CHICAGO | General Discussions

[Halsted & Villagio]

I just got back from NYC. Decided to go there just to spend some time with old friends and to show my 11 year old NYC. My sister and her husband also decided to join us. Because I am so used to going there on business, staying 1 or 2 days, never really venturing out except to work, it was great to have a fresh pair of eyes on the place. Here were some things that my group observed/some things that happened:

The Bad:

1. My wife (without heels on) almost broke an ankle while walking no less than 3 times. The streets are so broken up and uneven.

2. There is a level of soot, dirt and waste caked on everything there that is on another level... much higher in concentration than in Chicago. There is a thin layer of soot and dirt just about everywhere and you can smell it. Whether it is from emissions or industrial waste, etc. I am not sure where it comes from exactly but it was palpable to the swell and touch. It can't be healthy to breath this stuff in every day.

3. At the end of our stay my sister coughed up some black flem/fur like black substance that she swears was the result of inhaling the air in NYC.

4. I made the mistake of driving because we spent one day at a friend's house upstate and I wanted the car to be handy. Huge mistake. While driving in Manhattan it literally took 1 hour to go 1 block. Realizing that this was madness, after driving the 1 block in 1 hour, I quickly turned the car in the opposite direction of where I wanted to go, somehow snaked around a few barricades and made my way to the Holland Tunnel and then to our hotel, parked the car and there the car stayed (aside from the brief trip upstate) until the day we left to return home - some 5 days later.

5. In sections, there are so many people there that they all blend in together. It was amazing while at the same time, annoying. They just became a sea. A sea of noise and humanity. My wife who considers herself a bit of a long legged fashionista, was looking forward to the fabled fashion scene of NYC, could not wear her heels because the streets were a health hazard and she pointed out that no'one there was wearing heels and that, to her surprise, it really did not matter what anyone was wearing... because it was so many people bunched together that they all blended in.

6. When crowds get that big, that thick with humanity, it really is no fun.

7. Tourists have completely taken over certain parts of Manhattan - completely. Not small parts either. Big chunks of Manhattan are dominated by tourists.

8. The trash bags piled up on some streets was truly epic. My wife could not believe it and actually snapped pictures. So along with our wonderful pictures of Lady Liberty, Central Park (which was nice, btw), Times Square, the Brooklyn Bridge... we have pictures of trash bags piled up on the street as high as 7/8 feet.

9. To my surprise, my wife, sister and brother-in-law all said that NYC did not feel as tall as Chicago while walking around the city. I don't know why they felt that way... maybe it is because low rise Mid-Town divides Manhattan into sections, maybe the lack of setbacks, etc. But for whatever reason they said it did not feel it as tall or as imposing as Chicago.

10.The city is too confined, super loud - always loud noise, people move about like hamsters in a cage with a feverish pace that is cool to see and experience for a day or a week but it is not a place any sane person would want to live in -- UNLESS you have big BIG money. Big money can go a long ways towards eliminating the inconveniences average, every day NYC citizens have to deal with.


The Good:

1. Mixed in with the junk, NYC has some masterpieces of architecture.

2. A lot of the new construction leaves a lot to be desired, some completely miss the mark but some of the new buildings going up are going to be pretty amazing. A mixed bag. Many (not all) of the amazing new buildings going up get lost though for whatever reason... whether lost behind other buildings or lost due to lack of height or the setting obscures them, etc.

3. Some of the old buildings and towers there are amazing (which I am sure everyone already knows) but the "setting" of those buildings and towers was a pleasant surprise. For instance in lower Manhattan, as you walk up a slight incline while leaving the 911 Memorial, there is a street there that angles off at a diagonal... on that street lies 2 old towers with copper tops and there is new, taller new build directly behind it to the left of it... Wow!... is all I can say... I was stunned... plain and simple, I loved it. My wife, sister and brother-in-law didn't really notice it - they were looking more at the new World Trade Transportation Hub - which was nice, but really not anything special to me. But that angled street and that setting... while walking on a incline... it just felt like those buildings (probably no taller than 400/500 feet or so) would go right up into the heavens.

4. Pound for pound, there are more top tier, high quality buildings in NYC than Chicago. Most probably already know this. But arguably there are also more crap buildings in NYC than Chicago. NYC definitely has its fair share of junk buildings. And regarding those spectacular towers, on the negative side, you walk out of those buildings to dirty, soot filled streets, trash bags and various strewn pieces of garbage all around and you walk out of those buildings into a virtual rat race. I imagine it kind of kills the joy of being in an ultra lux building.

5. I think NYC probably beats Chicago as far as skyline shots - there is just more of it. But as for walk around feel of the height of the place, our consensus was that Chicago beats NY. Not sure why that is exactly but Chicago just feels taller. Maybe it is because Manhattan is divided in half with low rise Mid-town separating the two skyscraper areas? Maybe it has something to do with setbacks? Just not sure but (at least according to the people with me on this vacation) Chicago just feels taller for some reason.

6. NYC is the attraction king... they hype up their attractions through the roof. And they build a lot of attractions and tourists lap it up in huge helpings. Chicago is doing well in this area as well... just not sure if we are getting the word out there as well as NYC.

7. Oddly enough, the old cemeteries in Manhattan were pretty cool. They kind of provide of rest spot from all the madness and the look of them provides an interesting juxtaposition.

8. Times Square is all they say it is in terms of set-up and wow factor. However, one thing I easily noticed was the unhappy, angry look on the faces of people as they were leaving Times Square. It is such a sea of mess and humanity that it is not a happy experience. Once is all anyone needs to see of that place and once may be too many... you will miss nothing and save yourself some aggravation by skipping it.

Summary:

Chicago has great pace and can be fast moving as well, but you get a break in Chicago... and there is more natural balance in Chicago. You see people walking down the street, you see what they are wearing (my wife likes that one ), and you connect with more people in Chicago. You can breathe, breathe the air, and hear yourself think more in Chicago. All in all, it was a good trip... NYC is a great city and is good for a visit... it is nothing like in the movies... a tourist haven, super loud, too thick with wall to wall people, much dirtier, less landscaping, much more trash than you will ever see in any tv show or movie... definitely not all it is cracked up to be... but I still recommend it for a weekend if you are looking for something different. Going there helped us all to appreciate more what a true jewel we have in Chicago - a place we would much rather live in... and a place that has pretty much everything NYC has except for the negatives.

[the urban politician]

^ In other words, nothing's changed

[Arm&Kedzie]

Source - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44725026

Impressed by Chicago's trend line

[Halsted & Villagio]

^ Lol. True. Except maybe the part about "perception" and media hype not equating to reality. On tv we see a cleaned up version of NYC. My views expressed are mainly those of the group I went there with. I already pretty much knew what it was like from my business trips... although I saw more of the place this time around. But back to my group... they had a view of NYC being somewhat clean and definitely at least landscaped... and they had no idea about the broken sidewalks, broken up streets, wall to wall tourists, the level of the noise and layers of dirt and soot. Those are things rarely talked about today and you definitely don't see it today on tv or in the movies.

And the part about Chicago feeling taller is an interesting take that my group had... and it is something rarely discussed as well.

[left of center]

Wow, yeah same here.

Approaching NYC in annual median earnings (obviously if this was mean, then NYC would skyrocket past us, as those Wall Street salaries at the very top would skew the average skyward).

Surprising that Dallas is beating LA, be it mean or median or otherwise. The cost of living in CA is so much higher than TX, you would think salaries would be much higher in LA. The higher minimum wage would also bring up the bottom wage earners as well, as compared to TX which I believe only has the federal minimum wage in effect.

[Gonzo the Great]

I know this is the wrong forum for my question but when can we expect to see Kris Bryant back in the line up where he belongs

[Baronvonellis]

Originally Posted by Halsted & Villagio

^ Lol. True. Except maybe the part about "perception" and media hype not equating to reality. On tv we see a cleaned up version of NYC. My views expressed are mainly those of the group I went there with. I already pretty much knew what it was like from my business trips... although I saw more of the place this time around. But back to my group... they had a view of NYC being somewhat clean and definitely at least landscaped... and they had no idea about the broken sidewalks, broken up streets, wall to wall tourists, the level of the noise and layers of dirt and soot. Those are things rarely talked about today and you definitely don't see it today on tv or in the movies.

And the part about Chicago feeling taller is an interesting take that my group had... and it is something rarely discussed as well.

Hmm, I went for 5 days to NYC about this time last year. I don't remember seeing everything covered in soot and dirt. I'm not sure what you mean. I mean the subway stations and parks aren't scrubbed with bleach everyday like some uber-clean German Train station, but it seemed fairly normal amount of dust for a big city when I was there. And they don't have alleys so trash is going to be on the sidewalk, they can't get around that. That's the benefit of Chicago alley system.

Otherwise, being crowded with tourists and noisy is pretty much the cliche of Manhattan to me. Did you go to Williamsburg? I enjoyed it there alot. Or Greenwich Village? That area seemed really quiet, and similar to Lincoln Park. But I agree the intensity of the city was enough for 5 days, but I couldn't image living there with the crush of people everyday. Only if I had nice brick condo a block from Central Park and rich would I enjoy living in NYC lol.

[Halsted & Villagio]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

Hmm, I went for 5 days to NYC about this time last year. I don't remember seeing everything covered in soot and dirt. I'm not sure what you mean. I mean the subway stations and parks aren't scrubbed with bleach everyday like some uber-clean German Train station, but it seemed fairly normal amount of dust for a big city when I was there. And they don't have alleys so trash is going to be on the sidewalk, they can't get around that. That's the benefit of Chicago alley system.

Otherwise, being crowded with tourists and noisy is pretty much the cliche of Manhattan to me. Did you go to Williamsburg? I enjoyed it there alot. Or Greenwich Village? That area seemed really quiet, and similar to Lincoln Park. But I agree the intensity of the city was enough for 5 days, but I couldn't image living there with the crush of people everyday. Only if I had nice brick condo a block from Central Park and rich would I enjoy living in NYC lol.

I was probably overbroad in my statement that EVERYTHING was covered in soot and dirt. Put it this way, the area largely considered to be the HEART of Manhattan, imo, is coverd in soot and dirt. My hotel overlooked Times Square - we stayed at the Renaissance. We walked from the Renaissance TS, Broadway, all the way over to Central Park. Then we took a cab back to the hotel then took the subway to the 911 Memorial then walked over to Wall Street. That whole area - from TS up and to Central Park and back to Wall Street was most definitely covered in soot and dirt. A thin layer but a layer nonetheless.

We spent time in Greenwich Village - it was better... and Williamsburg... better... East Village... better... Tribeca - mixed... Hells Kitchen - mixed up and leaning rough... Little Italy - rough and decaying to my surprise.... we spent time in pretty much all the neighborhoods in and around Manhattan including the boroughs... we were there 7 days (minus the one day trip upstate)... but, imo, I felt that the cleaner areas were more on the periphery... not the heart of Manhattan if you will.

Look, I think New York is great. I could live there if I had to no doubt about it. But I would do so only if my job required it. I mean, I fit right in. If you are from Chicago you can pretty much handle any big city in the world. But is it something I want to handle year in and year out? No. Is it a place that it is cracked up to be by the media, on tv and in movies? No. Is it far dirtier, grittier and grimy, smelly and trash filled than what it is portrayed to be? Yes.

Great city. Had a good time on our trip. Would recommend in short doses. Just relaying my experiences.

I totally agree with this quote Baronvonellis... "only if I had nice brick condo a block from Central Park and rich would I enjoy living in NYC lol."

We have a jewel in Chicago people

[emathias]

Originally Posted by Halsted & Villagio

I was probably overbroad in my statement that EVERYTHING was covered in soot and dirt. Put it this way, the area largely considered to be the HEART of Manhattan, imo, is coverd in soot and dirt. My hotel overlooked Times Square - we stayed at the Renaissance. We walked from the Renaissance TS, Broadway, all the way over to Central Park. Then we took a cab back to the hotel then took the subway to the 911 Memorial then walked over to Wall Street. That whole area - from TS up and to Central Park and back to Wall Street was most definitely covered in soot and dirt. A thin layer but a layer nonetheless.
...
We have a jewel in Chicago people

The touristy and/or heavily commercial parts of Manhattan are grimy - anyone claiming otherwise is wearing some seriously rose-colored glasses. And the trash bag issue - understanding why it exists still doesn't explain why the richest big city in the richest country in the world can't come up with a better system for waste disposal than simply piling it up on sidewalks. It's disgusting. Some of the side streets a little away from the busiest commercial areas aren't so bad as to be called grimy, but they still feel less clean than Chicago which I think is mainly a function of just the raw density of humanity in Manhattan. The few parts of Chicago that feel anywhere near as grimy as New York are also areas with heavy concentrations of humanity.

I like visiting New York, and if I was earning $300k+/yr I'd probably consider living there because I could then afford to mitigate at least the worst of the downsides. Part of the reason I live in a vintage walk-up in River North is because it is at least somewhat reminiscent of some of the side streets in parts of Manhattan like Chelsea or Hell's Kitchen or Murray Hill - relatively quiet areas that aren't filled with skyscrapers but are still walking distance to all the offices and tourist attractions in Midtown. In many ways the part of River North I live in (the officially-designated "River North Gallery District" roughly bounded by Orleans, Huron, Lasalle, and Chicago Ave) is functionally similar to Hells Kitchen or Murray Hill.

Anyway, I live in Chicago because it is a big, important city, and offers many of the amenities that only big, important cities offer, yet is less crazy and less dirty feeling than Manhattan or San Francisco. Give me Boystown over the Castro any day of the week. Give me Michigan Avenue over 5th Avenue or Union Square. Give me Pilsen over Bushwick or the Haight. In short, give me Chicago.

[marothisu]

There was a topic of change of races by community area (specifically Pilsen) a little bit ago. So I did a calculation of all the major groups by CA in Chicago and their changes from 2010 to 2016. The following is presented in terms of percentage point change. For example, if it went from 14% to 15%, I would say it's a change of 1 percentage point..

Source is the 2010 and 2016 Census American Community Surveys. Table DP05

White, Non-Hispanic Top Increases
1. Logan Square: +6.69 pct points
2. Rogers Park: +4.54 pct points
3. Avondale: +3.96 pct points
4. Uptown: +3.93 pct points
5. North Park: +3.30 pct points
6. Pullman: +2.38 pct points
7. West Town: +2.32 pct points
8. Forest Glen: +1.91 pct points
9. Woodlawn: +1.83 pct points
10. Near West Side: +1.72 pct points
11. East Garfield Park: +1.70 pct points
11T. South Shore: +1.70 pct points
13. Lower West Side: +1.65 pct points
14. Hegewisch: +1.59 pct points
15. Norwood Park: +1.59 pct points

Black, Non-Hispanic Top Increases
1. South Deering: +6.15 pct points
2. South Chicago: +2.56 pct points
3. Morgan Park: +1.94 pct points
4. West Ridge: +1.92 pct points
5. Edison Park: +1.33 pct points
6. Bridgeport: +1.25 pct points
7. Burnside: +1.21 pct points
8. Lower West Side: +1.02 pct points
9. The Loop: +1.01 pct points
10. Avalon Park: +0.91 pct points
11. Albany Park: +0.87 pct points
12. Dunning: +0.85 pct points
13. Beverly: +0.68 pct points
14T. East Side: +0.53 pct points
14T. Uptown: +0.53 pct points

Asian, Non-Hispanic Top Increases
1. Near South Side: +9.61 pct points
2. Amour Square: +8.73 pct points
3. Douglas: +3.79 pct points
4. Archer Heights: +3.33 pct points
5. Near West Side: +2.24 pct points
6. Near North Side: +2.19 pct points
7. Brighton Park: +2.09 pct points
8. Albany Park: +1.95 pct points
9. McKinley Park: +1.92 pct points
10. Mount Greenwood: +1.89 pct points
11. The Loop: +1.83 pct points
12. Jefferson Park: +1.82 pct points
13. Hyde Park: +1.74 pct points
14. Lower West Side: +1.62 pct points
15. Bridgeport: +1.56 pct points

Hispanic Top Increases
1. Garfield Ridge: +12.55 pct points
2. Chicago Lawn: +9.65 pct points
3. Montclare: +9.39 pct points
4. New CIty: +9.32 pct points
5. West Elsdon: +8.07 pct points
6. Dunning: +7.78 pct points
7. Ashburn: +6.52 pct points
8. Belmont Cragin: +5.49 pct points
9. Portage Park: +5.05 pct points
10. Austin: +4.76 pct points
11. West Lawn: +4.66 pct points
12. West Englewood: +4.33 pct points
13. Mount Greenwood: +3.83 pct points
14. Clearing: +3.71 pct points
15. Archer Heights: +3.64 pct points

[the urban politician]

Hmmm, so Pilsen isn’t becoming “white” as fast as people think? Of course, lower west side encompasses a large area, so it may hard to measure specifically what is happening in Pilsen looking at this.

Interesting that Armour square is 8% more Asian. I mean, it’s Chinatown, after all, I would have figured it was nearly all Asian by now.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Hmmm, so Pilsen isn’t becoming “white” as fast as people think? Of course, lower west side encompasses a large area, so it may hard to measure specifically what is happening in Pilsen looking at this.

Interesting that Armour square is 8% more Asian. I mean, it’s Chinatown, after all, I would have figured it was nearly all Asian by now.

I think it was actually in the General Development thread then that I posted specifically about Pilsen doing this down to the tract. You can find it probably a week or so back. Pilsen is becoming less Hispanic because they've been moving away. The actual gains of other races there aren't massive...and I believe Asian and Black had larger increases than White in most tracts. East Pilsen grew in overall population and I think that it went up by 500 or 600 for Asian population.

As far as Armour Square goes, remember that it also includes a part west of the interstate. I think there are a few public housing projects in Armour Square that are not at all Asian. I think...which is why it's not as high previously as you might think.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Here's an interesting in depth discussion of Chicago's ongoing "Black Flight" issue:

http://www.newgeography.com/content/...opulation-loss

[marothisu]

Now, as far as greater downtown (Near North, Near South, Near West, and the Loop) goes, as of 2016 it was estimated to have been 58.15% White (non Hispanic), 17.11% Black, 15.31% Asian, and 6.80% Hispanic.

Here's how it breaks down in changes..keep in mind that the Census estimated this area to have grown by 43,225 people from the 2010 ACS to the 2016 ACS.

White, Non Hispanic (Greater Downtown)
* Increase of 24,355 people
* Decrease of 0.49 pct points

Asian (Greater Downtown)
* Increase of 12,003 people
* Increase of 3.29 pct points

Hispanic (Greater Downtown)
* Increase of 4336 people
* Increase of 0.85 pct points

Black (Greater Downtown)
* Increase of 600 people
* Decrease of 4.15 pct points





Now here's the list for decreases...


White, Non-Hispanic Top Decreases
1. Montclare: -12.42 pct points
2. Garfield Ridge: -7.70 pct points
3. Dunning: -7.39 pct points
4. Archer Heights: -6.42 pct points
5. West Elsdon: -6.37 pct points
6. Clearing: -5.21 pct points
7. Morgan Park: -5.16 pct points
8. The Loop: -4.83 pct points
9. McKinley Park: -4.54 pct points
10. Ashburn: -4.51 pct points
11. Mount Greenwood: -4.40 pct points
12T. Portage Park: -4.21 pct points
12T. Jefferson Park: -4.21 pct points
14. West Lawn: -4.18 pct points
15. O'Hare: -3.91 pct points


Black, Non-Hispanic Top Decreases
1. Near South Side: -11.81 pct points
2. Chicago Lawn: -9.37 pct points
3. New City: -8.35 pct points
4. Douglas: -5.78 pct points
5. Near West Side: -5.77 pct points
6. Humboldt Park: -4.81 pct points
7. Hyde Park: -4.57 pct points
8. West Englewood: -4.46 pct points
9. North Lawndale: -4.20 pct points
10. Austin: -4.18 pct points
11. Garfield Ridge: -4.13 pct points
12. Woodlawn: -4.00 pct points
13. Riverdale: -3.85 pct points
14. Englewood: -3.64 pct points
15. Kenwood: -3.51 pct points


Asian, Non-Hispanic Top Decreases
1. Uptown: -2.85 pct points
2. Lincoln Square: -1.24 pct points
3. Norwood Park: -1.18 pct points
4. Dunning: -1.14 pct points
5. Garfield Ridge: -1.12 pct points
6. North Park: -0.97 pct points
7. Forest Glen: -0.96 pct points
8. Morgan Park: -0.88 pct points
9. Edgewater: -0.62 pct points
10T. Ashburn: -0.39 pct points
10T. Calumet Heights: -0.39 pct points
12. Logan Square: -0.36 pct points
13. North Center: -0.34 pct points
14. Riverdale: -0.33 pct points
15. West Elsdon: -0.32 pct points


Hispanic Top Decreases
1. Logan Square: -4.93 pct points
2. Albany Park: -4.81 pct points
3. Lower West Side: -4.32 pct points
4. South Deering: -3.90 pct points
5. Pullman: -3.86 pct points
6. Avondale: -3.75 pct points
7. West Ridge: -3.27 pct points
8T. South Chicago: -2.78 pct points
8T. West Town: -2.87 pct points
10. Rogers Park: -2.35 pct points
11. Uptown: -2.22 pct points
12. Norwood Park: -2.03 pct points
13. Armour Square: -1.49 pct points
14. Bridgeport: -1.38 pct points
15. Forest Glen: -1.12 pct points

[ardecila]

Interesting to see the racial changes on the outskirts of the city. Virtually all the edge neighborhoods on the west and southwest sides of the city are becoming more Hispanic and less white.

Then South Deering and South Chicago are losing their longtime Hispanic populations, and gaining Black population, probably refugees from more crime-ravaged neighborhoods. The only other neighborhoods seeing Black increases are all very small amounts of people, probably educated middle-class folks moving into largely white or gentrifying areas.

[the urban politician]

So the number of Asians gained in the central area of the city is greater than the total Asian population of all but the largest cities in the Midwest

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

So the number of Asians gained in the central area of the city is greater than the total Asian population of all but the largest cities in the Midwest

An interesting statement. St. Paul and Columbus both have pretty sizable Asian populations (St. Paul percentage wise is much more impressive than Columbus though). Other places like Minneapolis, Milwaukee, etc have kind of sizable ones too but the pure fact is that downtown Chicago alone has more Asian alone people than a lot of cities have total. Add in the areas south of downtown like Chinatown, Bridgeport, Douglas+rest of Bronzeville, McKinley Park, Brighton Park, Kenwood, Hyde Park (and areas like Fuller Park and Washington Park around it for completeness) and that area has even more..


1. Downtown Chicago + Chinatown area down to Hyde Park: 68,646 Asian alone people (total population of this area = 454,443. Asian % = 15.11%)

2. Jersey City, NJ: 65,180 Asian alone people
3. Austin: 61,234 people
4. St. Paul, MN: 51,238 people
5. Charlotte: 48,042 people
6. Portland: 46,488 people
7. Dallas: 41,273 people
8. Columbus, OH: 40,774 people
9. Las Vegas: 39,150 people
10. San Antonio: 38,172 people
11. Greater Downtown Chicago: 31,710 people
12. Fort Worth: 30,883 people
13. Oklahoma City: 27,090 people
4. Minneapolis: 23,839 people
15. Indianapolis: 23,750 people
16. Washington DC: 23,675 people
17. Milwaukee: 22,813 people
18. Nashville: 22,655 people
19. Atlanta: 18,130 people
20. Pittsburgh: 16,802 people
21. Baltimore: 15,685 people
22. Kansas City: 11,834 people
23. Des Moines: 11,685 people
24. New Orleans: 11,062 people
25. Detroit: 9636 people
26. St. Louis: 9561 people
27. Cleveland: 7660 people
28. Cincinnati: 5297 people
29. Miami: 3561 people

Also, that entire "surrounding" area increased by 17,666 Asian people. That increase is more than what the entire cities (individually) like Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Miami, etc have and barely below the entire Asian population of Atlanta city proper.

[the urban politician]

Impressive stuff. I would hope that as the Asian community grows, it will spur even more growth down the road as the Asian community becomes ever more established and the word spreads that you get the amenities of New York at 1/2 or 1/3 the price

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Impressive stuff. I would hope that as the Asian community grows, it will spur even more growth down the road as the Asian community becomes ever more established and the word spreads that you get the amenities of New York at 1/2 or 1/3 the price

It's important that Chicago become highly established as a port of entry for the Chinese. At some point in the future the current status quo in China is going to collapse and there will be a wave of mass immigration. We want to be where the best and brightest fleeing a newly liberated, but temporarily unstable China land.

[the urban politician]

We also have to remember that "Asian" also includes Indians, Pakistanis, etc.

By being a huge city we will always be a port of entry, but Chicago has never been a strong one for the Chinese. Typical poor marketing abroad is to blame, and if there is one thing I've been disappointed about with Rahm it would be his failure to remedy that.