Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which has a better economy?
Houston 59 49.17%
Chicago 61 50.83%
Voters: 120. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-08-2010, 12:44 PM
 
7 posts, read 14,844 times
Reputation: 10

Advertisements

Houston has a much stronger economy right now. Chicagoland has higher-than-national average unemployment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-08-2010, 12:54 PM
 
Location: By the lake
184 posts, read 571,301 times
Reputation: 122
It is easier to find a good paying job in Chicago than it is in Houston so therefore Chicago wins.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 12:57 PM
 
7 posts, read 14,844 times
Reputation: 10
^
How is that true if Chicago has much higher unemployment than Houston?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-08-2010, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Willowbend/Houston
13,384 posts, read 25,732,359 times
Reputation: 10592
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmario_88 View Post
It is easier to find a good paying job in Chicago than it is in Houston so therefore Chicago wins.
Im not so sure thats accurate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 08:19 AM
 
1,750 posts, read 3,389,720 times
Reputation: 788
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmario_88 View Post
It is easier to find a good paying job in Chicago than it is in Houston so therefore Chicago wins.
Have you looked for "good paying jobs" in both Chicago and Houston? Please report your findings to us
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 08:24 AM
 
Location: US Empire, Pac NW
5,002 posts, read 12,356,425 times
Reputation: 4125
If you take a look at the cities and the metro areas, I think both have robust economies. Both have a good mix of financial, law, technical, industrial, science, and engineering. It's useless to state that one is more diverse.

You can't even make the argument that one is growing faster than the other because Chicago has 10 million people in the greater Chicagoland area. Houston is probably growing slightly faster because it's cheaper to live there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 09:55 AM
 
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,221 posts, read 15,949,325 times
Reputation: 3545
Houston's metro area is growing A LOT faster than Chicago. It's economy (going by GDP), is only growing a little faster than Chicago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Washington D.C. By way of Texas
20,514 posts, read 33,519,512 times
Reputation: 12147
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskercurve View Post
You can't even make the argument that one is growing faster than the other because Chicago has 10 million people in the greater Chicagoland area. Houston is probably growing slightly faster because it's cheaper to live there.
Honestly, Chicago is growing slower not because it's more expensive. But because people do not prefer its winters. People would rather do Houston's unbearable summers than do Chicago's bitter winters. I say that because Chicago is not as expensive as people say it is. It is a bargain. But you'll probably still get more for your money in Houston but Chicago is a great alternative for people on the coasts if they are looking for a huge city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 12:07 PM
 
11,289 posts, read 26,186,261 times
Reputation: 11355
Quote:
Originally Posted by eskercurve View Post
If you take a look at the cities and the metro areas, I think both have robust economies. Both have a good mix of financial, law, technical, industrial, science, and engineering. It's useless to state that one is more diverse.
But by most accounts, Chicago is normally ranked as the most diverse economy. Most cities grow up fast around a few key sectors that let them blast ahead of other places in their regions. Things they're "good at".

Chicago was good at manufacturing and transportation related activities because of its location and the time period when it grew. There was a huge fallout in the manufacturing sector in our country, and many places centered around that fell from their positions. Chicago was large enough and determined enough to start sucking in other industries to fill the gaps. Because of this, the city is fairly unique in how large it is, and how so many industries are located in the area.

By 2010, Chicago has very solid hands going very deep into an unusually large number of industries. Medical, law, finance, utilities, transportation, IT, manufacturing, etc, etc.

Moody's did a report, and Chicago ranked as having the #1 most diverse economy out of the top 100 in our country. Houston was #81 because around 1/3 of the economy is based around natural resources/trade/transportation/utilities.

http://www.allbusiness.com/personal-finance/real-estate-mortgage-loans/589324-1.html (broken link)

Overall - Houston's economy is the healthiest right now because their fields are very active ones, while Chicago is probably the most stable and diverse. Chicago grows more slowly, and without many of the rapid fluctuations. It more closely follows national trends. When sectors boom and bust, they don't drag Chicago one way or another like other areas do when their key areas boom and bust. Manufacturing busted Detroit, Finance boomed and busted in NYC, oil boomed Houston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2010, 12:12 PM
 
Location: ITL (Houston)
9,221 posts, read 15,949,325 times
Reputation: 3545
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicago60614 View Post
Overall - Houston's economy is the healthiest right now because their fields are very active ones, while Chicago is probably the most stable and diverse. Chicago grows more slowly, and without many of the rapid fluctuations. It more closely follows national trends. When sectors boom and bust, they don't drag Chicago one way or another like other areas do when their key areas boom and bust. Manufacturing busted Detroit, Finance boomed and busted in NYC, oil boomed Houston.
I'd say Houston's economy is the less diverse, but more stable. The boom and busts don't drag Houston down much either (anymore). Here is a chart I posted here before:



Houston was steady throughout the entire decade, save for 00-01.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top