CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[Baronvonellis]

Well a great example is Rahm built the Riverwalk into an awesome destination! But how many people in Antwerp would know about it? You have to market your strengths of your city to other countries. When I would meet people in Europe the first thing that came to their mind if they knew anything about Chicago was crime and violence, and that's it's a dangerous place to visit. I have 2 friends in Munich that are literally scared to come visit me in Chicago, they think they will get shot walking around. That's not the kind of place you want to spend thousands on for a international vacation. We really have to get the crime under control, and fix our image problem, and start marketing so people have positive ideas of Chicago!

Regarding the Art Institute, well most of those museums are in their capital cities of their countries so of course they are going to be more popular. And really you think the Art Institute is better than the Vatican museum? It's literally the epicenter of western Civilization for 2000 years!! Vs. a city that's only barley existed 200 years. No comparison. The only one I'd say that maybe doesn't equal the Art Institute is Reina Sofía in Madrid. It's a nice modern art museum that has a couple Picassos, but tickets there cost less than half the Art institute and it's in the capital of Spain. The government in Spain subsidizes the ticket price. I've wanted to visit the Art Institute many more times than I do, but the $25 ticket price is really steep. Imagine how many more people would visit if it was $10.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

It's literally the epicenter of western Civilization for 2000 years!! Vs. a city that's only barley existed 200 years. No comparison.

^ Does the Vatican museum have actual art from around the world or is it just another provincial museum that has a bunch of paintings/statues of dead European nobles and nativity scene kind of stuff?

What I love about the Art Institute, the Met, the British Museum, etc is their collections from various civilizations around the world.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Does the Vatican museum have actual art from around the world or is it just another provincial museum that has a bunch of paintings/statues of dead European nobles and nativity scene kind of stuff?

What I love about the Art Institute, the Met, the British Museum, etc is their collections from various civilizations around the world.

My favorite part of the Vatican is actually the art collection LOL. There's some awesome stuff there. I don't remember where everything was from..mostly Europe but not a bunch of nativity scenes. A lot of statues of various things too.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Does the Vatican museum have actual art from around the world or is it just another provincial museum that has a bunch of paintings/statues of dead European nobles and nativity scene kind of stuff?

What I love about the Art Institute, the Met, the British Museum, etc is their collections from various civilizations around the world.

I mean it has the Sistine Chapel and a bunch of other awesome stuff. But I don't think the Rijksmuseum is better the Art Institute, for example.

[LouisVanDerWright]

The fact is Chicago is the site of the genesis of what we now understand to be the modern world and modern Life. Rome has great historical heritage, but Chicago's short past is far more relevant. This is reflected in our architecture, art, music, industry, etc.

What means more to the average Joe today? The difference between one style of classical music and another or the difference between jazz, blues, and rock and roll?

What matters more to artists today? Anicent styles of art depicting the same Bible scenes over and over again or the entire evolution of modern art from Manet and Money onwards? What matters more to today's architects and engineers? The innovations of ancient Roman construction or the innovations that occurred in Chicago leading to Modern architecture and modern engineering?

Sure ancient styles of art or culture or architecture are interesting from a historical standpoint, but the ancient method of masonry construction has been pretty much rendered obsolete. Where was it rendered obsolete? In Chicago. What hurts is that Chicago has surrendered it's status as the cultural center of the world that it enjoyed for decades of early film and radio. The relevance of Chicago isn't widely preached because of it.,

[Baronvonellis]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

The fact is Chicago is the site of the genesis of what we now understand to be the modern world and modern Life. Rome has great historical heritage, but Chicago's short past is far more relevant. This is reflected in our architecture, art, music, industry, etc.

What means more to the average Joe today? The difference between one style of classical music and another or the difference between jazz, blues, and rock and roll?

What matters more to artists today? Anicent styles of art depicting the same Bible scenes over and over again or the entire evolution of modern art from Manet and Money onwards? What matters more to today's architects and engineers? The innovations of ancient Roman construction or the innovations that occurred in Chicago leading to Modern architecture and modern engineering?

Sure ancient styles of art or culture or architecture are interesting from a historical standpoint, but the ancient method of masonry construction has been pretty much rendered obsolete. Where was it rendered obsolete? In Chicago. What hurts is that Chicago has surrendered it's status as the cultural center of the world that it enjoyed for decades of early film and radio. The relevance of Chicago isn't widely preached because of it.,

Sorry Sir, but I beg to differ. Chicago only exists because of the 2000+ years of western civilization that came before it. Otherwise it would still be an Indian trading post. Chicago is the current pinnacle of all that came before it. Greco-Roman civilization built the foundations and walls of society and culture that allow Chicago to even exist. Your saying that a roof is more important than the structure and foundation of a building? How would a roof stand up if it weren't for the walls and structure?

I don't know where to even begin to explain all of western civilization that came from Greece and Rome!!

You need to get out of the quadrant of Wisconsin, Iowa, and Chicago and explore the world a bit.


The Vatican museum, has gifts from all around the world that the Popes got for 2000 years! The place is enormous! Plus, lots of great Roman works of art. The popes were the king makers of Europe from 500 to 1700 or so. They were the center of the global age of exploration and global empires. You should watch the show the Borgias with Jeremy Irons to get a sense of how powerful the Popes were.

[Kenmore]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Sorry Sir, but I beg to differ. Chicago only exists because of the 2000+ years of western civilization that came before it. Otherwise it would still be an Indian trading post. Chicago is the current pinnacle of all that came before it. Greco-Roman civilization built the foundations and walls of society and culture that allow Chicago to even exist. Your saying that a roof is more important than the structure and foundation of a building? How would a roof stand up if it weren't for the walls and structure?

I don't know where to even begin to explain all of western civilization that came from Greece and Rome!!

You need to get out of the quadrant of Wisconsin, Iowa, and Chicago and explore the world a bit.


The Vatican museum, has gifts from all around the world that the Popes got for 2000 years! The place is enormous! Plus, lots of great Roman works of art. The popes were the king makers of Europe from 500 to 1700 or so. They were the center of the global age of exploration and global empires. You should watch the show the Borgias with Jeremy Irons to get a sense of how powerful the Popes were.

yikes^ watch out for this one

[pip]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Well a great example is Rahm built the Riverwalk into an awesome destination! But how many people in Antwerp would know about it? You have to market your strengths of your city to other countries. When I would meet people in Europe the first thing that came to their mind if they knew anything about Chicago was crime and violence, and that's it's a dangerous place to visit. I have 2 friends in Munich that are literally scared to come visit me in Chicago, they think they will get shot walking around. That's not the kind of place you want to spend thousands on for a international vacation. We really have to get the crime under control, and fix our image problem, and start marketing so people have positive ideas of Chicago!

Regarding the Art Institute, well most of those museums are in their capital cities of their countries so of course they are going to be more popular. And really you think the Art Institute is better than the Vatican museum? It's literally the epicenter of western Civilization for 2000 years!! Vs. a city that's only barley existed 200 years. No comparison. The only one I'd say that maybe doesn't equal the Art Institute is Reina Sofía in Madrid. It's a nice modern art museum that has a couple Picassos, but tickets there cost less than half the Art institute and it's in the capital of Spain. The government in Spain subsidizes the ticket price. I've wanted to visit the Art Institute many more times than I do, but the $25 ticket price is really steep. Imagine how many more people would visit if it was $10.

That's what I hear when I go home within the US. I don't even bother to explain anymore - well there are safe parts etc. Unfortunately the reality is even the safe areas the chances of being a victim of a robbery or something are higher than other top tier American cities. The crime stats while certainly not the worst in the US on a per capita basis are shocking nonetheless especially compared with other developed countries.

So what is the draw here? Other cities have museums, have river walks, have architecture, storied pasts. But how many of the top tourist destinations have crime like Chicago even in the 'safe areas'?

Chicago has an image problem but a lot of it is deserved.

[Bonsai Tree]

I know this is a bit of a tangent off this current conversation but I thought these two videos were relevant. Last year, the guys at Sorted Food (a British youtube food channel) traveled to Chicago for vacation. I highly recommend watching these videos because I think they show the genuine reactions of foreigners when they visit our city. I hope that this can dispel a lot of the "Chicago's not good enough" stuff, because I think that's just downright wrong. If you've got enough time (both videos together are about 14 minutes) it's highly worth a watch.

Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=015YZ0Fom7s
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J0kRhzDUlU&t=3s

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Bonsai Tree

I know this is a bit of a tangent off this current conversation but I thought these two videos were relevant. Last year, the guys at Sorted Food (a British youtube food channel) traveled to Chicago for vacation. I highly recommend watching these videos because I think they show the genuine reactions of foreigners when they visit our city. I hope that this can dispel a lot of the "Chicago's not good enough" stuff, because I think that's just downright wrong. If you've got enough time (both videos together are about 14 minutes) it's highly worth a watch.

Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=015YZ0Fom7s
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J0kRhzDUlU&t=3s

Absolutely nobody in here stated that Chicago is "not good enough." It's that the marketing for the city sucks - the city is a good place for a tourist, but most haven't an idea because the marketing (and this goes beyond official marketing - it covers what's talked about in the news too) sucks.

Originally Posted by pip

That's what I hear when I go home within the US. I don't even bother to explain anymore - well there are safe parts etc. Unfortunately the reality is even the safe areas the chances of being a victim of a robbery or something are higher than other top tier American cities. The crime stats while certainly not the worst in the US on a per capita basis are shocking nonetheless especially compared with other developed countries.

So what is the draw here? Other cities have museums, have river walks, have architecture, storied pasts. But how many of the top tourist destinations have crime like Chicago even in the 'safe areas'?

Chicago has an image problem but a lot of it is deserved.

While crime can happen to anybody at any time anywhere, the actual data shows that downtown Chicago is fairly safe. It's not the safest part of town, but it is not dangerous at all. Considering the majority of the 57 million visitors stay downtown, per capita that is a very low crime rate not even taking into account the over 200,000 residents of greater downtown and the hundreds of thousands of office workers, as well as people who live in the area who are just downtown for drinks, meetings, etc. Furthermore, to think that no crime happens in other cities where tourists hang out is just plain ignorant and shows a bias for believing that Chicago is the only place this happens.

Just for the record, there was a shooting a few years ago at a McDonald's near Penn Station during the middle of a weekday in Manhattan, just a few blocks south of Times Square. This is a 5 minute walk from my office and an extremely crowded area not only with office workers but also with tons of tourists with numerous hotels around (https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...icle-1.2427909).

Another one from last year just a few blocks south of the Empire State Building in the middle of the day:
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...icle-1.3776166

Tourists getting robbed in Midtown Manhattan at their hotels this year:
https://patch.com/new-york/midtown-n...sts-police-say

More tourists getting robbed in Manhattan in tourist areas:
https://nypost.com/2018/11/27/crooks...opping-in-nyc/

Here's a few tourists being shot and killed in San Francisco this decade in tourist areas:
https://abc7news.com/politics/bullet...cheted/958526/
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...san-francisco/

Tourist from Thailand getting robbed and shot for his camera in San Francisco:
http://www.ktvu.com/news/tourist-rob...property-crime

Miami:
https://www.local10.com/news/local/m...downtown-miami
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...ami/328110002/

Tourist in Los Angeles getting stalked and attacked this year:
https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2019...rfax-district/

Hell, even Seattle is in it:
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...tacked-robbed/

I actually don't know when the last time a tourist was shot and killed in Chicago downtown. The last event I remember is a Japanese tourist in town for the oncology conference in 2012 getting mugged by one of those "flash mobs." But yeah, let's go on thinking Chicago is the only place where tourists could be hurt or that it's even normal. You can start digging and find all sorts of events from a variety of cities - but the national media rarely decides to report on these things and then you go on thinking that tourists never get hurt anywhere else.

Yes the perception is crime - I'm well aware as I've posted before, but in the end the tourist areas in Chicago are not dangerous for tourists. This thought that somehow downtown Chicago is any less safe for a tourist than in other cities is a bit ignorant.

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

And five or six years ago, D.C. had a higher murder rate than Chicago.

DC currently has a higher homicide rate than Chicago, so far this year:

Baltimore: 18.64 per 100K (https://homicides.news.baltimoresun.com)
St. Louis: 16.85 per 100K (https://www.slmpd.org/images/Homicid...or_Website.pdf)
Kansas City: 10.43 per 100K (http://kcpd.org/crime/crime-statistics/)
DC: 8.50 per 100K (https://mpdc.dc.gov/node/197622)
Detroit: 8.17 per 100K (https://data.detroitmi.gov/Public-Sa...6gdg-y3kf/data) <-- Not including May
Philadelphia: 7.91 per 100K (https://www.phillypolice.com/crime-maps-stats/)
Atlanta: 7.40 per 100K (http://www.atlantapd.org/i-want-to/crime-data-downloads)
Oakland: 7.29 per 100K (https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/01/...p-and-details/)
Newark: 6.31 per 100K (http://npd.newarkpublicsafety.org/statistics/crimestats)
Anchorage, Alaska: 6.12 per 100K (https://communitycrimemap.com)
Charlotte: 6.05 per 100K
Chicago: 5.96 per 100K (https://home.chicagopolice.org/onlin...me-statistics/)
Jacksonville: 5.38 per 100K (http://transparency.jaxsheriff.org/HOTS/Murder)
Indianapolis: 5.21 per 100K (https://databases.usatodaynetwork.co...cide-list-2019)
Milwaukee: 4.87 per 100K (http://archive.jsonline.com/news/cri...366709981.html)
Columbus, OH: 4.32 per 100K (https://communitycrimemap.com)
Dallas: 4.18 per 100K (http://www.dallaspolice.net/resource...at%20Daily.pdf)
Denver: 2.27 per 100K (https://crime.denverpost.com/crime/homicide/)
Los Angeles: 2.15 per 100K (https://data.lacity.org/A-Safe-City/...y8tr-7khq/data)
Las Vegas Metropolitan Area: 1.97 per 100K (https://www.lvmpd.com/en-us/Pages/Statistics.aspx)
NYC: 1.14 per 100K (https://compstat.nypdonline.org/2e5c...e7c75c/view/89)

Chicago's had a kind of spurt the last month but Dallas is not even that far below Chicago right now. Houston I think is near Chicago in rate, but the numbers aren't easy to get and I have to count by hand basically and don't want to right now. Obviously not going to sit here and claim it's in the realm of a NYC, LA, etc and part of Chicago's reputation is deserved, but not all of it.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by pip

That's what I hear when I go home within the US. I don't even bother to explain anymore - well there are safe parts etc. Unfortunately the reality is even the safe areas the chances of being a victim of a robbery or something are higher than other top tier American cities. The crime stats while certainly not the worst in the US on a per capita basis are shocking nonetheless especially compared with other developed countries.

So what is the draw here? Other cities have museums, have river walks, have architecture, storied pasts. But how many of the top tourist destinations have crime like Chicago even in the 'safe areas'?

Who are you hearing this from? Septuagenarians with the Drudge Report as their home page? "Shocking"? This is simply untrue and no one with a lick of sense would write it. Why would you write it if you have no idea? Shame on you.

New Orleans and Minneapolis have a higher violent crime rates than Chicago, Houston and D.C. right now--which are all about the same--to say nothing of Indianapolis, which is considerably higher. Is anyone afraid to take in a Pacers game in Indy? Are you? Is it too dangerous to take your family to the Spaghetti Warehouse in Minneapolis?

The "safe" part of Chicago has a violent crime rate similar to Toronto. The violent crime rate in Chicago today is similar to San Francisco's 10 years ago. Did San Francisco have a reputation for being a crime-ridden hell hole in 2008? And five or six years ago, D.C. had a higher murder rate than Chicago.

And if you look at property crimes--by far the most common crimes visitors experience--many more cities have a worse rate than Chicago, even Orlando and Miami.

[nomarandlee]

Interesting article in the Tribune about Loop Landlords needing to raise their game to keep up with new office corridors in Fulton Market, Riverwalk, and Lincoln Yards/78.

What do you think the Loop could do to help make itself a better office market to remain as competitive as ever?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/colum....html#nws=true

Column: Loop’s luster may be lagging: Chicago’s city center faces huge office vacancies, ownership changes and new competitors

.....In a tight labor market, many companies have placed a greater premium on factors such as river views and proximity to neighborhood amenities like restaurants, entertainment and open space. Real estate has become a key element in recruiting and retaining top employees, brokers and investors say......

But it may take more than swank tenant amenities like a gym and rooftop deck to attract companies into the Loop because, as CBRE office tenant broker Kyle Kamin said, “There’s almost no center of gravity anymore.”

The properties attracting large tenants include ground-up developments along the river and in Fulton Market and big existing buildings such as the Merchandise Mart along the north bank of the river and The Old Post Office redevelopment at the south end of the established office market.........

..

[the urban politician]

^ I don't doubt there is some truth to that.

But I also take interest--a TON of interest--in cultures other than the Greco-Roman world. There is a mass of history out there (Persia, Ancient Near East, India, The Moghals, East Asia) that I suspect that the Vatican museum won't cover--am I wrong about this?

The AI's Asian collection is impressive, plus we have an absolute GEM in the Oriental Institute. Glad we have that here in Chicago

[Baronvonellis]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I don't doubt there is some truth to that.

But I also take interest--a TON of interest--in cultures other than the Greco-Roman world. There is a mass of history out there (Persia, Ancient Near East, India, The Moghals, East Asia) that I suspect that the Vatican museum won't cover--am I wrong about this?

The AI's Asian collection is impressive, plus we have an absolute GEM in the Oriental Institute. Glad we have that here in Chicago

Yea, the Vatican museum is for the gifts that the Popes have received. It's not meant to be a survey of world art. There's not much Asian or African art.

The most popular Museum in Berlin and Germany is very similar to the Oriental Institute. The Oriental Institute is criminally under visited. I would move it's collection to the Art Institute if I was Mayor lol.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Yea, the Vatican museum is for the gifts that the Popes have received. It's not meant to be a survey of world art. There's not much Asian or African art.

The most popular Museum in Berlin and Germany is very similar to the Oriental Institute. The Oriental Institute is criminally under visited. I would move it's collection to the Art Institute if I was Mayor lol.

The first time I went to the Vatican, everyone told me about this but I kind of brushed it off. Then when I saw it in person, it was really awesome. My favorite part for sure. Rome is a great historical city, but I'd already been to Istanbul before which has about 10X more historical things than Rome - and some of the things are massive (like the Aya Sofya) so St. Peter's impressed me but not as much due to past travels.

The thing is about the Vatican, and maybe TUP hasn't been there, but you basically can't just walk into anywhere in the Vatican as a normal person. You pretty much have to go with a tour group of some kind (whether a tour that has more to do with the Vatican or just one you get there). That means pretty much everyone goes to the art area of the Vatican whether they want to or not and that's one reason there's so many visitors to it. Actually it's kind of creepy. The tour guide we got is good friends with the wife of the head of the Swiss Guard. She told us things that most people do not because of this - like how they listen to literally everything the tour guide and us say. If there's something they don't like, they'll ask the tour guide to step aside and explain themselves over a microphone. Somehow due to the relationship, our guide covered her mic a few times and said some borderline atheistic things LOL Anyway, it's kind of creepy that they are listening to everything you say and pretty much everyone goes through the art gallery area.


In any case, a place like AI should be visited more than it is. It's an awesome institution and definitely amongst the top art museums I've ever been to in the world.

[SIGSEGV]

Hell I work a few blocks away from the Oriental Institute and I've never gone there...

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Hell I work a few blocks away from the Oriental Institute and I've never gone there...

I believe it's the first institution in the US solely dedicated solely to the study of the ancient near east (i.e. Middle East) and Egypt. It's not a huge museum by physical area but there's a TON of stuff and information in there. You can certainly see it in a day but if you are one to read anything and everything in a historical museum, then it might be overload for trying to fit everything in a few hours TBH.

Surely underrated though - somehow it's not a well known place to the general public.

[Tom In Chicago]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Hell I work a few blocks away from the Oriental Institute and I've never gone there...

Yeah. . . this place is sorely under-rated. . . you must go. . .

. . .

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by pip

That's what I hear when I go home within the US. I don't even bother to explain anymore - well there are safe parts etc. Unfortunately the reality is even the safe areas the chances of being a victim of a robbery or something are higher than other top tier American cities. The crime stats while certainly not the worst in the US on a per capita basis are shocking nonetheless especially compared with other developed countries.

So what is the draw here? Other cities have museums, have river walks, have architecture, storied pasts. But how many of the top tourist destinations have crime like Chicago even in the 'safe areas'?

Chicago has an image problem but a lot of it is deserved.

^ What stats do you have to back this up, namely that tourists in Chicago are victims of more crime than in other US cities? Just curious...

[SIGSEGV]

DC somehow has shedded its high crime perception (even though the reality is that it has a similar or higher homicide rate than Chicago). How did that happen?