become Chicago in anyway shape or form, simply because they occupy different positions in their respective nations, and they have very different histories of development: Chicago has already become a solidly established global city for the last 100 years while Toronto has only recently come of age in the last 15 years and is still in the midst of drastic transitions, a big difference. Chicago already boasts a world class cultural and music scene, and the Chicago skyline and Chicago School of Architecture is world renowned (I was a civil engineering minor in university, so spent a lot of time studying Chicago's contribution to modern structural engineering i.e. John Hancock Tower, etc.). At the same time, Toronto is still midst of establishing its cultural identity while experiencing an explosive influx of immigration (100,000+ on an annual basis). To sum it up, I think there are some areas where both cities are alike, but even more areas where both cities are far apart and will probably never reconcile due to differences in history, culture, and historical patterns of development and their respective roles in each country.
I agree overall, Chicago is solidly well-established as a major metropolis in the Western Hemisphere and I don't think you'll get any argument from any objective observer. I've been to Chicago many times for work, and the urban planning, and the grandiose size of municipal infrastructure and architecture, certainly demonstrates Chicago's vision and standing as a major world city.
I think Toronto has a lot of catching up to do, especially in terms of urban planning and better provisions for public realms like more open public spaces, better-designed architecture that reflects its unique multicultural heritage and as a growing city in the 21st century. Toronto's pipeline of proposed buildings is impressive, and probably only surpassed by NYC in terms of quantity in North America, but it needs to focus more on urban integration and providing provisions for multi-use housing stock (high rise as well as midrise, low-rise, and street retail/office). And thinking back, maybe "catching up" is not quite the right word to use here - it should be less of a race/competition and more of a learning process where Toronto learns (and/or copies) from the best aspects of Chicago.
Very much like Chicago, Toronto's strength lies in its status as the center of economy, finance, transport, research, technology, and education in Canada. The GTA is home to 3/4 of the highest ranked public universities and colleges in Canada (University of Toronto, University of Waterloo, York University, University of Western Ontario, Ryerson University, Sheridan, and Queen's University's Business School) - all of which have impressive and well-established science and research bases in Toronto. Very much like Chicago, Toronto is also the center for finance and professional services (consulting, accounting) - HQs to 4 of the largest universal banks in the world (Royal Bank of Canada, Bank of Montreal, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, and Scotiabank), and the Canadian HQs for 4 of the largest consulting and accounting firms (Deloitte, EY, Accenture, and PwC). With all that said, I personally don't think Toronto would ever become Chicago in anyway shape or form, simply because they occupy different positions in their respective nations, and they have very different histories of development: Chicago has already become a solidly established global city for the last 100 years while Toronto has only recently come of age in the last 15 years and is still in the midst of drastic transitions, a big difference. Chicago already boasts a world class cultural and music scene, and the Chicago skyline and Chicago School of Architecture is world renowned (I was a civil engineering minor in university, so spent a lot of time studying Chicago's contribution to modern structural engineering i.e. John Hancock Tower, etc.). At the same time, Toronto is still midst of establishing its cultural identity while experiencing an explosive influx of immigration (100,000+ on an annual basis). To sum it up, I think there are some areas where both cities are alike, but even more areas where both cities are far apart and will probably never reconcile due to differences in history, culture, and historical patterns of development and their respective roles in each country.
All that arguing and you FINALLY get where im at.
This was one of my first post where I mentioned this exact same thing and people got on me.I was not allowed to elaborate I just got slowly attacked.
Problem with discussing Toronto with Toronto people is that they see all the incredible changes happening at breakneck speed in their city so even though the city has come a long way fast and changed so much,they miss the things that people who visit see right away.
Yes Toronto skyline growth is impressive but the street level aesthetic is not attractive overall.Its pragmatic and thats it.
Great cities of the world like Paris has the Champs,London Picadilly Circus orr Traflagar Square,NYC Times Square,Chicago Mag Mile etc.
Toronto has very little in grand areas where walking is more that just to get to where you are going but an experience in feeling you are in a grand place.Where you have a sense that something big has or will happen here.
I suppose you are right maybe "cathing up" is not the best word but Toronto is not an established city in the sense that Chicago is.Chicago is almost as established as NYC,London,or Paris.Im not saying it is but if someone made that argument ,it would be not so easy to dismiss like it would for Toronto.
I just want people from Toronto to realize that being"the most diverse" is NOT and ideninity.So yes it does lack and idenity but people in Toronto dont want to believe this.
We have talked about food,history and culture that people can identify Chicago with even outside of Chicago and the U.S.
To date nothing from Toronto posters in over 40 pages of this thread.
As long as the culture and history of place still makes its relevant,it does not matter of it was 80 years when a city was in its hey day as there is a time in its history it becomes iconic and Chicago has passed that point so therefore Toronto ,now and the near future needs to round out its edges refine itself as Chicago is.
There are 17 Billionaires that call Chicago home.Oprah is not one.There are 6 billionaires in Toronto.Cities with that many billionaires usually have a lot of old money.The history that afforded these people such great wealth goes with the history of the city.Same is true for Toronto or any other city but again its the amount.
Chicago to this day is in the stop 5 cities of America in number of fastest growing companies.More than the booming cities of Houston,Dallas and many others.
Residential Construction Spending July 2016:
1. New York - $1.347 billion (YOY change: -54%)
2. Dallas - $914 million (YOY change: -3%)
3. Chicago - $897 million (YOY change: 133%)
4. Miami - $854 million (YOY change: -18%)
5. Houston - $719 million (YOY change: -27%)
6. Atlanta - $561 million (YOY change: -27%)
7. Los Angeles - $353 million (YOY change: -62%)
8. Seattle - $343 million (YOY change: -34%)
9. Boston - $235 million (YOY change: -62%)
10. San Francisco - $193 million (YOY change: -64%)
General construction is up 66% and residential construction is up 133%. Chicagoland spent $897 million on residential construction, and $4.224 billion on general construction spend
This was one of my first post where I mentioned this exact same thing and people got on me.I was not allowed to elaborate I just got slowly attacked.
Problem with discussing Toronto with Toronto people is that they see all the incredible changes happening at breakneck speed in their city so even though the city has come a long way fast and changed so much,they miss the things that people who visit see right away.
Yes Toronto skyline growth is impressive but the street level aesthetic is not attractive overall.Its pragmatic and thats it.
Great cities of the world like Paris has the Champs,London Picadilly Circus orr Traflagar Square,NYC Times Square,Chicago Mag Mile etc.
Toronto has very little in grand areas where walking is more that just to get to where you are going but an experience in feeling you are in a grand place.Where you have a sense that something big has or will happen here.
I suppose you are right maybe "cathing up" is not the best word but Toronto is not an established city in the sense that Chicago is.Chicago is almost as established as NYC,London,or Paris.Im not saying it is but if someone made that argument ,it would be not so easy to dismiss like it would for Toronto.
I just want people from Toronto to realize that being"the most diverse" is NOT and ideninity.So yes it does lack and idenity but people in Toronto dont want to believe this.
We have talked about food,history and culture that people can identify Chicago with even outside of Chicago and the U.S.
To date nothing from Toronto posters in over 40 pages of this thread.
As long as the culture and history of place still makes its relevant,it does not matter of it was 80 years when a city was in its hey day as there is a time in its history it becomes iconic and Chicago has passed that point so therefore Toronto ,now and the near future needs to round out its edges refine itself as Chicago is.
There are 17 Billionaires that call Chicago home.Oprah is not one.There are 6 billionaires in Toronto.Cities with that many billionaires usually have a lot of old money.The history that afforded these people such great wealth goes with the history of the city.Same is true for Toronto or any other city but again its the amount.
Chicago to this day is in the stop 5 cities of America in number of fastest growing companies.More than the booming cities of Houston,Dallas and many others.
Residential Construction Spending July 2016:
1. New York - $1.347 billion (YOY change: -54%)
2. Dallas - $914 million (YOY change: -3%)
3. Chicago - $897 million (YOY change: 133%)
4. Miami - $854 million (YOY change: -18%)
5. Houston - $719 million (YOY change: -27%)
6. Atlanta - $561 million (YOY change: -27%)
7. Los Angeles - $353 million (YOY change: -62%)
8. Seattle - $343 million (YOY change: -34%)
9. Boston - $235 million (YOY change: -62%)
10. San Francisco - $193 million (YOY change: -64%)
Your entire argument basically boils down to "Chicago has more history".
This is obviously true, but it is just that - history.
The architecture, the "grand spaces", the food, the movies etc... are history. They are based on accomplishments and relevance from decades in the past.
Toronto is not going to "catch up" to Chicago's history. That's impossible.
Where is Chicago today and where is it going? It is in decline. It is losing influence and power to other cities in the USA, and it is losing population and residents to other cities in the USA. These are simple facts.
Chicago is not increasing the gap with other US cities or Toronto. The gap is shrinking.
Your entire argument basically boils down to "Chicago has more history".
This is obviously true, but it is just that - history.
The architecture, the "grand spaces", the food, the movies etc... are history. They are based on accomplishments and relevance from decades in the past.
Toronto is not going to "catch up" to Chicago's history. That's impossible.
Where is Chicago today and where is it going? It is in decline. It is losing influence and power to other cities in the USA, and it is losing population and residents to other cities in the USA. These are simple facts.
Chicago is not increasing the gap with other US cities or Toronto. The gap is shrinking.
Good grief. Where is all this decline crap coming from? Chicago is a *major* world city going through a down cycle. It's had them before, it will have them again, much like Toronto or any other major city. Chicago's population was 3.5 million in the 1950s and settled around 2.9 million in the 90s, now it's 2.7 million. Guess what, in the 1950s Chicago was at best a borderline world city. Today, you won't find many people who would disagree that Chicago is a bona fide global power, in nearly all aspects of the term. You could even make a defensible argument that Chicago has evolved (even with declining population as stated), into a Top 10 world city. Additionally, city population aside, the Chicagoland metro has been growing (generally) and is comfortably around 9.5 million, though many argue the real number is actually closer to 10 million. I think your *desire* to see Chicago's decline is clouding your judgment.
Chicago's downtown is now on the uptick with major global corporations committing to Chicago and moving HQs to the Loop. As a tech incubator, it is also making strides. Just 10 years ago, Chicago was viewed as perhaps as favorably as any city on the planet. It was the *cool* city. This stuff is cyclical. Do you really think that after nearly 200 years of existence, Chicago is going to decline to some mediocre-level city? Meanwhile, Toronto is going through a renaissance of sorts. Great news for it, but just because it is on favorable ground does not mean it will continue and suddenly we wake up in 2040 and it's eclipsing NYC. It's cyclical.
Chicago is the pre-eminent city in the heartland of the globe's pre-eminent power. It is an acknowledged (note, not saying "the") world leader in a multitude of areas including economics/futures/derivatives, global HQs, transportation, intermodal cargo transport, culture (esp. high culture/museums), architecture, education, and so forth and so on.
If I were Toronto (a great city in its own right), I'd be flattered at the comparison with Chicago. There is a lot alike -- and to like-- between these two cities.
Good grief. Where is all this decline crap coming from? Chicago is a *major* world city going through a down cycle. It's had them before, it will have them again, much like Toronto or any other major city. Chicago's population was 3.5 million in the 1950s and settled around 2.9 million in the 90s, now it's 2.7 million. Guess what, in the 1950s Chicago was at best a borderline world city. Today, you won't find many people who would disagree that Chicago is a bona fide global power, in nearly all aspects of the term. You could even make a defensible argument that Chicago has evolved (even with declining population as stated), into a Top 10 world city. Additionally, city population aside, the Chicagoland metro has been growing (generally) and is comfortably around 9.5 million, though many argue the real number is actually closer to 10 million. I think your *desire* to see Chicago's decline is clouding your judgment.
Chicago's downtown is now on the uptick with major global corporations committing to Chicago and moving HQs to the Loop. As a tech incubator, it is also making strides. Just 10 years ago, Chicago was viewed as perhaps as favorably as any city on the planet. It was the *cool* city. This stuff is cyclical. Do you really think that after nearly 200 years of existence, Chicago is going to decline to some mediocre-level city? Meanwhile, Toronto is going through a renaissance of sorts. Great news for it, but just because it is on favorable ground does not mean it will continue and suddenly we wake up in 2040 and it's eclipsing NYC. It's cyclical.
Chicago is the pre-eminent city in the heartland of the globe's pre-eminent power. It is an acknowledged (note, not saying "the") world leader in a multitude of areas including economics/futures/derivatives, global HQs, transportation, intermodal cargo transport, culture (esp. high culture/museums), architecture, education, and so forth and so on.
If I were Toronto (a great city in its own right), I'd be flattered at the comparison with Chicago. There is a lot alike -- and to like-- between these two cities.
Is Chicago not losing influence and residents to other US cities? Is the gap between the top 2 US cities in NYC and Los Angeles not increasing versus Chicago?
Is the gap between the 4th and 5th US cities not tightening versus Chicago?
Is this not what decline is?
I don't think anyone would say Chicago is booming. You could argue it has emerged from decline closer to stagnation, but it is what it is.
Quite frankly 20-30 years ago no one would have thought Toronto would overtake Chicago to become the fourth largest city in North America. The fact that it has says less about Toronto's strength and more about Chicago's decline. While Toronto is among the faster growing cities in North America, all other major cities are growing at reasonable to high rates too. It will take a looooooong time if EVER for Toronto to catch up to Los Angeles or NYC. But Chicago's consistent decline over decades has enabled Toronto to surpass it.
If Chicago was as healthy as NYC and Los Angeles in maintaining its stature within the US/North America, Toronto would not have surpassed it either.
Last edited by Mr. Burns; 11-17-2016 at 02:07 PM..
Your entire argument basically boils down to "Chicago has more history".
This is obviously true, but it is just that - history.
The architecture, the "grand spaces", the food, the movies etc... are history. They are based on accomplishments and relevance from decades in the past.
Toronto is not going to "catch up" to Chicago's history. That's impossible.
Where is Chicago today and where is it going? It is in decline. It is losing influence and power to other cities in the USA, and it is losing population and residents to other cities in the USA. These are simple facts.
Chicago is not increasing the gap with other US cities or Toronto. The gap is shrinking.
Well thats what you see buts it alone is enough.
Cities that have no real history or culture of their own better be a financial economic powerhouse city like Houstpn or or an entertainment capital(Las Vegas,Orlando).Which do you think Toronto is? then again Houston has a history and idenity. Toronto does not.
Its the largest North American City that does not.The ONLY reason people mainly go there is the economy is good.Fifteen years ago,no one was going to Toronto.
Why do you think people go to NYC,Paris,London etc.?HISTORY and CUlTURE go hand and hand.
No matter how much :decline" Chicago has or does not have,Toronto will ALWAYS be in its shadow.
Funny how many topics centered around Chicago in the Toronto forum but not ONE talking about Toronto.Pull up Chicago in the search for Toronto its 2 threads currently going on about Chicago and toronto
You guys are fixated on Chicago because you know you dont have what it has.I get it.Too bad you dont.
I dont even know why Im bothering.
The poll says it all.Its a blow out
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.
POSTING IT.
