Toronto/Chicago comparisons

[Hipster Duck]

^No, I have my doubts about that. Houston had the slowest growth in its history between the 2000 and 2010 censuses, and it would have been even slower if 150,000 black refugees from New Orleans, post-Katrina, hadn't decided to stay. It's basically built out at its present population of 2.0 million. Chicago lost 200,000 people to settle at 2.7 million people in the last census mainly because the 2000s were full of housing project evictions and clearances that are now finished. I expect Chicago to gain population during the next census, and we have to remember that it has a 700,000 person lead over Houston.

 

[Long Island Mike]

In the 1970s, New York flirted with bankruptcy, Times Square was a cesspool, and crime rates were soaring. I don't think too many New Yorkers would think of that decade as any kind of a golden age.

GW: I do agree with that thought about NYC in the 70s...NYC hit rock-bottom in my opinion around 1977...
The big examples to me being the riots following the July 1977 blackout and the Son of Sam murder spree...
There were cool things about NYC back in the 70s also-but the bad things far outweighed them...LI MIKE

 

[adma]

^No, I have my doubts about that. Houston had the slowest growth in its history between the 2000 and 2010 censuses, and it would have been even slower if 150,000 black refugees from New Orleans, post-Katrina, hadn't decided to stay. It's basically built out at its present population of 2.0 million.

Given the nature of Houston's development, it's scarcely "built out". But given the culture of Houston's development, it might as well be "built out" in spite of itself...

 

[kkgg7]

^No, I have my doubts about that. Houston had the slowest growth in its history between the 2000 and 2010 censuses, and it would have been even slower if 150,000 black refugees from New Orleans, post-Katrina, hadn't decided to stay. It's basically built out at its present population of 2.0 million. Chicago lost 200,000 people to settle at 2.7 million people in the last census mainly because the 2000s were full of housing project evictions and clearances that are now finished. I expect Chicago to gain population during the next census, and we have to remember that it has a 700,000 person lead over Houston.

I wouldn't be surprised it Houston surpasses Chicago or nearly closes the gap in the next decade. It is only a difference of 550K right now. The Energy industry and low housing price will keep attracting people from other places, particularly from California.

 

[Thanos]

I wouldn't be surprised it Houston surpasses Chicago or nearly closes the gap in the next decade. It is only a difference of 550K right now. The Energy industry and low housing price will keep attracting people from other places, particularly from California.

2010 census has Chicago at 2.695 million and Houston at 2.1 million. Houston is 600 sq.mi whereas Chicago is only 234 sq.mi.
Your numbers mean nothing when you can't see the bigger picture at hand. The metropolitan of Houston is not even 6 million whereas Chicago is 9.5 million. Houston has a long road ahead before getting anywhere close to Chicago.

 

[kkgg7]

2010 census has Chicago at 2.695 million and Houston at 2.1 million. Houston is 600 sq.mi whereas Chicago is only 234 sq.mi.
Your numbers mean nothing when you can't see the bigger picture at hand. The metropolitan of Houston is not even 6 million whereas Chicago is 9.5 million. Houston has a long road ahead before getting anywhere close to Chicago.

however, during 2000-2010 metro Houston gained more people than NYC/Chicago combined.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Didnt know where to post this...since its a Toronto-vs-Chicago comparison, seems like a good place

In Toronto-vs-Chicago theatre war, tax credits are the new ammo

A new front has opened in the long-standing battle between Toronto and Chicago for the title of North America’s second theatre city: tax credits.

While the subject matter would make for a mind-numbing musical, an act passed by the Illinois Legislature quietly over the holidays has essentially launched the opening shot in a war over War Horse, the West End megahit that Toronto is about to become the third city in the world to stage. Or it might be called the first punch in the Thrilla for Priscilla: Queen of the Desert, the colourful drag-queen musical that entertained Torontonians before it became a hot, Tony-winning ticket on Broadway

In an effort to lure prestigious, big-budget productions such as these away from cities like Toronto to Chicago – and, particularly, the employment, tourism and hundreds of millions of dollars in economic spinoffs they bring – Illinois’s new Live Theater Production Tax Credit will offer a tax rebate up to $2-million (U.S.) for commercial producers of “pre-Broadway and long-run shows” beginning in July.

The threat of losing in-demand shows to American competitors has motivated Toronto rivals Dancap and Mirvish Productions to put their differences aside and join forces with actor, stagehand and musician unions and associations to figure out how to lobby for a similar incentive either at the federal or provincial level.

Earlier this month, the two producers also met with representatives from Tourism Toronto, the city’s Entertainment District Business Improvement Area and the Hotel Association to discuss how to persuade the Ontario government to adopt a similar, or perhaps even more attractive, tax credit.

Or, in the words of producer David Mirvish, “laws that allow us to be competitive – a level-playing field.”
More..... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-are-the-new-ammo/article2319934/?from=sec434

 

[Tewder]

Vying for pre-broadway try-outs and tour stops is one thing but sit-down productions and original shows are what will mark a city as a major theatre town.

 

[grammarjew]

I read this entire thread, and I feel kind of sad. As someone who spent a few years in Chicago and visited Toronto a few times, I can't deny Toronto is perhaps more livable and almost certainly more vibrant on the whole. Still, Chicago is a wonderful place to explore and meet new people and try new things. It's not, as one user stated, simply a gleaming downtown surrounded by smoking craters and maybe a few nice neighborhoods here and there. I think Chicago can learn a lot from Toronto, and I hope Chicago can fill in its bad areas, because it really is a great town (with plenty of diverse, whacky, interesting people). Maybe I'm a little defensive, but I had to stick up for the city I love, even if I didn't provide a Google street view and pointed out things like pedestrian density--sorry

 

[supercilious]

As a Torontonian who has traveled to Chicago many times, I wouldn't consider it to be any less livable or vibrant.

It was planned infinitely better than Toronto with great infrastructure and heaps of green space in the downtown core and the architecture is second to none in North America.

Sure it has some less than stellar areas, but that's par for the course in big american cities, not a fault of Chicago itself.

I love living in Toronto, but if I had to live anywhere in the states, it would unquestionably be Chicago.

 

[balenciaga]

As a Torontonian who has traveled to Chicago many times, I wouldn't consider it to be any less livable or vibrant.

.

whoever thinks so must be ... Canadians.
Chicago is a great city to live in. I don't know why some claim it is not as vibrant as Toronto. its downtown streets are usually packed with pedestrians. Its transit is more convenient, and waterfront much more accessible. It has great schools and universities. Housing price is very affordable considering it is one the world's largest financial centers while on the other hand Torontonians don't have much left after their exorbitant mortgage payment every month.

Yes, there are bad areas. If you have to live in one of those suburban areas, too bad. But why do you have to. Jane/Finch doesn't make the entire Toronto a bad place to live as you never ever to have to go there in your life and it really doesn't affect most people's life.

 

[RC8]

Many people underestimate how annoying it is to live in a city with 500+ murders a year.

Jane and Finch is a place of teddy-bears and candy compared to the dangerous neighbourhoods in the U.S. and elsewhere.

 

[diminutive]

Many people underestimate how annoying it is to live in a city with 500+ murders a year.

Jane and Finch is a place of teddy-bears and candy compared to the dangerous neighbourhoods in the U.S. and elsewhere.

Much of that violence though is a product of the US' specific socioeconomic history (i.e. hundreds of years of slavery/pseudo-apartheid creating hugely disadvantaged minority groups).

That's not an attempt to minimize how violent Chicago and many American cities can be and how seriously that affects quality of life. I was even present for a shooting in Chicago and it certainly left a mark.

It's not specifically Chicago's fault that it has high rates of violence, though. It's almost like blaming Johannesburg for being violent; yes, but... And it gets frustrating to have Canadians gloat about how livable our cities are while ignoring the socioeconomic preconditions of American urban issues.

(Edit: not you specifically, but its a common argument to hear "Toronto avoided becoming Detroit because we didn't do X," where X could be anything from keeping streetcars to building highways. Which, you know, totally ignores the main reasons US inner cities suffered over the past half century. )

 

[canmark]

But at the same time, New York City is seeing its murder rate decline. I love Chicago (my brother used to live there), but what's going on in that city?

 

[diminutive]

But at the same time, New York City is seeing its murder rate decline. I love Chicago (my brother used to live there), but what's going on in that city?

Chicago's murder rate is declining. In the early '90s it was pushing in on 1,000 murders a year (which is really quite mind boggling), but seems to be half of that now. That's still insane, though.