Chicago vs Rest of Midwest. (Nashville, Atlanta: rent, employment, neighborhoods)

[Phil75230]

How wide is the gap between Chicago (including suburbs) and the rest of the Midwest (save perhaps Detroit and Cleveland)? I'm asking because as a Southerner there's certainly a huge gap between Atlanta and even some of the regions second-tier cities (Charlotte, Nashville, Raleigh-Durham), plus the big Texas cities (depending on whether you call that the South).

In short, does metro Chicago culture clash with Midwestern culture to the extent that Atlanta, Dallas, and Houston clash with Southern culture? Thanks in advance.

[chet everett]

The shifts that continue to see fewer and fewer jobs in agriculture or manufacturing are in many ways making the "rest of the midwest" look more and more like Chicago and its suburbs -- larger numbers of people working are doing so in generic office type settings. (sadly few folks in the historically underclass parts of Chicago have any employment at all, which is also different than other midwestern cities where folks can afford rent working at a retail chain and such...).

That said, the recreational habits of many folks in more rural areas do include a lot more time doing things like fishing and hunting, which is generally not very popular with folks living inside Chicago or most suburbs. There are little pockets where the "Field & Stream" sports are more common though folks in the greater Chicago region tend to be much more likely to spend leisure time watching things like NFL, NHL, NBA, and MLB which even in other midwestern cities that have multiple such teams (which is not really all that common...) the ratings are just not as strong.

Not sure that you can completely reduce "culture" to just work and recreation, but those are what folks do spend the majority time engaged in and despite the growing surface similarity with "work" the recreation is still a big separator. In all honesty the sorts of dining, nightlife, arts and such that Chicago and the nicer suburbs offer is really much more extensive than any other midwestern city and as a percentage of folks that embrace such options only a handful of other US cities can compare and they are places like NYC and San Francisco, which are clearly not midwestern...

[thefallensrvnge]

I would say that the gap between Chicago and other cities of the Midwest is larger than say Houston/Atlanta and the rest of the Southern cities. The South has several cities that compete for the status of number one. I mean even in Texas, Houston and Dallas are always battling it out. Chicago has no competition. There are many great cities in the Midwest, but in terms of cultural offerings Chicago is king.

Having lived in the rural Midwest, as well as several mid-sized metros, I would say that Chicagoans (at least in the city since I've never lived in the burbs) indulge in their cultural offerings more than others in the surrounding region. This is mostly because of the larger variety of cuisine, museums, plays, local and international fashion stores. There's more to do here. For me personally, what has helped is a better mass transit system. What used to keep me from going to the museum on Friday night in KC was the thought of getting in my car, fighting traffic, stopping for gas, trying to figure out what the damn GPS is telling me, finding a parking space, paying for it, and then rinse and repeat to get home. Now, I just hop on the train.

Also, being in a dense, more crowded city, I'm more aware of things going on around me. I hear people talking about a new exhibit or play on the street or on the train. I see adverts on buses, taxis, in the subway cars, on TV, etc.

[Kmanshouse]

For the companies I have dealt with that are global, etc, they have a major hub in Chicago and satellite offices in some of the midwestern cities that are tiny by comparison. I imagine this is somewhat commonplace.

Detroit was Chicago's closest "competitor" before it crashed. Maybe it will rise again to a top 10 city, but until it does, it's a slaughter.

Another way I think of this is that the midwest is generally pretty similar in scenery, but do you see people from outside the midwest planning 3-day getaway weekends in Detroit, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Des Moines, Minneapolis, St. Louis? Maybe a tiny bit, but in that way Chicago is again far beyond these other cities.

Indianapolis does compete in the annual event scene. They host many national sporting events like the Final Four, Big Ten Title Game, Indy 500, as well as stuff like Gen-Con, etc. etc.

That all said, I absolutely love it that these other midwestern cities have maintained solid identities with traditional sports teams, etc. Despite conventional wisdom that many of these are kind of dying stars, most still have strong cores and a great loyal spirit to them.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by Kmanshouse

For the companies I have dealt with that are global, etc, they have a major hub in Chicago and satellite offices in some of the midwestern cities that are tiny by comparison. I imagine this is somewhat commonplace.

Detroit was Chicago's closest "competitor" before it crashed. Maybe it will rise again to a top 10 city, but until it does, it's a slaughter.

Another way I think of this is that the midwest is generally pretty similar in scenery, but do you see people from outside the midwest planning 3-day getaway weekends in Detroit, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Des Moines, Minneapolis, St. Louis? Maybe a tiny bit, but in that way Chicago is again far beyond these other cities.

Indianapolis does compete in the annual event scene. They host many national sporting events like the Final Four, Big Ten Title Game, Indy 500, as well as stuff like Gen-Con, etc. etc.

That all said, I absolutely love it that these other midwestern cities have maintained solid identities with traditional sports teams, etc. Despite conventional wisdom that many of these are kind of dying stars, most still have strong cores and a great loyal spirit to them.

I don't know if I agree with this. Detroit has definitely seen better days but things are improving. Minneapolis is doing well. Columbus is hot. Cincinnati is hot. The biggest collapses have definitely been Cleveland, Detroit, and St. Louis, but the first two have made some recent strides. St. Louis still has its fair share of problems.

[Kmanshouse]

Actually true - I said that in a sweeping way but didn't mean it. Columbus and MPLS are definitely not dying stars. That applies to more of the others....

[pianist1972]

St. Louis is on its way back up.

[RisingAurvandil]

Chicago is, by far, the top Midwest city. I will take it a step further, it is the top city between the East and West coasts. Similar to the way that New York is unparalleled in the U.S.

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

I don't know if I agree with this. Detroit has definitely seen better days but things are improving. Minneapolis is doing well. Columbus is hot. Cincinnati is hot. The biggest collapses have definitely been Cleveland, Detroit, and St. Louis, but the first two have made some recent strides. St. Louis still has its fair share of problems.

I've lived in StL for most of my life. It is on the upswing. Cranes everyone in the Central Corridor. We have a decent rail system, considering our size, and there is an ongoing push for expansion. Several neighborhoods that were trashed 20 yeas ago have been gentrified and filled with young folks. Sure, the black areas on the north side are struggling. But that's not any different than such areas in any other large city.

[froglipz]

Chicago just has way too much shooting and killing every weekend!

[damba]

It certainly does, but the violence is in very concentrated areas of the
city.