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.
Agree with they all have "bright" futures. I don't agree that growth as a standalone metric says much other than growth. Actually, tbh I think it's weird how so many of you use it as a catch-all stat to determine winners and losers. High growth might be great for 20 somethings, or childless professionals, or real estate investors and business owners, but it's actually pretty horrible for most others. And with any rapid growth you have a volatility that can have really nasty side effects. I'd rather have stability first, steady/small growth second.
In any case, with the coasts being so expensive (with little signs of trends reversing) and global warming threatening so much of the south (and the coasts), trends are bound to reverse and the midwest is bound to see considerable growth again. Especially, imo, the Great Lakes region. Buffalo was actually listed as the most desirable place to live in 2050 by a few climate scientists.
I need to explore Muskegon's lakefront but Gary sits on a six-mile beach with towering Dunes with National Park on the east west and south of Miller Beach. And the view of Chicago's skyline from Miller Beach, Gary is honestly, objectively, one of the most stunning views in the entire nation. Most people are too afraid to even come to Gary to see it. Losers....
They keep saying Chicago is losing Population..But in All honesty, Does it really matter. Chicagoland lost 13,000 people last year. That's 13,000 out 9 Million...a freakin drop in the Bucket. A drop of Kool Aid in the Ocean, A single tree in a Forest! That's like 0.000001 percent of Population Chicago Lost .
So .Aside from Civic Pride and Gov't Budgets, Statistics Folk , City Geeks like us, And the People in Houston, Does Chicago's decline really Matter....
.If A Regular Person Not into City Data and Completly Oblivious to The population of City Limits visited Chicago Last Year, and than Visited Chicago again this Year..Would they Notice 13,000 less people , Or would Chicago feel and Look the Same way it did last year..My Point.
I recently read Paris And London Also lost population recently....How many of you STILL Wanna go to Paris...At first I was like Chicago is Losing Population that's it it's finna go into Decline but than I realized and I think
.... Chicago is one of those Invincible Cities. IT DOES NOT MATTER ,How many people Chicago loses It will still possess that Grandeur...
This is Not the Case for Other Midwestern Cities But Chicago has that Critical Mass in that it's Gonna be Major no matter what. It Will NEVER Be a Detroit..
Look at it another way, Chicago can drop down from 2.7 million to 1 million it would still be Major....First it's in Cook County which still has 5 million .. than it's Surrounded by Super Large Counties like Kendall which has over 900,000 than Dupage and Will Both over 600,000 , Lake County over 500,000 and on and on So if Chicago drops to a Million it's still Surrounded by multiple Counties At or above 700,000 and about 10 more Counties of between 100,000 and ,300,000
....that's Nearly 20 Counties over 100,000 that Chicago can draw from No Matter the Population of the City Limit....and About 7 counties of at least 700,000 - nearly a Million Chicago can draw from. That's Too Big,. Too Big to Fail,. St Louis and Columbus and Minneapolis don't hold this same kind of Power. Chicago and Most Importantly it's Surrounding Counties ARE TO BIG to fail.
How much of Detroit's "comeback" is real? I had a conversation with an older woman from Detroit who was around for the 12th St riots. She said that outside of the theme park-like downtown, Detroit is still pretty much a giant slum
How will St Louis fare in the next 1-2 decades? On paper, other than demographics and the bankruptcy, it's nearly a twin City of Detroit, yet is perceived to be in much better shape. Why?
Columbus and Indy, two more twin cities, seen to be doing pretty well. They're perceived as "bland" by a lot of people, but economically they seem to be very solid. I wonder how they will look in the next 10-20 years.
St. Louis City has a higher educational attainment, lower poverty, and higher income than Detroit City. Only thing that really is similar between Detroit and St. Louis is high violent crime and urban decay (which is heavily on the north side of St. Louis, while Detroit seems to have a more citywide problem of decay). St. Louis also has a way better park system, universities, and civic institutions in the center city than Detroit. Add in the light rail system and I don't think St. Louis is that similar to Detroit at all. St. Louis also seems to have a much more diversified economy than Detroit. Definitely more of an Eds/Meds city than Detroit is. I would say St. Louis is more of a hybrid between Minneapolis and Detroit, which I know sounds weird as hell, but anybody that has spent enough time there knows what I mean.
Median Household Income
Minneapolis $56,255
Indianapolis $44,615
St. Louis $40,346
Cincinnati $38,539
Detroit $28,099
Cleveland $27,551
Bachelor's Degree or Higher
Minneapolis 48.4%
Cincinnati 37%
St. Louis 34.1%
Indianapolis 30.1%
Cleveland 16.3%
Detroit 14.9%
Poverty Rate
Indianapolis 18.9%
Minneapolis 20.4%
St. Louis 23.8%
Cincinnati 26%
Cleveland 35%
Detroit 35.7%
St. Louis City has a higher educational attainment, lower poverty, and higher income than Detroit City. Only thing that really is similar between Detroit and St. Louis is high violent crime and urban decay (which is heavily on the north side of St. Louis, while Detroit seems to have a more citywide problem of decay). St. Louis also has a way better park system, universities, and civic institutions in the center city than Detroit. Add in the light rail system and I don't think St. Louis is that similar to Detroit at all. St. Louis also seems to have a much more diversified economy than Detroit. Definitely more of an Eds/Meds city than Detroit is. I would say St. Louis is more of a hybrid between Minneapolis and Detroit, which I know sounds weird as hell, but anybody that has spent enough time there knows what I mean.
Median Household Income
Minneapolis $56,255
Indianapolis $44,615
St. Louis $40,346
Cincinnati $38,539
Detroit $28,099
Cleveland $27,551
Bachelor's Degree or Higher
Minneapolis 48.4%
Cincinnati 37%
St. Louis 34.1%
Indianapolis 30.1%
Cleveland 16.3%
Detroit 14.9%
Poverty Rate
Indianapolis 18.9%
Minneapolis 20.4%
St. Louis 23.8%
Cincinnati 26%
Cleveland 35%
Detroit 35.7%
I disagree. St. Louis is a larger Memphis mixed with some Chicago characteristics. I don't think you can make the argument that St. Louis has a brighter future than Detroit. Detroit has a larger economy and higher ranking among the GaWC. St. Louis is in the bottom Gamma cities while Detroit is a Gamma + city.
They keep saying Chicago is losing Population..But in All honesty, Does it really matter. Chicagoland lost 13,000 people last year. That's 13,000 out 9 Million...a freakin drop in the Bucket. A drop of Kool Aid in the Ocean, A single tree in a Forest! That's like 0.000001 percent of Population Chicago Lost .
So .Aside from Civic Pride and Gov't Budgets, Statistics Folk , City Geeks like us, And the People in Houston, Does Chicago's decline really Matter....
.If A Regular Person Not into City Data and Completly Oblivious to The population of City Limits visited Chicago Last Year, and than Visited Chicago again this Year..Would they Notice 13,000 less people , Or would Chicago feel and Look the Same way it did last year..My Point.
I recently read Paris And London Also lost population recently....How many of you STILL Wanna go to Paris...At first I was like Chicago is Losing Population that's it it's finna go into Decline but than I realized and I think
.... Chicago is one of those Invincible Cities. IT DOES NOT MATTER ,How many people Chicago loses It will still possess that Grandeur...
This is Not the Case for Other Midwestern Cities But Chicago has that Critical Mass in that it's Gonna be Major no matter what. It Will NEVER Be a Detroit..
Look at it another way, Chicago can drop down from 2.7 million to 1 million it would still be Major....First it's in Cook County which still has 5 million .. than it's Surrounded by Super Large Counties like Kendall which has over 900,000 than Dupage and Will Both over 600,000 , Lake County over 500,000 and on and on So if Chicago drops to a Million it's still Surrounded by multiple Counties At or above 700,000 and about 10 more Counties of between 100,000 and ,300,000
....that's Nearly 20 Counties over 100,000 that Chicago can draw from No Matter the Population of the City Limit....and About 7 counties of at least 700,000 - nearly a Million Chicago can draw from. That's Too Big,. Too Big to Fail,. St Louis and Columbus and Minneapolis don't hold this same kind of Power. Chicago and Most Importantly it's Surrounding Counties ARE TO BIG to fail.
I disagree. St. Louis is a larger Memphis mixed with some Chicago characteristics. I don't think you can make the argument that St. Louis has a brighter future than Detroit. Detroit has a larger economy and higher ranking among the GaWC. St. Louis is in the bottom Gamma cities while Detroit is a Gamma + city.
Not talking about culture or aesthetics. Look at the data. St. Louis is basically in the middle of the pack as far as demographics such as income and education. St. Louis has a river, blues and BBQ, that's where the similarities between Memphis and St. Louis start and end. St. Louis and Chicago share some architectural similarities, but that's it really. You mention St. Louis a lot but know very little about it. The facts are right in your face.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Muskegon or Gary fit the criteria for this thread. Both cities are too small.
I suppose Gary is technically in a metro of 9+ million, but it’s certainly not the most important, nor top 5-10 cities in that metro. Then Muskegon is part of Grand Rapids CSA, I think(?).
I suppose Gary is technically in a metro of 9+ million, but it’s certainly not the most important, nor top 5-10 cities in that metro. Then Muskegon is part of Grand Rapids CSA, I think(?).
The thread isn't about small cities that are a part of another city's MSA...CSA is really stretching it.
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.
