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.
It’s one of the better depressing ghettos out there. At least it looks less rundown on the surface.
Minneapolis is a bit better I guess, but neither are giving Detroit or St. Louis a run for their money.
Yeah, Milwaukee really isn't nearly as beaten up as a lot of people seem to think. There definitely is a lot of poverty that exists in Milwaukee but I'd say only about 15% of the city is decayed on some level(minimum for me would be more than 10% of lots either being boarded up or vacant), and its population loss hasn't been nearly as intense as most other rust-belt cities as well. Milwaukee has only lost a little more than 20% of its peak population, far lower than St Louis, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, etc. Minneapolis at one point lost more peak population compared to Milwaukee(though its recovered a bit more). I also think its very odd because despite St Louis having a lower poverty rate, its far more beat-up compared to Milwaukee.
The Greensboro/Winston Salem metro area has the best buying power of any metro over 1 million in the nation and this carries over into the city too. Very nice 4-season climate (no extremes), an economy and population that's not shrinking, some great outdoor recreation, wonderful residents. They're the most balanced city on the list looking at everything from an objective standpoint.
The Greensboro/Winston Salem metro area has the best buying power of any metro over 1 million in the nation and this carries over into the city too. Very nice 4-season climate (no extremes), an economy and population that's not shrinking, some great outdoor recreation, wonderful residents. They're the most balanced city on the list looking at everything from an objective standpoint.
Ugh if there's one (or two) thing I miss about living in Greensboro, it's the $750 rent for a decent 1-bed and 15 minute drive to anywhere in the city.
I agree. I don’t consider Chicago affordable. Yes, when compared to NYC, Boston, DC, SF, etc one can say it is, buts that’s not saying much when compared to those. $50k a year isn’t going to get you a comfortable life in Chicago, at all, yes it will go much further than it’s more expensive peers, but Chicago is not really cheap nor particularly affordable. I’d say it’s in the middle of the pack in affordability, close to being with top tier of most unaffordable cities.
Chicago is only about 10% more expensive than Houston by most COL calculators so it's only a bit more expensive than the cheapest top 10 major city. If that's not affordable to you then big cities aren't for you.
Chicago is only about 10% more expensive than Houston by most COL calculators so it's only a bit more expensive than the cheapest top 10 major city. If that's not affordable to you then big cities aren't for you.
I just moved from Chicago to Miami, after living in Chicago for 30+ years (was raised there). I think I know what I am talking about. Chicago is not prohibitive but it's not affordable either.
For example, want your kids to go to a good public school, but are middle class? Good luck. All my friends who were also raised in the city and now have kids have moved to the suburbs for better schools, because the only good schools in Chicago are in the neighborhoods where it's extremely expensive. These are the same friends that said they would never raise their kids in the suburbs, and they all make more than $100k. To me affordability would be that a middle class family could live in a neighborhood, be provided good schools, city services, safety, etc.
When you just look at numbers it can be misleading, because Chicago is indeed a tale of two cities. It just doesn't look like that on paper. Sure you can find good deals, but they are a rarity, not the norm.
Income has to be considered in all of this as well. Here is a source that allows you to view Annual mean wage information by metro area: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm
In Greater Cincinnati, you can still find 1 bedroom and studio apartments for $500-600. Within the city limits, you can be in a decent to good area and pay less than $1000 for a 1 bedroom, and it won't be a slum. I really wish we had mass transit, but all around Cincy is a well rounded metro with a diverse economy and tons of things to do for fun.
Chicago is completely out of the picture for affordability. Yes, it's cheap compared to like 10 cities. If you're in the US you have 100+ sizable cities to choose from. Yes, it's an alpha world city that attracts global investments and talent BUT, it's also different than it's coastal counterparts in NY LA and Houston.
Chicago dominates the Midwest in a way that no other city dominates it's region, except for maybe Denver. It's super worldly, but SUPER Midwestern. Because of that, it will always be compared and contrasted with it's more affordable neighbors in Indianapolis, Saint Louis, Detroit etc... The areas that are affordable in Chicago, are pretty much being ruined by a societal breakdown (not unique to Chicago), but that's a whole other topic.
Chicago does give you the bang for the buck, and it's a jewel of a city; but now that many other regions are rejuvenating and reinventing themselves, people have options. When you're forced out of your own town because of affordability, options become viable solutions, and the Midwest has soooooo many legacy cities to choose from.
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.