CHICAGO | General Developments

[Near North Resident]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

I can afford my rent. You however are the one on some weird power trip fantasizing about displacing the current population of the entire city. NO ONE can magically absorb a 75% increase in housing costs, and you've utterly failed to provide any sort of rational defense of your ramblimgs or any sort of study that supports your numbers

If you dont want to deal with the things you listed than find a new line of work.

people that own their properties could absorb any price increases

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by Near North Resident

people that own their properties could absorb any price increases

if you think you can simply pass 75% higher costs down the funnel and theres going to be a stream of eager and willing renters from a region, a country, and a generation whose earnings have barely increased (if not decreased) in the last decade lined up to take the hit, then ive also got some very nice bridges to sell you. if you enjoy paying taxes and upkeep on empty 12 flats then i guess that could work for you.

as Ordo laid out, if there is some economic reasoning underpinning the demand that would lead to that high of an increase in a short period of time, then thats a different story. the heart of the matter is there isnt and therefore we are simply playing pointless "what if" games.

TUP is the only one acting entitled here, lusting over an imaginary gain on his property that will probably never materialize because it is not based in reality. id be bitter too if id miscalculated basic supply/demand that badly. maybe you'd have more luck throwing that money on black in Vegas instead.

[maru2501]

someone thinks they're in san francisco

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by orulz

Artificial limits on price, aka rent control, are an alternative to the free-market scenario, but under such a regime, as TUP points out, nobody will build anything new, everybody will stay in their units forever, and the demand will never be met. The doors to the city will be shut and it will stagnate.

The opposite is also true. If rents are artificially high (and there's evidence that they are) then the city will also stagnate because most people will be priced out of it. If people want Chicago's population to grow, and want the tax base to grow, and the consumer economy to grow, then rents need to be attractive versus the burbs.

There's also the issue of income. Given the continued corporate trend of oursourcing (Motorola Mobility just outsourced the entire procurement dept to China), no one is going to give American workers the 50% raise they need to pay 50% more in rent. Until someone puts tariffs in place (didn't hear any mention of that in the GOP debate last night), workers can't get raises and rents can't rise.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by aaron38

The opposite is also true. If rents are artificially high (and there's evidence that they are) then the city will also stagnate because most people will be priced out of it. If people want Chicago's population to grow, and want the tax base to grow, and the consumer economy to grow, then rents need to be attractive versus the burbs.

There's also the issue of income. Given the continued corporate trend of oursourcing (Motorola Mobility just outsourced the entire procurement dept to China), no one is going to give American workers the 50% raise they need to pay 50% more in rent. Until someone puts tariffs in place (didn't hear any mention of that in the GOP debate last night), workers can't get raises and rents can't rise.

None of what your wrote addresses the global market of professionals. You mention the global manufacturing market, but not the market of workers who could work on Paris or London or Hong Kong. They will pay what they think they have to. I took the Tube from Kings Cross to Bank and back this morning at rush hour and am sitting on a Paris bistro right now. Chicago can't really compete with that, but even at a discount, what Chicago can offer is enough that it's years of being underpriced for the global professional crowd appear to be over.

If the global market is 40% of your salary goes to rent, the people don't needed raises for rent to rise, they just need to have global expectations.

[Kenmore]

TUP doesn't even live in chicago, he's a suburban wannabe

[ChickeNES]

Macy's rethinks State Street flagship
By Brigid Sweeney and Ryan Ori - Crain's Chicago Business - November 11, 2015
Macy's is considering redeveloping its sprawling State Street store as the retailer seeks new sources of revenue.

Cincinnati-based Macy's said in a statement today that it has begun exploring potential joint ventures “or other deal structures with third parties” for flagship real estate in Chicago, Manhattan, San Francisco and Minneapolis.

Redevelopments would be done “in a manner that maintains a robust Macy's retail store presence while also bringing alternative use into those buildings,” Macy's said in the statement.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/2...s-state-street-flagship-store-in-chicago

[Ned.B]

^Definitely makes sense, and I've heard about this coming for a few months now. There is a ton of underutilized space in the top floors of the State street store. The 8th floor is the last major retail floor, and I think there are 5 floors above that. Even then some of the upper retail floors have massive spaces devoted to products that don't draw many buyers.

Plus if they had office or residential giving them income on the upper floors, maybe they would actually be able to afford to maintain the exterior of their building.

[the urban politician]

I never said that a 50-75% rise in rents in Chicago was justified by the city's present economics. One or two of you put words in my mouth and are running with it.

All I said was:

Originally Posted by the urban politician

The rents in Chicago are too low, unfortunately. They need to be about 50-75% higher.

And I stand by this. If Chicago was able to pull off higher rents (for example by increased demand or a stronger economy) then we would be seeing stupendous amounts of property rehab & construction all over the city. Not that we aren't already seeing a lot, but it would simply be on another scale compared to today. And instead of complaining about it, most of you would be having an 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I never said that a 50-75% rise in rents in Chicago was justified by the city's present economics. One or two of you put words in my mouth and are running with it.

All I said was:



And I stand by this. If Chicago was able to pull off higher rents (for example by increased demand or a stronger economy) then we would be seeing stupendous amounts of property rehab & construction all over the city. Not that we aren't already seeing a lot, but it would simply be on another scale compared to today. And instead of complaining about it, most of you would be having an 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵.

and if demand was up by 50,000% than we'd be seeing space elevators getting built directly to the moon!!

you used the word "need", which implies its the way things "should be". and using "should be" typically suggests an individual has a certain level of insight and/or research to back up an assertion that a imbalance exists, of which you clearly have none. enjoy the burbs.

[Baronvonellis]

Yea, but Chicago isn't yet Paris, London or New York to command those international Alpha city rents. I'm a well paid professional and I would never pay $2300 a month rent, that is crazy!That's just throwing money down the drain. I have a roomate, and I like having extra spending money left over at the end of the month after all my expenses. Large swaths of the city are still undervalued and dilapidated because of crime and conversion from a industrial to a service economy.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Yea, but Chicago isn't yet Paris, London or New York to command those international Alpha city rents. I'm a well paid professional and I would never pay $2300 a month rent, that is crazy!That's just throwing money down the drain. I have a roomate, and I like having extra spending money left over at the end of the month after all my expenses. Large swaths of the city are still undervalued and dilapidated because of crime and conversion from a industrial to a service economy.

^ It has nothing to do with "alpha city" status. SF and Boston have higher rents than Chicago. Washington DC does too.

If the conditions in Chicago were such that much higher rents were justified, it would unlock a ton more investment and drastically turn this city's fortunes around.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ It has nothing to do with "alpha city" status. SF and Boston have higher rents than Chicago. Washington DC does too.

SF is located near arguably the most beautiful part of the lower 48, with year round agreeable weather, and an industry that has fueled in part the current economic expansion. Its rent is also driven by a severe lack of housing due to numerous factors of which I am sure you are well aware (height restrictions/NIMBYISM/rent control/chronic underdevelopment) none of which I see you advocating for. It is also a fraction the size of Chicago and landlocked. Chicago has none of those things, hence it is affordable, in relative terms (although I would say its more fair to say that SF is UNaffordable).

DC has height restrictions and is flooded with government money/jobs. Another unique set of circumstances that does not pertain to Chicago.

[the urban politician]

^ I just don't think we are achieving anything but talking past eachother, especially over a topic that you seem to really take to heart.

I don't need explanations as to why Chicago has lower rents than coastal cities, that is all pretty obvious. I am just expressing wishful thinking, namely that I wish Chicago could justify higher rents, because I think that would greatly benefit the city, as I've gone over already. Not a big deal, no need to pounce at me like a tiger over this. We're really not getting anywhere in changing eachother's mind, so lets just drop it.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by emathias

None of what your wrote addresses the global market of professionals. You mention the global manufacturing market, but not the market of workers who could work on Paris or London or Hong Kong.

How are you defining professionals? The dept. I mentioned was all white collar office workers, not manufacturing. Engineering and IT are also losing hard to Asia, those are professionals too. When manufacturing goes, so does sales and the regional offices. No one in those jobs can ask for a raise to take on 50% more rent. There aren't enough executives to fill up the city.

The global expectation is wages go down until we reach balance with the rest of the world. If rents don't drop to follow, people are either priced out of the city, or they won't have any money left to spend, and can't support any other jobs.

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I am just expressing wishful thinking, namely that I wish Chicago could justify higher rents, because I think that would greatly benefit the city.

And I'd greatly benefit from a 50% raise. It's not going to happen.

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by aaron38

How are you defining professionals? The dept. I mentioned was all white collar office workers, not manufacturing. Engineering and IT are also losing hard to Asia, those are professionals too. When manufacturing goes, so does sales and the regional offices. No one in those jobs can ask for a raise to take on 50% more rent. There aren't enough executives to fill up the city.

The global expectation is wages go down until we reach balance with the rest of the world. If rents don't drop to follow, people are either priced out of the city, or they won't have any money left to spend, and can't support any other jobs.



And I'd greatly benefit from a 50% raise. It's not going to happen.

In addition to offshoring I also think the accelerated automation of the white collar workforce (something that has already severely negatively affected the blue collar professions) is going to be one of the greatest challenges first world cities face in the coming decades.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by aaron38

And I'd greatly benefit from a 50% raise. It's not going to happen.

^ I'm fine with that "Chicago is never going to be greater than it is" mentality if you are, but for the fact that seemingly every other week the local media (as well as forumers here) complain about the lack of tourism, foreign investment, not being as great as New York, not having as much VC as the Bay Area, not having enough population growth, etc etc etc. Lets not act as if I am on a platform complaining that Chicago is not performing well enough and the rest of you "level-headed" folks are looking at eachother saying "wow, he's out in left field!" Because we hear this 🞵🞵🞵🞵 every damn day from every nook and cranny that you could possibly peer your head into.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I'm fine with that "Chicago is never going to be greater than it is" mentality if you are, but for the fact that seemingly every other week the local media (as well as forumers here) complain about the lack of tourism, foreign investment, not being as great as New York, not having as much VC as the Bay Area, not having enough population growth, etc etc etc. Lets not act as if I am on a platform complaining that Chicago is not performing well enough and the rest of you "level-headed" folks are looking at eachother saying "wow, he's out in left field!" Because we hear this 🞵🞵🞵🞵 every damn day from every nook and cranny that you could possibly peer your head into.

It's not out in left field, but on the other hand - you have to look at it on its own and stop comparing. You have to look at growth in and of itself. Is Chicago building as much as NYC or LA, for example? No, but it's still increasing at a very nice rate that is as good as it was 7+ years ago. I could honestly give much of a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 that LA has 4X more new housing construction permits than us. That's great for them and at the end of the day, we are also increasing and it's a great sign. Tourism is another thing - Chicago is not going to outdo NYC in international tourism - it's just not going to happen - at least in the next 30 years. However, we should be looking at the growth in and of itself first before comparing to other places. And I think that opening up tourism offices will only go so far these days. The city should be looking at more ways to expose it via social media (they have a little bit but not tons). That's another story though.

And I don't subscribe to the "Chicago is as great as it ever will be right now." I think that's utter 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 just as much as saying about a lot of things in the world "it'll always be like this" - there's a lot of room for the city to get "greater" as long as things keep moving and they have been in the last few years again. Accepting the status quo and not bettering yourself or other things is 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵. If you truly believe this, then leave the city and go somewhere like Des Moines or Memphis where that type of thinking is more acceptable. There is no reason to do this in a city like Chicago.

We don't have to be as great as NYC or whomever else either - we just have to be great. Most people in the world aren't stupid enough to say "there's only one great city per country" and disregard every other good place. I'd say a lot of the greatest cities of the world didn't do it by saying "we need to be just like ____ " and they certainly as 🞵🞵🞵🞵 didn't do it by saying 'well, this is as good as it'll ever be." Thta line of thinking is dangerous and has no place here.

[Ryanrule]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I'm fine with that "Chicago is never going to be greater than it is" mentality if you are, but for the fact that seemingly every other week the local media (as well as forumers here) complain about the lack of tourism, foreign investment, not being as great as New York, not having as much VC as the Bay Area, not having enough population growth, etc etc etc. Lets not act as if I am on a platform complaining that Chicago is not performing well enough and the rest of you "level-headed" folks are looking at eachother saying "wow, he's out in left field!" Because we hear this 🞵🞵🞵🞵 every damn day from every nook and cranny that you could possibly peer your head into.

stop with the black/white nonsense.

what we have a problem with is rampant profit taking. you are not entitled to make gobs of money. take your 5% and deal with it.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Ryanrule

stop with the black/white nonsense.

what we have a problem with is rampant profit taking. you are not entitled to make gobs of money. take your 5% and deal with it.

Rampant profit making built Chicago. Did you just notice this now?