Detroit gets some love from a travel guru.

[RickBeall]

Personally, I think Hamtramck is the Jewel in the Crown.

[illwill]

For whatever reason a LOT of people from Chicago feel the need to always bring up comparisons to NYC. They may be comparing museums or parks or higher education....or even architecture. NYC seems to come out on top in damn near every category and it seems to bother so so many people in the windy city. Why is that? On a side not, I'd take DC over Chi any day of the week.

I think it's the stair-step effect. I'm so sick and tired of hearing Detroiter's always bringing up Chicago and bashing it for being a successful city. But then we want everything they have. Here in Detroit we get so excited for a raw food restaurant or a simple new store announcement. It obviously shows that we resent Chicago and we're jealous of what they have. Otherwise, why do we ALWAYS bring up Chicago in our conversations? Just like Chicagoan's always bring up NYC. But I doubt Chicagoan's ever bring up Detroit. Just like NYC never mentions Chicago.

Detroit measures itself to Chicago, Chicago measures itself to NYC and NYC measures itself to London. New York is definitely the top city of America but even NYC is changing for the worse.

I've lived in a few cities in this country and abroad and I just think America is the same where ever you go. The weather varies, the terrain varies, the accents vary, the architecture varies but aside from those things and a few others, everything is still the same. It wasn't always that way.

I personally blame it on technology. The internet, cable, the 24 hour news cycle, twitter, facebook etc...has melted the united states into one homogenized country. Cities aren't what they once were. I feel like you overpay to live in a place that people think they're so unique and different but in the end, they're all the same. The hipsters, food trucks, pop-ups, "the new hot neighborhood", real estate values etc... It's so funny. Maybe I'm getting old and I've out grown those things. I'd love for Detroit to be a nice place to live and that's it. A place where people can raise a family, have good schools, enjoy parks, be safe, not buying real estate for the sole purpose of flipping/investment. I'm tired of paying $12 for a burger when I go out to a bar that I can grille in my back yard for a dollar. The whole "city thing" is old to me. NYC, Chicago, LA, Austin, D.C. Detroit...who is next. I doubt Cleveland...lol!

I'd love to try Cuba

[iheartthed]

I think it's the stair-step effect. I'm so sick and tired of hearing Detroiter's always bringing up Chicago and bashing it for being a successful city. But then we want everything they have. Here in Detroit we get so excited for a raw food restaurant or a simple new store announcement. It obviously shows that we resent Chicago and we're jealous of what they have. Otherwise, why do we ALWAYS bring up Chicago in our conversations? Just like Chicagoan's always bring up NYC. But I doubt Chicagoan's ever bring up Detroit. Just like NYC never mentions Chicago.

I don't think New York really measures itself against London. If anything, New York is more likely to juxtapose itself to Los Angeles. Los Angeles [[or California) is the foil to New York. It is everything that New York is not: warm climate, sunny weather, laid back personalities, auto-centric, etc. New Yorkers tend to point to L.A. as where to go to live a different lifestyle. Not in an envious way but like a "hey, you don't like it here? You may like it there" type of way.

New Yorkers mention Chicago but are pretty clueless to any perceived rivalry that Chicagoans may have for New York. They view it more as a "settle for" city: if you want to live a kinda-New York lifestyle but can't actually live in New York -- for whatever reason -- then it's okay to "settle for" Chicago.

New Yorkers view London more as a peer city. Not a rivalry but as a similar city. It's like New York and London hang out at the same elite country club.

[downtownguy]

One singer came up to me and was singing songs about cities where people lived and I told him I lived in Detroit...

What? You didn't tell him you're from Warren?

[Shollin]

What? You didn't tell him you're from Warren?

I was living in the city of Detroit at the time.

[illwill]

Well "totally off the grid from every other American city" is a pretty high bar, but I think lots of cities have a discernible culture - NYC, DC, LA, Detroit, Miami, Atlanta, Austin. I haven't been to SF or Boston, but I get the same feeling about them from people I know who have lived there. But I was trying to explain Chicago's culture to some visitors when I was living there and I really couldn't come up with anything. Chicago is unusually derivative for a major city.

I would agree that Detroit is trying to mimic Chicago in terms of some of its offerings and its relevance, but that's about it.

Chicago definitely has a reputation... but not for anything socially-positive. Chicago has ALWAYS been known for their democratic machine, a tough nose city with a strong mayor and ward system. A dictatorship style environment. This is certainly not a reputation that today's generation is not really aware of because if they were, they'd avoid it at all cost. In my opinion, Chicago is still trying to soften it's horrific political reputation by attempting to change its identity. But it doesn't matter. In my personal opinion, the reason Chicago has never become a TRUE world-class city is because the city has too much of a stronghold on it's people. I understand that a city the size of Chicago has to have a strong Mayor but throughout decades, Chicago has never been a friendly city or a place that's business friendly. I see NYC becoming this way. The Mayor is making NYC become more of a hassle than a free-willed society. I heard one radio station making fun of NYC because they've always been known as this "tough-ass" city but they banned smoking, they want to limit soft drinks to 12oz or 16oz and so forth. Who wants to live in a nanny state? This is where I hope Detroit differs in its rebuilding process. Most successful-types just want to be left alone.

In Chicago, because of its rampant corruption, the city has never offered a comfortable lifestyle for its creative type. You're only permitted to do so much due to strict regulations, corrupt alderman and extreme fines/fees. They call it a Chicago corruption tax. Chicago is all about digging into your back pocket and wallet. This drives talent away. In Chicago, everything has its place because that's where you're allowed to have it. I hope the new Detroit will not grow to be this way. I also think this is what the author meant by Detroit being an honest city. Not the city government but it's people. I believe we're an honest region and hard working.

[Shollin]

LOL you talk about a dictatorship in Chicago and hope Detroit differs, yet Detroit has an EFM that has more control than any mayor in the country.

[Bham1982]

IDetroit measures itself to Chicago, Chicago measures itself to NYC and NYC measures itself to London. New York is definitely the top city of America but even NYC is changing for the worse.

This is pretty much what I'm talking about re. Chicago delusion.

No, NYC doesn't measure itself against London, and no, there is no rough equivalence of Detroit is to Chicago like NYC is to London.

Chicago is a great city, but it's just delusional. I don't know how else to say it. It's a legend in its own mind. It's kind of impressive that it has such a high view of itself, but the problem is when you look around, and pretty much no one agrees.

I think if you told the average Chicagoan that they haven't been the Second City in 30 years, and that LA is now twice the size of Chicago, they would be dumbfounded. It would be like telling a Detroiter than Grand Rapids is now bigger.

If you told the average Chicagoan that DC and SF now have larger economies than Chicago, and Houston and Boston gaining fast, they would think you're joking.

[Shollin]

This is pretty much what I'm talking about re. Chicago delusion.

No, NYC doesn't measure itself against London, and no, there is no rough equivalence of Detroit is to Chicago like NYC is to London.

Chicago is a great city, but it's just delusional. I don't know how else to say it. It's a legend in its own mind. It's kind of impressive that it has such a high view of itself, but the problem is when you look around, and pretty much no one agrees.

I think if you told the average Chicagoan that they haven't been the Second City in 30 years, and that LA is now twice the size of Chicago, they would be dumbfounded. It would be like telling a Detroiter than Grand Rapids is now bigger.

If you told the average Chicagoan that DC and SF now have larger economies than Chicago, and Houston and Boston gaining fast, they would think you're joking.

They're dumfounded because you're wrong. LA is not twice as big as Chicago and DC and SF do not have larger economies.

[Bham1982]

They're dumfounded because you're wrong. LA is not twice as big as Chicago and DC and SF do not have larger economies.

Yes, LA is about twice the size, and yes, DC and SF now have larger economies. I'm talking metropolitan area, obviously. And I kind of expected responses similar to yours, because here in the Midwest, it's not really our worldview.

LA has around 18 million in the CSA, and Chicago has around 9 million.

The largest U.S. metropolitan economies, in order of size, are:

NYC
[[then huge gap)
LA
[[then huge gap)
DC
SF
Chicago
Boston
Houston

[rb336]

I guess they all seem different to me. Each unique in its own way.

they are all the same, in their unique ways.

I think if I had to pick another city to live in, and I could pick any city in the world, it would be, in order
1) Prague [[Prague just has this vibe to it that is different from anyplace else I've been, plus it's 3 hours to almost anywhere)
2) Vienna
3) Sydney
4) Berlin
5) New York

[Shollin]

Yes, LA is about twice the size, and yes, DC and SF now have larger economies. I'm talking metropolitan area, obviously. And I kind of expected responses similar to yours, because here in the Midwest, it's not really our worldview.

LA has around 18 million in the CSA, and Chicago has around 9 million.

The largest U.S. metropolitan economies, in order of size, are:

NYC
[[then huge gap)
LA
[[then huge gap)
DC
SF
Chicago
Boston
Houston

Where are you getting your info? Nothing I have ever read suggests DC or SF has a larger GDP than Chicago. Chicago has one of the largest economies in the world.

[Patrick]

I just asked a Japanese neighbor about what he thinks of NYC:

-P: So man, you've been to New York many times and even lived there for a year....what did you think of it?

-I: Ha, it doesn't come anywhere near Tokyo. Tokyo is much bigger and busier...cleaner or better functioning.


I guess everyone thinks there "home" is better eh...

[Bham1982]

Where are you getting your info? Nothing I have ever read suggests DC or SF has a larger GDP than Chicago. Chicago has one of the largest economies in the world.

The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis releases an annual list of largest metropolitan economies. I only see 2011 as the most recent list, but there could be something more recent-

Though I'll admit I was wrong about Houston and Boston. I thought they were right behind Chicago, but there's still a huge gap. Chicago will be #5 economy for quite some time, even if the Midwest continues to be a relative economic laggard.

1. New York-Newark, NY-NJ-CT-PA CSA $1.486 Trillion

2. Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA CSA $897.207 Billion

3. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA CSA $594.977 Billion

4. Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA CSA $594.845 Billion

5. Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI CSA $554.511 Billion

6. Boston-Worcester-Providence, MA-RI-NH CSA $454.648 Billion

7. Houston-The Woodlands, TX CSA $419.636 Billion

8. Philadelphia-Reading-Camden, PA-NJ-DE-MD CSA $396.263 Billion

9. Dallas-Fort Worth, TX-OK CSA $394.902 Billion

10. Atlanta-Athens/Clarke County-Sandy Springs, GA-AL $296.453 Billion

[Shollin]

No everything release by the BEA has Chicago 3rd.

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2013/03%2...metro_area.pdf

[illwill]

Well "delusional" must be working because Chicago has been stealing much of Michigan's talent for years and it isn't slowing down. There are now more Michigan grads in Chicago than in New York. Of course we all know it's a Michigan State hot bed. I'm not saying Chicago is a cupcake with a cherry on top but you can't deny Chicago is leaps and bounds ahead of Detroit in terms of the type of lifestyle that these young kids are looking for. I assume transit has a lot to do with it, shopping, walkable neighborhoods and tons neighborhood pubs. I think Detroit might want to cater to people such as myself who have already made the rounds but now want a slower pace lifestyle but still in a great city.


The proof is in the pudding.

When I speak to my college age nephews and nieces and their friends, I ask about their interest in moving to Detroit after finishing school? They look at me like I'm crazy. They're looking forward to returning back to the Michigan burbs where they grew up. In all fairness, they have little interest in Chicago as well. Now, I think this is unique to the Michigan region because most kids from big city suburbs look forward to moving into the city. I once mentioned to them in conversation, that I read most college grads these days aren't interested in driving because they choose to live in walkable cities with public transit. AGAIN, they said not any of our friends [[with a smirk on their faces)... They said they'd rather drive everywhere. Again, I think this is unique to S.E. Michigan because we've never had a functional big city in Michigan.

Here's what I see, people like us who prefer Detroit belong to a certain fraternity. People aren't exactly flocking here in droves like the rah-rah Detroiter's are pretending, but I think the growth is for real this time. Slow but steady. I think empty nesters and the matured would be worth courting.

[Shollin]

It's not like people are flocking to Chicago. The city lost 200,000 people last census. Over the past 6 decades, Chicago has only 1 decade where it gained population. The fastest growing cities in the country lack major transit and wouldn't really be considered urban and walkable. People are moving to where the jobs are.

[Bham1982]

No everything release by the BEA has Chicago 3rd.

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2013/03%2...metro_area.pdf

But your link has MSA, not CSA. I said that Chicago has the 5th largest economy by CSA.

Usually, in DYes, when we're talking metropolitan areas, we talk CSA. If you use MSA, then Detroit doesn't include Ann Arbor and the outer suburbs, SF doesn't include Silicon Valley, NYC doesn't include its richest suburbs, etc.

But if you want to use MSA, the same point stands. Chicago isn't anywhere near the "Second City" economically. Using your preferred MSA ranking, Chicago is almost as far from #10 Atlanta as it is to #2 LA.

[Bham1982]

Well "delusional" must be working because Chicago has been stealing much of Michigan's talent for years and it isn't slowing down. There are now more Michigan grads in Chicago than in New York.

This is more of the same. Complete boosterism and delusion.

Chicago has the second worst population loss in the nation. Illinois has one of the worst economies in the nation.

Please show us an official list, from the University of Michigan, detailing where the most alums live, by metropolitan area. I mean, this is your crazy claim, so let's see it.

[Shollin]

No you said that if you told people in Chicago that DC and SF have larger economies, they would think you are joking. Using your rationale, we can say Baltimore has a larger economy than Chicago or San Jose has a larger economy. This is why people get a dumbfounded look because your criteria changes after you make blanket statements that aren't true.

[Bham1982]

No you said that if you told people in Chicago that DC and SF have larger economies, they would think you are joking. Using your rationale, we can say Baltimore has a larger economy than Chicago or San Jose has a larger economy. This is why people get a dumbfounded look because your criteria changes after you make blanket statements that aren't true.

I'm not entirely sure of what you're saying, but DC and SF definitely do have larger metropolitan economies than Chicago, if you compare by the Census-based CSA. That was my point.

I'm guessing, based on your statements, that you assume I meant city limits only. I would never compare metropolitan areas based on city limits alone, since they're completely arbitrary.

But if you want to compare based on city limits only, Chicago still is nowhere near the "Second City" in terms of economy. It's barely ahead of Houston, and will probably be surpassed very shortly, because Houston has much higher per capita productivity, and is within striking distance by population.

[Shollin]

I just posted the link that shows Chicago's metro area economy is the 3rd largest in the US but you continue to deny it. Baltimore is not in DC MSA but in DC CSA. There two very separate cities so combining their economies and saying it's larger than Chicago's is disingenuous.

[Bham1982]

I just posted the link that shows Chicago's metro area economy is the 3rd largest in the US but you continue to deny it.

You're not reading my posts. I agreed with you that Chicago has the 3rd largest economy by MSA.

But [[1) that isn't what we're talking about, and [[2) the exact same point still stands, in that Chicago is nowhere near the Second City.

Baltimore is not in DC MSA but in DC CSA. There two very separate cities so combining their economies and saying it's larger than Chicago's is disingenuous.

Again, I don't understand your point. DC has a bigger metropolitan economy than Chicago by CSA. Yes, metropolitan economies are based on many, many cities, which is true both in Chicago and in DC. There's nothing "disingenuous" by using official Census-based metropolitan area classifications.

You pick whatever metric you want. If you don't like CSA, fine, then use MSA, or city limits. Or find something else.

Whatever you use, Chicago is nowhere near the Second City, and closer to cities like Houston, Dallas, and Atlanta, than the real Second City of LA. This is true in terms of both population and economy. That's my point.

[Shollin]

This is exactly what you said:

"If you told the average Chicagoan that DC and SF now have larger economies than Chicago, and Houston and Boston gaining fast, they would think you're joking."

No where did you mention based on CSA and not MSA. Based on MSA, Chicago is larger than DC and SF. DC's CSA includes Baltimore which is a separate economy from DC. If Chicago could just annex a separate mid sized economy like Milwaukee, it would be larger. If you said DC and Baltimore combined has a larger economy, than you would be right.

[rb336]

No everything release by the BEA has Chicago 3rd.

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2013/03%2...metro_area.pdf

The problem is, Chicago's region includes an area about twice the size of LA county, inludes parts of IN and WI, DC includes most of Maryland, and big chunks of VA and WV. If Detroit were set up the same way, it would include Toledo and Windsor. Throw those two in the mix and I think Detroit would crack the top ten, probably up to 6. If LA were set up the same way it would equal NY