CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[marothisu]

It's not gotten stale because of anything like that. That's ridiculous. It's gotten stale because it's been over 6 months since Amazon first announced this thing and they've only said anything once, which was almost 3 months ago (top 20). After 6 months, people have gotten a little tired of it. There's not much more people can write that's new on this thing so the articles have waned as a result. At this point, most analysis that comes out has already been done before. THAT is why it's gotten stale. There's only so many articles you can write about who has the top number of tech workers.


It has nothing to do with DC - which I don't believe is automatic to win this though they have a good chance in the end. That whole area was only supposed to have 1 bid, but some jurisdictions didn't want to play nicely either so it kind of split into multiple bids. Amazon picked all 3 because the whole area is a good finalist, but there's more happening in the background with this than most people realize. I wouldn't be surprised if it were DC, but if DC weren't picked I also wouldn't be surprised.

[chicubs111]

Originally Posted by marothisu

It's not gotten stale because of anything like that. That's ridiculous. It's gotten stale because it's been over 6 months since Amazon first announced this thing and they've only said anything once, which was almost 3 months ago (top 20). After 6 months, people have gotten a little tired of it. There's not much more people can write that's new on this thing so the articles have waned as a result. At this point, most analysis that comes out has already been done before. THAT is why it's gotten stale. There's only so many articles you can write about who has the top number of tech workers.


It has nothing to do with DC - which I don't believe is automatic to win this though they have a good chance in the end. That whole area was only supposed to have 1 bid, but some jurisdictions didn't want to play nicely either so it kind of split into multiple bids. Amazon picked all 3 because the whole area is a good finalist, but there's more happening in the background with this than most people realize. I wouldn't be surprised if it were DC, but if DC weren't picked I also wouldn't be surprised.

Well said..hit the nail on the head...This whole topic has been beaten to death by the press and all the guessing and analysts have gotten tiring...at this point we know the top 8 or 9 cities that are the real front runner and not surprising there the larger metros in this country... DC area does seem as a front runner just for the fact that they have 3 locations that made the cut so statistically they have the best chance combined (not to mention the Bezos home he recenlty built and washington post connection doesnt hurt)...outside of that I feel Chicago has a pretty good shot at this...of all the collected proposals Chicago has made the best presentations and site options (both architecturally and location to city center) than any other city.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Makes sense - there's a lot less articles now about HQ2 than before. Announcing it soon will kick it back into gear. All the cities that lost can write articles about how they suck (If Chicago doesn't win, you know this is what Crains will do) and the city that wins will talk about how great it is in tons of articles.

Whoever gets Amazon will be simultaneously glorified and crucified by the media. I can already read the Crain's articles...

Chicago loses Amazon and the future is bleak
Chicago and the rust belt are finished
Chicago is not a tech hub
Can Chicago survive without Amazon?
Chicago has lost its mojo
Amazon says thanks but no thanks to population loss, uncontrolled crime, and exploding debt

[left of center]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

Amazon says thanks but no thanks to population loss, uncontrolled crime, and exploding debt

This is the one. This is the one that'll be plastered all over Crain's.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by left of center

This is the one. This is the one that'll be plastered all over Crain's.

Yup. Pretty much this.

I still don't understand what it is with Chicagoan's attitude towards their own city. Or more precisely, Chicago journalists' attitude expressed in their writing towards their own city. This doom and gloom mentality has got to stop. I'm not saying everything's cupcakes, sparkles, kittens and unicorns, but give me a break!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

We pay 1.9% for our condo in Lincoln square.

We pay 2.0% for our condo downtown.

Market value?

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Yup. Pretty much this.

I still don't understand what it is with Chicagoan's attitude towards their own city. Or more precisely, Chicago journalists' attitude expressed in their writing towards their own city. This doom and gloom mentality has got to stop. I'm not saying everything's cupcakes, sparkles, kittens and unicorns, but give me a break!

Aaron (Glowrock)

So true. The worst offender is an old dude that writes for Chicago Business Journal, Lewis Lazare. Anytime I see him as the author, I know it's going to be a bash fest.

He thought he busted Rahm with a really bizarre story about hotel occupancy rates being somewhat down in 2017 from 2016. What he completely failed to mention was that there were thousands of more hotel rooms available in 2017. So while the occupancy rates were down slightly, there were literally thousands of more hotel rooms rented.

Honestly, most of the Chicago is dying garbage seems to come from old suburbanites that rarely go into the City and have lost money on their homes. The city is really doing quite well all things considered.

[the urban politician]

^ Agree. I actually think it is exactly older suburbanites who’ve been here for decades who are most jaded.

Having said that, we can’t really blame them. Think of it this way:

I’m some older dude in the burbs who bought a home 20 years ago and now find that it hardly gained value, or even lost some. All while the property taxes on it doubled (we’ve already discussed this)

Traffic is increasing everywhere

The news talks about pensions, Mike Madigan, and budget wars in Springfield constantly

If I work downtown it’s probably the same ho-hum Metra commute every day, I’m not really exploring the city much.

If I don’t work downtown I probably don’t go into the city very often anyhow, so I’m not taking advantage of all of the opportunities.

I’m aging and the cold winters are getting annoying, and right about now Florida or Arizona are looking appealing.

I can totally understand the viewpoint of that individual, just as much as I can understand Aaron’s excitement in being in a bustling urban city having come from Houston.

Views on homeownership are going to change drastically, particularly in Chicago where a whole generation got burned. Multiunits will pay the taxes, and more people will buy smaller homes that are easier to resell. I think outside of a few niche markets the giant multimillion dollar home is going to become increasingly rare. Even I have resisted the temptation to buy a bigger home. I own a suburban home that’s moderate sized, moderately priced. Why throw my money away on a huge home that I may not be able to resell above the price that I paid for it?

[Vlajos]

^Totally agree!

[marothisu]

Really no different than most other places though. Even my co-workers who live just across the river in New Jersey in places like Hoboken and Jersey City which is a pretty short/easy train ride away don't come into Manhattan all that much outside of work. I know people who live in either the outskirts of other cities or suburbs (Los Angeles, Dallas, NYC, Chicago, Boston, Miami, etc) who don't actually go into the city centers or wherever the activity is very much even though they live pretty close. To them their worlds are where they live and the immediate area and don't really reap the benefits at least culturally of the main city they're near.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Yup. Pretty much this.

I still don't understand what it is with Chicagoan's attitude towards their own city. Or more precisely, Chicago journalists' attitude expressed in their writing towards their own city. This doom and gloom mentality has got to stop. I'm not saying everything's cupcakes, sparkles, kittens and unicorns, but give me a break!

Aaron (Glowrock)

We used to have a lot more bravado and confidence 10 to 15 years back. Chicagoans were (and still are in many ways) exceptionally proud of their city, to the point of it being relentless, annoying boasting to out of towners. The media (both local and national) has really given us a beating as of late.

I don't believe this to be a permanent state of affairs, however. At some point the murder count will ease down, at some point the state will rectify the budget/go into default and the budget issues will ease down as well. We will right the ship and eventually we will be able to be proud of ourselves once again.

And then Houston will clinch the #3 spot. And then the whole cycle repeats.

[Vlajos]

^ crime is already decling at a fast pace, but no one seems to mention it.

[rgolch]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Agree. I actually think it is exactly older suburbanites who’ve been here for decades who are most jaded.

Having said that, we can’t really blame them. Think of it this way:

I’m some older dude in the burbs who bought a home 20 years ago and now find that it hardly gained value, or even lost some. All while the property taxes on it doubled (we’ve already discussed this)

Traffic is increasing everywhere

The news talks about pensions, Mike Madigan, and budget wars in Springfield constantly

If I work downtown it’s probably the same ho-hum Metra commute every day, I’m not really exploring the city much.

If I don’t work downtown I probably don’t go into the city very often anyhow, so I’m not taking advantage of all of the opportunities.

I’m aging and the cold winters are getting annoying, and right about now Florida or Arizona are looking appealing.

I can totally understand the viewpoint of that individual, just as much as I can understand Aaron’s excitement in being in a bustling urban city having come from Houston.

Views on homeownership are going to change drastically, particularly in Chicago where a whole generation got burned. Multiunits will pay the taxes, and more people will buy smaller homes that are easier to resell. I think outside of a few niche markets the giant multimillion dollar home is going to become increasingly rare. Even I have resisted the temptation to buy a bigger home. I own a suburban home that’s moderate sized, moderately priced. Why throw my money away on a huge home that I may not be able to resell above the price that I paid for it?

Except it isn’t any different in any other part of the Midwest. I had a house in Brookfield, WI (MKE suburb) that I owned for 17 years, and last year sold it at a loss (when factoring in that I had to put in a driveway and landscaping). I bought it for 650k, and sold it for 685k, and put waaaaay more than 35k in landscaping and driveway. What’s more, I own two homes. One in Cook County (Trump Tower), and one in Milwaukee county (Kilbourn Tower). Even though my Milwaukee home is assessed at 400k less, I pay 5k more in property taxes than my Chicago home.......

And yet...... there isn’t any where near the self loathing hatred that Wisconsin residents express toward Milwaukee that there is for how Chicagoans act. And at least in Chicago.... the city and suburbs have sooooo much more to offer. For all the attacks on Naperville, there’s actually great restaurants and a cool downtown in Naperville. Now try to find the same in Mequon, River Hills, Brookfield, Pewaukee, etc. They have ok places to eat. But the wealthy suburbs of Chicago are so far above that of Milwaukee.....

I think Chicagoans have the most severe case of “grass is always greener.” And it’s exacerbated by so much hammering by the National press. Yeah, the winters suck here... but I’ll take our summers any day over Houston or Phoenix.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

^ crime is already decling at a fast pace, but no one seems to mention it.

Because it's now in Drumpf's lexicon nearly 24/7/365. Every time he gives some useless propaganda speech, some how, some way, Chicago's murder rate from 2016 gets talked about as why "those loser Democrats and their useless gun restrictions don't do a thing." or something to that effect. Now that he's got tens of millions of sheep mindlessly repeating the same alternative facts ad-nauseum, no amount of reduction in the crime rate is going to do a damned thing to help. Unfortunately, the old adage that it takes a falsehood 20 minutes to spread around the world while the truth can take years is very, very true.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

^ crime is already decling at a fast pace, but no one seems to mention it.

Just having the media back off talking about us as the murder capital will be a welcome reprieve.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

^ crime is already decling at a fast pace, but no one seems to mention it.

At the rate so far through 3 months, Chicago may end up in the range of what the average was between 2005 and 2015. However, realize that even in 2013 or 2014 when it was at its lowest since the mid 1960s, the media was still all over Chicago.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by marothisu

At the rate so far through 3 months, Chicago may end up in the range of what the average was between 2005 and 2015. However, realize that even in 2013 or 2014 when it was at its lowest since the mid 1960s, the media was still all over Chicago.

Yeah, that was so bizarre. Literally the lowest murder rate since the 60s and the media still was doom and gloom.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by marothisu

At the rate so far through 3 months, Chicago may end up in the range of what the average was between 2005 and 2015. However, realize that even in 2013 or 2014 when it was at its lowest since the mid 1960s, the media was still all over Chicago.

Murders typically pick up in the summer months, when its warmer and potential rivals are more likely to be outdoors and spot each other. Using the existing rate, which includes winter months as well as a colder than normal spring, would extrapolate to a lower than anticipated amount.

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Yeah, that was so bizarre. Literally the lowest murder rate since the 60s and the media still was doom and gloom.

Media does what it can to generate views and clicks.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by left of center

Murders typically pick up in the summer months, when its warmer and potential rivals are more likely to be outdoors and spot each other. Using the existing rate, which includes winter months as well as a colder than normal spring, would extrapolate to a lower than anticipated amount.

We have decades of data by month and week. What marothisu said is correct.