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.
Pennsylvania is located next to three solid blue states with a particularly high cost of living and high population density (at least in their key economic hubs) - New York, New Jersey and Maryland. While Pennsylvania isn't the Great Plains or Deep South, it is comparatively more affordable and less crowded, which helps to draw many transplants from its neighbors. I'm pretty certain that Pennsylvania is seeing a substantial net loss of residents to the South and West, even as they gain from the other Middle Atlantic states.
While Chicago offers a uniquely substantial urban experience in the central US, other regional cities have been catching up. I don't think in general that suburban Chicago or downstate Illinois have a competitive advantage vs. equivalent areas in surrounding Midwest states. It will be interesting to see if over the next few decades, Ohio and Michigan start to narrow the population gap with Illinois as well. Those two states are not so dominated by a single huge metro area, and are both (particularly Michigan) more politically competitive and scenically appealing.
Pennsylvania is located next to three solid blue states with a particularly high cost of living and high population density (at least in their key economic hubs) - New York, New Jersey and Maryland. While Pennsylvania isn't the Great Plains or Deep South, it is comparatively more affordable and less crowded, which helps to draw many transplants from its neighbors. I'm pretty certain that Pennsylvania is seeing a substantial net loss of residents to the South and West, even as they gain from the other Middle Atlantic states.
While Chicago offers a uniquely substantial urban experience in the central US, other regional cities have been catching up. I don't think in general that suburban Chicago or downstate Illinois have a competitive advantage vs. equivalent areas in surrounding Midwest states. It will be interesting to see if over the next few decades, Ohio and Michigan start to narrow the population gap with Illinois as well. Those two states are not so dominated by a single huge metro area, and are both (particularly Michigan) more politically competitive and scenically appealing.
Umm, Detroit? Don't most Michiganders live in Detroit area? And Ohio is not too "scenically appealing" either, IMO, the western part of the state particularly.
Umm, Detroit? Don't most Michiganders live in Detroit area? And Ohio is not too "scenically appealing" either, IMO, the western part of the state particularly.
About half of Michigan's population is in the Detroit, Ann Arbor and Flint metro areas combined - much lower than metro Chicago's share in Illinois.
Cincinnati is at the southwest corner of Ohio and has one of the most attractive settings among major Midwest cities. I would agree the northwest part of the state is pretty bland, just like most of Illinois.
Illinois is a complete mess. It really is, due to politicians like Mike Madigan that have run the state into the ground. I still like Chicago much better than both Philly and Pittsburgh, but PA seems like the better state to live in.
I doubt Madigan will survive the 2020s, politically or perhaps even mortally.
Some arguably good things going for Illinois is that there will be legal recreational dispensaries in Illinois at the start of next year and the state is mostly surrounded by states where that is not legal which means some regional tourism dollars though hopefully not massive smuggling issues. So far other states that have legalized recreational use have been doing pretty alright.
Another is that Illinois has been embarking on massive expansions of its state rail services (well, massive for the US with only Virginia and California really comparable). This hopefully gives Illinois’s many smaller cities a good shot in the arm.
Finally, the two major cities very near the Illinois border, St. Louis and Milwaukee, have been seeing heavy reinvestment into their urban cores which hopefully ends up with some positive spillover. After all, the second most populous metropolitan area within Illinois is the Illinois portion of the St. Louis metro. It’s hit upon some very hard times over the last several decades, but there are some promising signs.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 11-29-2019 at 03:38 PM..
While Chicago offers a uniquely substantial urban experience in the central US, other regional cities have been catching up.
I agree with most of your post except for this. Chicago will always be the urban, economic powerhouse and nucleus of the Midwest. No other city in the Midwest is even a tenth of the level of urbanity and importance Chicago is on, don't be ridiculous.
About half of Michigan's population is in the Detroit, Ann Arbor and Flint metro areas combined - much lower than metro Chicago's share in Illinois.
Cincinnati is at the southwest corner of Ohio and has one of the most attractive settings among major Midwest cities. I would agree the northwest part of the state is pretty bland, just like most of Illinois.
I've been all over Ohio, but never to Cincy. I've been to their airport, but that's in Kentucky.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCrest182
I agree with most of your post except for this. Chicago will always be the urban, economic powerhouse and nucleus of the Midwest. No other city in the Midwest is even a tenth of the level of urbanity and importance Chicago is on, don't be ridiculous.
Agreed.
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.