Market Conditions: June Sales Slowest in 6 Years as Sales Fell 13.3%
The Chicago housing market continues to struggle despite the strong economy.
From the Illinois Association of Realtors:
The city of Chicago saw year-over-year home sales decrease 13.3 percent with 2,766 sales in June, compared to 3,191 a year ago. The median price of a home in the city of Chicago in June was $319,900 up 1.6 percent compared to June 2018 when it was $314,900.
Thanks to G for the historical sales data:
- June 1997: 1,817
- June 1998: 2,214
- June 1999: 2,435
- June 2000: 2,513
- June 2001: 2,451
- June 2002: 2,590
- June 2003: 2,891
- June 2004: 3,752
- June 2005: 3,850
- June 2006: 3,557
- June 2007: 3,127
- June 2008: 2282
- June 2009: 1981
- June 2010: 2526 (tax credit sales)
- June 2011: 1841
- June 2012: 2246
- June 2013: 2729
- June 2014: 2846
- June 2015: 3202
- June 2016: 3321
- June 2017: 3380
- June 2018: 3191
- June 2019: 2766
Here is the monthly median price data:
- June 2008: $309,945
- June 2009: $242,050
- June 2010: $234,250
- June 2011: $207,000
- June 2012: $216,700
- June 2013: $254,900
- June 2014: $275,000
- June 2015: $288,250
- June 2016: $299,900
- June 2017: $306,750
- June 2018: $314,900
- June 2019: $319,900
“We can’t escape the topic of tax increases right now, and prospective buyers are paying attention,” said Tommy Choi, president of the Chicago Association of REALTORS® and broker at Keller Williams Chicago – Lincoln Park. “High assessments in the north, and tax increases expected in 2021, has made some leery. Still, the summer proves to be an active time for the Chicago housing market. For buyers, rates remain low and market time and inventory has increased, meaning there is more choice and more time to make key decisions. For sellers, prices remain relatively steady, and pricing appropriately is key.”
Average 30-year mortgage rates were actually down substantially year-over-year, falling to 3.8% compared to 4.57% in June 2018.
They were also lower month-over-month falling to 3.8% from 4.07% in May 2019.
Number of days on the market, statewide, remained the same as last year at 45 days.
Statewide, inventory fell again, but just 4.1% year-over-year.
“Housing affordability is being discussed once again as a contributor to sales declines that are once again lower than those recorded last year for the same month,” said Geoffrey J.D. Hewings, director of the Regional Economics Applications Laboratory at the University of Illinois. “Price increases in Chicago and Illinois last month were barely positive and the increase in apartment rentals and declines in consumer sentiment indices suggest that many potential home buyers are sitting on the sidelines, no doubt influenced by concerns about trade conflicts and the future growth of the economy.”
Are higher property taxes, and loss of deductions, along with some fantastic apartment buildings, making renting more popular than buying now?
Is owning property on the way “out”?
Slower June home sales, moderating median prices provide opportunity for Illinois homebuyers [Illinois Association of Realtors, Press Release, July 23, 2019]
Higher property taxes, loss of deductions, aging inventory(60’s and 70’s split levels that have not been updated in 30 years), prices closer or in some places higher than 2007 pick prices will ensure stagnant market for the next 3-4 years.
holy shit they actually talked about the elephant in the room… taxes
a median price increase of barely a percent while
“Average 30-year mortgage rates were actually down substantially year-over-year, falling to 3.8% compared to 4.57% in June 2018.”
is a huge red flag (saving nearly 10% on mortgage payments with that rate drop)
In addition to that I think people are finally realizing the impact of the SALT deduction reduction, at least in the upper middle class zones of town.
Does anyone else think that the short market times and lack of inventory can mostly be attributed to the internet? People can find what they want a lot faster and compare it to others quickly, set up appointments to see, etc., where as in the past that technology just didn’t exist in such a mainstream fashion.
“Does anyone else think that the short market times and lack of inventory can mostly be attributed to the internet? People can find what they want a lot faster and compare it to others quickly, set up appointments to see, etc., where as in the past that technology just didn’t exist in such a mainstream fashion.”
I think lack of inventory can be attributed to higher property taxes, and loss of deductions. We are considering moving up to a larger home, but I just cannot stomach paying at least $15-$20K a year for property taxes. It is absurd. So us, and hundreds of others like us, are not putting smaller houses on the market, resulting in artificially lower inventory.
Correction. Paying $20K in property taxes for a $700K house is absurd. Almost 3% in property value down the toilet due to years of improperly managing pension funds. Strongly considering looking for opportunities outside of IL in the upcoming years.
“So us, and hundreds of others like us, are not putting smaller houses on the market, resulting in artificially lower inventory”
Same here. Everything is on the table now, including moving to another state. We wanted to move up to a larger house in better school but the taxes are so bad as it is and the uncertainty of how much worse they will get coupled with the salt deduction cap, we just wont do it. We’d already be losing money by moving since appreciation has been basically flat for ten years. Another problem is the younger people are not forming families and creating the demand they historically should be based on their huge population. My neighbor’s 3 x 20 something kids all moved to CA. He’s pissed because they are all broke, barely scrapping by but refuse to move back or somewhere more affordable. None of them are interested in having a family ever. The sunbelt or outdoorsy areas of the country are sucking up millenials and boomers enmasse and this migration pattern is hitting us hard with no signs of reversing any time soon. At least Chicago is sort of treading water, it could be much worse.
$585K house. $18.3 in property tax. 3.18%. As bad as it gets.
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Lincolnshire/41-Keswick-Ct-60069/home/17640761
That Lincolnshire house is a prime example of why the North Shore real estate market is so bad (I know LS isnt technically NS).
Aleks, same here. Property taxes are keeping us from moving to a larger home. The taxes on our small Oak Park bungalow have more than doubled over 14 years but we’d be lucky to get what we paid for the home if we sold.
It is getting to the point that the property taxes on many properties will exceed the mortgage costs.
how about a $8200 tax bill on a 1800sqft, $229k house in Wonder Lake?
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Wonder-Lake/4522-W-Lake-Shore-Dr-60097/home/17283812
Cabin on the water getting hammered locals?
should be “Hammered by locals”
I would fully expect the SALT deduction and the higher property taxes to affect decisions but if anything it should result in people fleeing the city and state – i.e. I would expect inventory to be rising. It is for condos but not for SFHs.
If people are staying in the area then I would expect a shortage of lower priced properties and a glut of higher priced properties as people downshift.
We’re not seeing this. I think people may be like my wife – they just see it as a cost of living here. Grrr.
“Another problem is the younger people are not forming families and creating the demand they historically should be based on their huge population. My neighbor’s 3 x 20 something kids all moved to CA. He’s pissed because they are all broke, barely scrapping by but refuse to move back or somewhere more affordable. None of them are interested in having a family ever. The sunbelt or outdoorsy areas of the country are sucking up millenials and boomers enmasse and this migration pattern is hitting us hard with no signs of reversing any time soon.”
Haha, love this. So, basically the older generation that repeatedly elected public officials without demanding that they properly fund the pensions are now complaining that the younger generation won’t buy houses with the high tax bills that are necessary to fix the problems with the pension system that the older generation created.
Kevin, I graduated high school in the late 90s, hardly “older generation” but as far back as I can remember adults discussed this very topic of future liabilities, debt, taxes. There seemed to be a strike of some public sector mopes every month somewhere around Chicago. People tried. Didnt matter, D or R, they gave away anything the unions demanded no matter how unrealistic, a lot of it in the form of future promises just to stop a strike threat. The state was and still is captive to the public sector mafia. Nothing short of putting their leaders in prison and burning down the statehouse, city hall and courts is going to fix Illinois. Maybe a few public executions too, /JK kind of.
“how about a $8200 tax bill on a 1800sqft, $229k house in Wonder Lake?”
I don’t know anything about Wonder Lake but I see it’s in McHenry County.
If you look at the suggested homes that Redfin gives you, none of those have taxes like this one which makes you think it’s some kind of faulty assessment. Even a property on an acre isn’t more than $4,000.
Although several of the smaller homes that were priced at just $120,000 still had taxes of like $3600 which seems high for that type of property.
But none were $8,000. Or even over $5,000.
Several were also under contract. If it really sucked that much on Wonder Lake (some kind of gated community, it seems?) then NOTHING would be selling.
“It is getting to the point that the property taxes on many properties will exceed the mortgage costs.”
Yes. This. It’s a killer.
Was it Crain’s that talked about the south suburbs and how some homes have fallen in price to like $40,000 because the property taxes are so high? One of the local papers was talking about it. So owners are just walking away from them to move to other parts of the country now.
Some of the south suburbs are in a death spiral. Property taxes at 7%+ of the market value. I know someone who has a commercial property being taxed at 25% of the assessed value. He hasn’t paid his taxes in 10 years and the town doesn’t do anything about it because they can’t sell a tax lien and if they shut him down then it will be just another boarded up store front (he’s the last store open in the strip).
The solution in the south suburbs, Harvey, Riverdale, Dolton, etc. is consolidation. The area has tremendous infrastructure going for it but too many overlapping redundant jurisdictions. The long talked about third airport could have been a huge win for that region and Chicagoland as a whole but apparently cramming the sky over the north side full of non stop airplanes and 30 – 40 minuet taxi times to gates that are often already full was the better solution. You’d think a metro with winter weather would a second major airport more than 30 miles away from the other one in case of weather events but that would take logical planning.
“D or R, they gave away anything the unions demanded no matter how unrealistic, a lot of it in the form of future promises just to stop a strike threat.”
————————-
Don’t forget they wanted the union votes and election donations. That’s why Chicago didn’t stop REQUIRING lead pipe for water service until 1986 — plumbers union opposition and threats to not support pols who wanted to use copper earlier..
“You’d think a metro with winter weather would a second major airport more than 30 miles away from the other one in case of weather events but that would take logical planning.”
———————-
I agree that consolidation would help reduce overhead, and an airport at Peotone (with high speed rail connector) would be great, but we’ve already got Midway, which is 20 miles from O’Hare which is underused.
But Midway is so constrained, it would be better for private jets, corporate flights and small regional stuff only. We need a true second airport that can handle jumbos and mass diversions for weather events.
The best spot for a second airport is Gary, Indiana: Much closer than Peotone, tons of space, well-served by infrastructure and transportation, etc. But then Illinois pols don’t get the big dollars …
Sorry, meant to say THIRD airport …
“The best spot for a second airport is Gary, Indiana: Much closer than Peotone, tons of space, well-served by infrastructure and transportation, etc. But then Illinois pols don’t get the big dollars”
———————–
Agreed if you’re only looking at plane service to Chicago. The selling point for Peotone has always been that the entire southern region of Chicagoland would benefit from the industrial development.
High taxes are great for home prices. They make home prices fall! It’s now cheaper to buy then ever before! Russ said his house is worth the same as it was 14 years ago. What a steal for a buyer! Oak Park for the price it was 14 years ago! Amazing!
Now I’m just joking. But for the imminent collapse of Illinois, that’s not happening anytime soon. It’s just to be a long, slow decline. People are going to leave and just not come back. Half of all college kids now leave the state for college. How many of them even return? Significant percentages of state employees take their pensions out of state. Many people just up and retire out of IL altogether. Households just get up and move, sometimes just across the border into IN or WI. I have quite a few friends who’ve lived their entire lives in IL and have left in the last five years. And they’re loving it. They’re not just selling their books either – they’re truly never coming back. One of my friends took a job in Milwaukee and he’s never been happier living in WI. It’s smaller, he’s a big fish in a small pond, and everything except the state income tax is cheaper. It’s gonna be a generation or two long event. Chicago proper has been losing people for more or less 100 years now and it’s still losing people, the schools are worse, the crime rate waxes and wanes here and there, but there’s no doubt Chicago is still collapsing. In slow motion.
What is so different about Chicago versus other cities (Other than the high property taxes)? Chicago is by far the cheapest of the other major cities (LA, SF, NYC, Boston, DC, etc). Even cheaper than cities like Seattle, Portland, etc.
Chicago has way more to offer than many of those other cities, yet our real estate prices lag. However, people still seem to be willing to pay an arm and leg to live in those other cities… why not Chicago? Are we really in a decline or just the demographics is changing?
Sure, property taxes are high in some metro Chicago burbs, but $1 million 1/1 and 2/2 condos aren’t the norm here either. People still seem to flock to SF and willing to rent a room for a few grand.
HD says we are on a slow decline, but what is going to be the tipping point? Will Chicago just turn into Manhattan with only rich folks and those subsidized?
The city proper seems to be booming. Maybe we are just getting old and not willing to accept the new paradigm of being perpetually broke?
The population loss reflects the decline. Us and West Virginia are the only two states to lose population. A good proxy for Chicago and Illinois would Rhode Island and Connecticut. Just long slow declines with brain drains. Everyone leaves, no one stays, the state fianances are a mess and it’s a bad place for business. Like I said it’s not collapsing like Syria or something. But a slow, long slog of attrition until most of Chicago is a dump and the rest of the state looks like rural West Virginia. We’re already halfway there.
Albeit the nicer parts of rural west virginia.
“Albeit the nicer parts of rural west virginia.”
The further south you go the poorer it gets. I’ve driven to and around the Shawnee National Forest a few times. Everyone of those towns is economically depressed, losing population, the main street is all boarded up and the wal-mart just outside of city limits is literally the only place in town with any activity. If i showed you pics of two towns, on in southern IL, one in WV, the only way you’d be able to tell the difference is from the hilliness of the terrain.
“A good proxy for Chicago and Illinois would Rhode Island and Connecticut. Just long slow declines with brain drains.”
Ba ha ha.
The delusions about Chicago. Hilarious.
There is a huge multi-billion dollar development about to go up in Lincoln Park that is only rivaled by Hudson Yards in NYC.
UberEats and Uber Freight are in talks to bring thousands of jobs to the old post office. Google is adding another entire building because they have already maxed out on their current space they just moved into less than 2 years ago. That’s another 1000 jobs.
They are building several more hotels, apartments and commercial buildings in Fulton Market. The Riverline is going up. Every tech company is adding jobs with dozens of openings.
And not just tech. Look at Accenture. A powerhouse consulting firm with its HQ here. Ford just added nearly 500 jobs at the plants on the south side and has said it may add more.
Brain drain? On what planet?
Hilarious. Truly.
Oh, and Etsy just bought one of our Internet companies for $275 million in cash. Started in 2014.
Not too bad for 5 years.
Just another day in “brain drain” Chicago.
“Chicago has way more to offer than many of those other cities, yet our real estate prices lag.”
Two things:
1. Chicago is not geographically challenged like most of the others. You can keep building and building south, west and north. Heck, you can live in Wisconsin and Indiana and work in Chicago. Until the land is scarce, prices won’t be. But in the areas where it IS scarce, well, the prices are higher. But still too much supply. We should be grateful we’re not the cities you listed as it’s hell to buy there.
2. The weather. I have friends from NYC that said if not for Chicago winters, they would have moved a long time ago. And forget getting those in California to move but a big quake may do it.
All cities are booming. Trump was supposed to help the rural areas but he has done the opposite (because it was already happening under Obama and there’s no way to stop it.) The cities are the driving force of the jobs. It’s a knowledge economy now and those jobs are in cities. The creative class.
Chicago has some wealth inequality but it’s nothing compared to most of the other major cities. I’m hoping Lightfoot can bring more jobs to the south and west sides and spread the wealth. Investment is needed.
One of the hottest neighborhoods for housing right now is Englewood. That Whole Foods (and Starbucks/Chipotle) that went in there, have REALLY provided a boost. It’s amazing what some optimism does. Imagine if it got more? Imagine if other businesses went in?
The high rents are pushing out the middle class. It’s really difficult to get, say, a 2-bedroom apartment for under $1500 from Uptown down to Hyde Park, including neighborhoods like Bronzeville and Bridgeport. But how do you afford that if you make $50,000 and have a few kids? Really difficult.
“Half of all college kids now leave the state for college. How many of them even return?”
They’ve built over 10,000 apartments in downtown alone over the last few years. Over 10,000 young people are filling them up (with some non-college students, of course.)
Someone is moving here.
“the schools are worse, the crime rate waxes and wanes here and there, but there’s no doubt Chicago is still collapsing. In slow motion.”
Lol! Remember when Trump was going to send the national guard if he was elected? Lol. Guess it’s not that bad, after all.
The schools are probably the best they’ve been in about 60 years in Chicago. The most amazing thing happened when everyone was trapped in their condos 10 years ago. They couldn’t move to the suburbs. They were stuck. They had to enroll their kids in the schools. And they all made it work. And because those GenXers did, the Millennials have no problem sending their kids to the city schools.
“The best spot for a second airport is Gary, Indiana:”
Where’s the space? For Dreamliners? You need huge landing space for those planes.
And why would Illinois EVER want it in another state? Why would we want thousands of great jobs in another state? Not just the pols. ANY of us?
As an Illinoisan, I want those airport fees (and there are at every airport) being paid in Illinois. Indiana can do its own thing if it wants.
“Some of the south suburbs are in a death spiral.”
This. The newspaper has documented what is happening there. People are just turning in the keys and leaving to move to the warmer weather in the south.
“Everyone of those towns is economically depressed, losing population, the main street is all boarded up and the wal-mart just outside of city limits is literally the only place in town with any activity.”
This is true EVERYWHERE across America. In California, Texas and Florida. The rural areas are in decline and have been since manufacturing has left. And no one is farming anymore either. No reason to stay there. There’s no jobs. There aren’t even hospitals anymore.
Population has shifted to the bigger metro areas.
By the way, most of the rust belt cities are actually booming right now. This whole “oh- the rust belt is doomed” thing is completely wrong.
Look at Milwaukee. Construction everywhere. Look at St. Louis. Loft conversions, big tech complex being built, new public transportation hubs, new hotels.
Look at Detroit. My gosh. It is just crushing it. Building everywhere. Hottest hotels in the Midwest are there. Huge restaurant boom. Downtown lofts now $500,000 each.
I don’t know if Cleveland is booming but Cincinnati has even turned it around and it was hit hard by the opioid crisis.
Lots of real opportunities in the Midwest right now. Oh- and what about Grand Rapids? It’s been making all of the lists as a city of choice for Millennials.
Grand. Rapids.
“Google is adding another entire building because they have already maxed out on their current space they just moved into less than 2 years ago. That’s another 1000 jobs.”
Haven’t you told us for years that those are just sales jobs, and we consider those real tech jobs?
“wonder lake”
The crazy things about that place are (1) it’s actually properly assessed for the asking price; (2) the assessment is ~10% less than 15 years ago; (3) the wonder lake local portion of the tax bill is only about 20% of the total; (4) there is a ~$600 assessment for ‘drainage’, presumably for a sewer extension into the area. That place can expect taxes of at least ~3.5% of FMV until there is a change in the law.
sabrina was really pounding the Chicago Kool aid last night!
Sabrina, I like you and I really appreciate your effort on the website all these years but it has given you some tunnel vision. Millennial are leavings Chicago. This is not a controversial fact:
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/03/06/millennials-leaving-chicago-cost-of-living/
Here’s the conventional wisdom: companies like McDonald’s are moving into the city to be more attractive to young workers; who prefer to be close to Chicago’s amenities, top restaurants, and nightlife.
In neighborhoods close to the Loop, construction crews are furiously trying to meet the growing housing needs of millennials, the group between the ages of 25 and 34.
And yet in the three years since Maira Khwaja graduated from the University of Chicago, many have left.
“Of my close friend group, I’m one of the only people who stayed,” she said.
Khwaja’s group reflects what the Brookings Institution learned — between 2012 and 2017, Chicago had a net loss of 13,757 millennials.
https://www.minnpost.com/economy/2018/12/unlike-many-cities-chicago-is-losing-people-many-of-them-are-moving-to-minnesota/
Unlike many cities, Chicago is losing people. Many of them are moving to Minnesota
This Thanksgiving, Veronica Harper marked one year in the Twin Cities.
Born and raised in Chicago, the 28-year-old was ready for a change. She felt there were more job opportunities in the smaller metro area. Plus, having visited family in Minnesota on several occasions, she was pretty familiar with the place.
S0, she decided to move up here when she landed a human resources job.
Harper isn’t alone.
In recent years, the Chicago metro area has seen its population stagnate, then shrink. As many metro areas see growth, it’s one of just a few big metro areas in the U.S. experiencing a population drop.
Among the gainers from Chicago’s loss? Minnesota.
“All cities are booming. Trump was supposed to help the rural areas but he has done the opposite (because it was already happening under Obama and there’s no way to stop it.) The cities are the driving force of the jobs. It’s a knowledge economy now and those jobs are in cities. The creative class. ”
This has nothing to do with Trump at all. Why do you have to bring Trump into this?
Most cities are booming I totally agree. Except Chicago, which is still declining (and has been since 1920 when it hit peak population!)
As for inequity in Chicago, it’s awful. It’s not a ‘bad’ as san fran or some other US cities, but it’s near the top of the list.
Here’s a map of the income for neighborhoods. The only ‘middle’ class areas are in NW and SW sides where the cops and firemen and city workers live. The rest is either grinding poverty or a playground for the upper middle class.
https://voorheescenter.wordpress.com/2018/06/06/who-can-live-in-chicago-part-i/
As for IL rural areas, i’m of the opinion that IL rural areas always seem more run down than rural areas in other parts of the midwest. Rural wisconsin and michigan are actually pretty nice with lots of resorts and second homes, and good farming income. Rural Illinois is one step removed from grinding poverty. I’m not trying to rail in IL here either, it’s just my observation. I’m sure rural new mexico or alabama may be worse, but compared to teh midwest, IL is not good. And I blame Springfield for neglecting the rest of the state.
https://www.bettergov.org/news/spiral-of-decline-heavy-burden-for-homeowners/
Spiral of Decline Heavy Burden for Homeowners
In Cook County suburbs, home values are collapsing while property taxes are up.
“Brain drain? On what planet?”
Since I posted yesterday learned a family friend who’s a big time banking tech consultant, global in reach, and could live anywhere, is moving the whole family of five to FL. He got a $40,000 tax bill and said fuck it. Bought a place already and hasnt even put his palace here on the market yet, just moving so the kids can start school in Naples by fall. Thats whats actually happening in Illinois. A few thousand hip apartments for 20 somethings in the core is nice but the big time tax payers are leaving. It’s not business friendly nor family friendly anymore. That was a our brand, we lost the message. No amount of “tech” back offices and sales centers are going to put a dent in it.
Look at Milwaukee. Construction everywhere. Look at St. Louis. Loft conversions, big tech complex being built, new public transportation hubs, new hotels.
St Louis isn’t booming. You were wrong about Soulard and wrong with this. Loft conversions are happening because downtown properties are dirt cheap and not generating any revenue. The attempt a creating Wrigleyville south will probably work, only because the city is nuts for the Cards
Look at Detroit. My gosh. It is just crushing it. Building everywhere. Hottest hotels in the Midwest are there. Huge restaurant boom. Downtown lofts now $500,000 each.
Don’t use Gilbertville as a proxy for Detroit.
Also don’t come to Minnesota, based on the Chatteriti comments you guys would all die in the first winter
“One of the hottest neighborhoods for housing right now is Englewood. That Whole Foods (and Starbucks/Chipotle) that went in there, have REALLY provided a boost. It’s amazing what some optimism does. Imagine if it got more? Imagine if other businesses went in?”
I don’t think that even Joe Z would set the bar that low
I’m sure business will move in as long as they get what they need from the city (Quid pro quo), until it doesn’t make sense – See Target/Chatham. You really are naïve if you think otherwise
“I don’t think that even Joe Z would set the bar that low ”
————————-
C’mon, he’s got apartments to shill, right Joe? I mean, Sabrina?
“One of the hottest neighborhoods for housing right now is Englewood.”
the average selling price of SFHs there has quadrupled since 2013 – from 10K to 40K. Yeah, so I guess you could say it’s hot if you want to.
“Yeah, so I guess you could say it’s hot if you want to.”
Um…yeah. A tripling is usually a definition of “hot” by most people’s measures.
If I told you that home prices in Portage Park had tripled since 2013, would you not say that was hot?
I would.
It’s the hottest neighborhood in the city right now. It’s had the most appreciation. Yes, it’s coming off of low values. But someone, just 6 years later, has decided that homes there are now worth $40,000 instead of $10,000. Neighborhoods build momentum step by step. Englewood is doing it.
Real estate investors, thankfully, are usually the first to see beyond the preconceived notions about a neighborhood. It takes guts to be the first in but that’s where the big money is.
“You really are naïve if you think otherwise”
It’s a miracle humans ever created the airplane or went to the moon with these kinds of attitudes. If you can’t see neighborhoods changing before your very eyes, then that’s your problem. It’s always the first in who make the most money.
Changing neighborhoods are about investment. All it takes sometimes is one or two to go in and it can turn. When you hit bottom, as Englewood has done, there’s nowhere to go but up.
I’ve said for a long time now that I don’t know why builders aren’t going in there to build some middle class housing. People who live in the neighborhood say there are a ton of empty lots. Builders could get them for cheap. Build some $150,000 to $200,000 homes. They all keep complaining that land is “too expensive” but it’s not in Englewood.
“St Louis isn’t booming.”
Wrong again. St Louis is building all over the place. The Cortex zone is really humming now. Unfortunately, there’s too many empty lots on the north side. Jack Dorsey, a favorite son, is working with other city leaders to set up a teardown fund so that they can remove the blight. That’s the first step. They think it will take $30 to $40 million though.
Every single big and medium size city is booming.
It’s what happens when the Fed gives away free money. You take loans. You build.
“Bought a place already and hasnt even put his palace here on the market yet, just moving so the kids can start school in Naples by fall.”
Really?
Naples???
Out of ALL the cities down there? Yikes. If you had said Tampa, which is relatively hot with new residents, then I might buy into it. Naples average age is, what, 70?
Hey, if he doesn’t mind paying for those private schools, because Illinois property taxes are so high, then more power to him. Because, yeah, Florida schools actually suck. But he’ll find out.
And those summers? Good luck with those too. He’s moving just in time for hurricane season. Yippee.
And the “big time” tax payers actually aren’t leaving as Chicago is on pace to beat last year’s luxury home sales record (which is sales over $3 million.) Are those the “big time” payers? Or did you mean someone else?
Oh, and Illinois is finally gaining jobs again. And all around the state, not just in the Chicagoland area.
As I said, the boom is SO OBVIOUS. All you have to do is drive around the state. Look around Chicago. Open your eyes. Chicago is super hot. The unemployment rate also continues to drop both in the city and statewide.
From Crain’s:
“Extending a trend that’s been developing for several months, the Illinois Department of Employment Security reported today that the state has gained nearly 100,000 non-farm jobs in the past 12 months. That’s the biggest pop since July 2015, when a year-to-year increase of 105,300 was recorded. Figures shortly before that were much smaller and have dropped off since then until now.
If validated in later months—the data is preliminary, not seasonally adjusted, and can bounce around a lot—the figures could have major implications. Chief among them is that if the state is gaining lots of jobs, it finally may be gaining population, too, instead of losing it.”
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg-hinz-politics/illinois-job-engine-suddenly-kicks-high-gear
“This has nothing to do with Trump at all. Why do you have to bring Trump into this?”
What are you talking about HD? That was his ENTIRE PLATFORM in 2016. He was going to even the game. Bring jobs out to the rural areas. Instead, the cities have only gotten richer under his presidency. They are running away from the rural folks even more so than in 2015-2016. The rural areas are falling even further behind.
And to top it off, he wants to take away their health insurance.
Lol.
Oh- and the “middle class” in Chicago- yes, the entire North side was the “middle class” until the last 10 or 15 years, when the tide changed, helped by the improved schools, which kept the money in the city instead of going to the suburbs. Now, it’s perfectly acceptable for two 30-year olds with small children to move to Portage Park or Jefferson Park rather than Oak Park or Park Ridge. And they are doing so (which is why renovated bungalows are now $400,000 in those neighborhoods.)
I advocate for more middle class housing. As I said on another thread, there are opportunities for it, including in Englewood which has a lot of empty lots.
And “grinding poverty”? Really?
Bronzeville, Hyde Park, Kenwood, Pilsen, Woodlawn, Jackson Park are “grinding poverty?”
You’ve been living in Long Grove far too long my friend. Get in your car and drive around this great big city.
I urge all of you who spend your days solely visiting Wrigley Field and the Lincoln Park Zoo to get out and see what this city really has to offer.
“Rural wisconsin and michigan are actually pretty nice with lots of resorts and second homes, and good farming income.”
There’s a reason Illinois has both Caterpillar and John Deere (as well as ADM) headquartered here.
Our farmers are rich. We’re one of the biggest producers of soybeans in the world (no offense to Wisconsin and Michigan, which have their own specialties, such as dairy and cherries.)
And Michigan has one of the largest meth industries in the country. They are constantly doing meth busts in Southwest Michigan. So what’s your definition of “pretty nice”?
All rural areas have their problems with poverty, lack of job opportunities, the opioid crisis, poor schools, and poor access to health care. That’s not an Illinois thing.
“Unlike many cities, Chicago is losing people. Many of them are moving to Minnesota”
Fantastic. Some of the smaller cities really DO have great job opportunities. I don’t understand why 20-somethings think they have to move to the big cities to have a cool urban life.
Look at Milwaukee. It’s booming right now and has great restaurants, the lake front and a nice job market. Houses are affordable too.
Why not move to where you can afford a good apartment on a $35,000 a year salary? If she’s in human resources, and just starting out, she’s not making much. She’d have to have roommates and whatnot in Chicago. Why not Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Detroit, St. Louis, Louisville, Kansas City, Des Moines, Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland or Pittsburgh?
“Haven’t you told us for years that those are just sales jobs, and we consider those real tech jobs?”
Yawn, anon(tfo). Yes, I said that YEARS ago. Things have changed. They were mostly sales jobs in the first few years.
They are hiring engineers and other tech jobs now. Have been for about 2 years now. Same with Dyson. Same with Facebook. They have all figured out that their engineers don’t have to be in Silicon Valley and instead of paying them $250,000 like they have to out there, they can pay them $130,000 in Chicago instead. It’s a win-win for them as they get to tap all the great talent here without a bidding war and they save millions of dollars on salaries.
“C’mon, he’s got apartments to shill, right Joe? I mean, Sabrina?”
You honestly think the man who shall not be named has actually been driving and walking around Chicago for the last 10 years running this site?
Um…okay.
I’ve said for a long time now that I don’t know why builders aren’t going in there to build some middle class housing. People who live in the neighborhood say there are a ton of empty lots. Builders could get them for cheap. Build some $150,000 to $200,000 homes. They all keep complaining that land is “too expensive” but it’s not in Englewood.
LOL
Why not buck up if it’s a slam dunk?
Somehow I think that if a buyer could afford $200k, Englewood isn’t where they’re looking
No comment on Target closing 2 stores?
“Builders could get them for cheap. Build some $150,000 to $200,000 homes. They all keep complaining that land is “too expensive” but it’s not in Englewood.”
haha I doubt you could build a 1000sqft home on a free lot for 150k in Englewood with all the red tape and other nonsense involved
“the man who shall not be named”
—————————-
You mean . . . gasp . . . VOLDEMORT runs this site?!?!?!
“He got a $40,000 tax bill and said fuck it”
So say your friend sells his IL home at a big loss because he can afford to (assessed/comps out at $1.5M and sells it for $1M). Doesn’t the new owner still pay the $40K in yearly taxes? Maybe after a successful appeal, the new owner will see their taxes reduced to $35K +/- in the next assessment cycle (every 3 years in the city), but as long as his neighbors are still living in their similar homes, still paying $40K in property taxes, his former house is still on the county/township books at a $1.5M +/-, and the new buyer just absorbs the high property taxes. As I understand it, it’s not the actual sale price that determines the taxable base of one’s house (maybe it’s a small fraction of some complicated taxing formula that nobody really understands), but rather the value is almost entirely based on neighboring comps; unlike in CA where your property tax is 1.26%’ish of the selling price of your house, regardless of the neighboring vales. Am I missing something here? Does IL tax differently than I thought?
I completely understand why people would want to leave the state because of high property taxes, but unless you can afford to take a bit hit on the selling price, or unless you have nothing to lose (you’re underwater anyway and living in Harvey), I just don’t see this mass exodus of middle/upper middle class people with skin in the game leaving the state as they just can’t afford to. Maybe after *years* of depressed home sale prices the taxes will decrease too, but in the here and now it’s an evil cycle. Every existing house that sells just creates a new property tax payer and the taxing bodies know that.
remote job growth is exploding so why live in a confiscatory place like Illinois when you can live a lot of other places with a better quality of life and less taxes and hassle
you’d have to be an idiot to stay in Chicago if you can do your job anywhere.
I literally gave my family a 50k a year raise because of taxes I don’t have to fork out to these cronies… thats half a million dollars over 10 years!
“1920 when it hit peak population”
You that sloppy when someone is trusting you to settle their PI claim?
1920 population of Chicago was about 75% of peak (1950, in a census year; sometime near that for real peak), which is about the same as now. You meant something like:
Chicago hasn’t been as small as it is now for 100 years. When the national population was about 106m, or ~1/3 of today’s population. Mount Greenwood wasn’t part of the city yet!
Of course, the supposedly “booming” St Louis hasn’t been as small as it is now in *150* years. When the national population was 38,925,598 (ie, about 12% of current)–about the current population of California.
“Does IL tax differently than I thought?”
No, that’s right on–*except* there is no “rate”–there is a levy, that gets divided over all of the assessed values.
So, if everyone’s (including apartments, commercial and industrial) real estate were suddenly worth exactly 50% less per the assessor, everyone’s tax bill would be exactly the same as it was.
“I literally gave my family a 50k a year raise”
So, ~$12k in RE taxes; with 4.95% rate on the AGI of ~$750k, assume you’re maxing your deferrals, that’s pretty damn good. Those AAPL covered calls seem to be paying off!
“I just don’t see this mass exodus of middle/upper middle class people with skin in the game leaving the state as they just can’t afford to. Maybe after *years* of depressed home sale prices the taxes will decrease too, but in the here and now it’s an evil cycle. Every existing house that sells just creates a new property tax payer and the taxing bodies know that.”
Like I said, it’s a slow drip. The kids go off to college, don’t return. The family across the street takes a job transfer, and they leave. IL is hoping to be the abortion capital of the midwest, so expect fewer babies to be born to those who actually stay. When it comes time for retirement, people just leave. And before you know it, we have an outflow that exceeds our inflow. Kind of like where we are now
Jeez anon(tfo), just take a red pill chill out. You’re nitpicking over a minor point like 1920 vs. 1950, when I failed to *doublecheck wikipedia for accuracy* before posting an comment on cribchatter. When the point was that population has been declining for decades. And yes the population was greater in 1920 than it was today.
“So, ~$12k in RE taxes; with 4.95% rate on the AGI of ~$750k, assume you’re maxing your deferrals, that’s pretty damn good. Those AAPL covered calls seem to be paying off!”
He’s probably counting the $$$ as including the almost assuredly to become law progressive tax. And sales tax is close to 2.0% lower, and not getting capped on the SALT deduction too. And then round up!
“IL is hoping to be the abortion capital of the midwest, so expect fewer babies to be born to those who actually stay.”
The US birth rate just fell to a new low nationwide.
If you want to increase the population, the US will have to let immigrants in.
“Chicago hasn’t been as small as it is now for 100 years. When the national population was about 106m, or ~1/3 of today’s population. Mount Greenwood wasn’t part of the city yet!
Of course, the supposedly “booming” St Louis hasn’t been as small as it is now in *150* years. When the national population was 38,925,598 (ie, about 12% of current)–about the current population of California.”
Population doesn’t tell you shit about what the city is doing now. Like I said during St. Louis week, Charleston and St Louis were both, at one time, the 4th largest cities in America. But, SURPRISE, America has changed.
And Charleston has a slew of $6 million houses down on its waterfront now when it was a dump as recently as 25 years ago.
Think of opportunities people. Where will people want to live?
Before air conditioning, NO ONE with a brain was moving to Naples. Nor Tucson. Air conditioning simply isn’t that old. Migration patterns changed.
And they will change again with climate change. Some Miami homeowners, for instance, are already selling and getting out before the climate change becomes so obvious. At some point, everyone will be trying to get out at once. And the migration patterns will change again.
For 10 years, I’ve said that Detroit will rise again. There’s a reason the Indians and the Americas biggest cities pre-colonialization were in the Midwest. We have fresh water. Others do not. We have food. Others do not. We don’t have hurricanes. We have few earthquakes.
“remote job growth is exploding so why live in a confiscatory place like Illinois when you can live a lot of other places with a better quality of life and less taxes and hassle”
I don’t know sonies but Square just bought a big building in downtown St. Louis. Already has 500 employees there. The new building will suit 1400. Square was originally founded in St Louis but they didn’t have the infrastructure for them to build out the company there. Instead, they are now returning with a ton of jobs.
If you could work anywhere, why would Square bother?
Why is Apple building a massive second headquarters in Austin that will house thousands of workers if everyone will be working at home?
Why is Salesforce leasing out an 80 story high rise in downtown Chicago?
The world’s great cities offer more than just a job or housing. It’s a creative incubator with networking, arts, entertainment and food.
Some people want that. Some don’t care and are fine never going to a museum, a play, an independent movie, a concert, or a food festival.
The most talented people in the world have flocked to the cities for hundreds of years. What is the Renaissance without Florence?
“No comment on Target closing 2 stores?”
Walmart closed nearly all of its urban stores in Chicago 3-5 years ago. I don’t remember exactly when. If it’s not working, they don’t keep it open.
Best Buy is closing on the Mag Mile after 20 years. It’s a business decision. Same with the closure of the Bed Bath & Beyond in River North.
The news just keeps getting better. Sorry all you bears. You really are in denial about how good it is out there, especially if you have a job downtown.
This is the best job market in Chicago in years. And now, apparently, we’re even hotter than hot cities like Denver (wow- never would have guessed that).
From Crain’s today:
For instance, the data indicates that between January and July of this year, Chicago added 164,000 non-farm jobs. That’s numerically more than any other metro area except New York, which added 349,000.
But likely a more reliable measure is the 12-month data, which somewhat smooths out seasonal variations. You can get the figures for each metropolitan area by clicking on the state, then the city.
In Chicago’s case, the year-to-year June-to-June job-growth gain was 1.8 percent, about 90,000. In comparison, national growth in that period was 1.5 percent.
Chicago’s 1.8 percent lags booming Texas cities such as Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston, up 3.2 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively. But it tops New York and Los Angeles at 1.2 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively; Philadelphia (1.2 percent), Boston (1.5 percent) and Washington (0.8 percent); and matches Atlanta (1.8 percent).
Beyond that, the growth in the past year here tops other large Midwest cities such as Cleveland and Indianapolis (each at 1 percent), Minneapolis/St. Paul (0.4 percent), and Milwaukee (1 percent). It matched the growth in St. Louis, at 1.8 percent year to year.
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg-hinz-politics/surprise-chicagos-job-market-outpacing-us
I don’t know sonies but Square just bought a big building in downtown St. Louis. Already has 500 employees there. The new building will suit 1400. Square was originally founded in St Louis but they didn’t have the infrastructure for them to build out the company there. Instead, they are now returning with a ton of jobs.
Square is leasing and didn’t buy (though I believe one of the head honchos bought the building – nice gig if you can get it)
They’re at 400+, it’s a pretty big jump to add 1k jobs
The rental rates in downtown are pretty low – a side effect of >15% vacancy rate. It’s also why bldg owners are looking for anything but office space down town. I’m currently in STL and if you think it’s booming, you’re worse than JoeZ for hype. Seemed like a lot of bldgs were for sale in Soulard Vs actual development
“Square is leasing and didn’t buy (though I believe one of the head honchos bought the building – nice gig if you can get it)”
They are leasing in the cortex right now and their founder just bought one of the beautiful old buildings downtown so they will move in there when it is renovated.
That’s called: investing back into the community. Much like the Quicken Loans founder, and billionaire, is doing in Detroit. I wish some of Chicago’s billionaires, like Ken Griffin, would invest similarly in the city.
Square is at 500 jobs. They have space in the cortex for 700. The new space will suit 1400 people. If it’s Square’s Midwest headquarters, it doesn’t seem unusual to expect that kind of job growth over the next few years. No one says it’s going to happen overnight. The new building won’t be ready for a year or two anyway.
Downtown St Louis needs jobs. It has more people living down there than working down there. The mayor knows this so when Square asked where it should go to expand, she told them that downtown would help the city the most.
It’s a huge downtown that is dead. The jobs are in Clayton or the cortex.
Soulard doesn’t have corporate jobs, other than what is going on at the brewery. It has amazing real estate, nearly all of which has been preserved. It’s a much nicer Pullman.
I did see a couple open lots and areas that could be developed with hotels and more restaurants. The land in between downtown and Soulard is wide open. That whole area can be turned into an entertainment district connecting the riverfront with the Ballpark Village down to one of America’s greatest historical neighborhoods, Soulard (that has mostly been preserved and is as historical as Georgetown, Old Town Alexandria, historic Charleston or Philadelphia’s Old City.)
If St. Louis only advertised Soulard like Charleston has done over the years with its historic district, and got some hotels near there, it could create quite a tourism industry. This worked for Nashville. Other than country music, it has few distinctive neighborhoods or anything much of interest yet it is now the number one city in the country for Bachelorette parties and is huge for Bachelor parties too. That’s a lot of money, and jobs.
Again, in case you missed it in Crain’s article, St Louis job growth matched Chicago’s over the last 12 months for the tops in the Midwest. It also beats NY, LA, Washington DC.
“Chicago’s 1.8 percent lags booming Texas cities such as Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston, up 3.2 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively. But it tops New York and Los Angeles at 1.2 percent and 1.4 percent, respectively; Philadelphia (1.2 percent), Boston (1.5 percent) and Washington (0.8 percent); and matches Atlanta (1.8 percent).
Beyond that, the growth in the past year here tops other large Midwest cities such as Cleveland and Indianapolis (each at 1 percent), Minneapolis/St. Paul (0.4 percent), and Milwaukee (1 percent). It matched the growth in St. Louis, at 1.8 percent year to year.”
“1920 vs. 1950”
It’s just a number, right?
Oh, no, it’s a historical understanding that, in general, the American industrial cities reached their population zeniths at the beginning of the baby boom. Should’ve claimed a typo.
“Why is Salesforce leasing out an 80 story high rise in downtown Chicago?”
Because it is a magical building that won’t block views from nearby buildings?
ps: It’s 57 stories, and Ohana will occupy about 40% of the RSF.
“Like I said, it’s a slow drip. The kids go off to college, don’t return.”
I think that it’s more a curse of success, as opposed to Chicago being undesirable. By which I mean, huge numbers of UMC boomers in the Chicago area sent their kids away to school, where they connected with the kids of UMC boomers from other places. Then the kids took post college jobs in NY or CA or CO or WA or OR or whatever, and stayed. I’d say that at least a third of the people I’ve encountered over the past couple of decades or so in NYC and LA/SD/SF and Denver/Boulder grew up in a nicer Chicago burb. None of them seemed to harbor any negative feelings about Chicago (many in fact did post-college stints back in Chicago); they just find their new areas very compelling. They consider Chicago to be a great, world-class city; they just happen to really like the ocean or mountains or whatever, and have been able to establish decent careers outside of the Loop (and having a little down payment help from their parents who did grind away for decades in the Loop helped compensate for lower earnings/high housing prices in their new areas). When you meet someone in CA or CO who grew up UMC in Detroit or St. Louis or OH or whatever, they might express some sort of hometown pride (sports, custard, etc.), but they’re never going back, whereas for Chicago natives it tends to remain within the realm of possibility.
“So, ~$12k in RE taxes; with 4.95% rate on the AGI of ~$750k, assume you’re maxing your deferrals, that’s pretty damn good. Those AAPL covered calls seem to be paying off!”
going forward, probably saving more than 12k a year on property taxes, but yeah I miscalculated using JB’s new rates and added 10k for some reason lol… closer to 30k a year total, but probably more if you factor in cheaper sales taxes
either way, its no small chunk of change, and yes lately AAPL covered calls have been paying off nicely thanks 🙂
“I don’t know sonies but Square just bought a big building in downtown St. Louis. Already has 500 employees there. The new building will suit 1400. Square was originally founded in St Louis but they didn’t have the infrastructure for them to build out the company there. Instead, they are now returning with a ton of jobs.”
extremely cheap labor and office space? I am very familiar with St. Louis and people there don’t make any money at all compared to San Francisco, so why wouldn’t they put jobs there (as opposed to san franshitshow), if like I said they can be anywhere?
“If you could work anywhere, why would Square bother?”
Because Jack Dorsey is from St. Louis, that’s why.
“I think that it’s more a curse of success, as opposed to Chicago being undesirable.”
This may have been the case a while back as the large increases in higher income earners masked the middle and lower class exodus.
But these days Chicago is straight up undesirable for all income brackets. There are scores and scores of articles in the last few years about how Chicago is close to bottom on the list for people to move. Even anecdotally, I know of quite a few people in my social circle who’ve lived here their entire lives and have recently left. And when I mention this to others, they also have their own stories of friends and family members who’ve left for greener pastures. It’s hard to deny the evidence on the ground.
https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/March-2018/Two-Graphs-Show-Why-the-Chicago-Area-Is-Losing-Population/
“https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/March-2018/Two-Graphs-Show-Why-the-Chicago-Area-Is-Losing-Population/”
Huh? That shows Chicago metro growing, albeit slowly, and entirely through additions of people earning over $75k/year. The largest category of decrease is foreign-born adults with income under $25k.
I don’t see how that is relevant to the point you are making.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/07/politics/rural-cities-partisan-divide-2020/index.html
Even CNN admits that “The Brookings data show a clear growth spurt since Trump took office in the counties that he carried in 2016. Primarily located at the outskirts or beyond the largest metropolitan areas, many of these counties are propelled by the industries that dominated the 20th century economy, including energy production, mining, agriculture, manufacturing and construction.
From January 2017 through September 2018, employment in the counties Trump won grew at a robust average annual rate of 2.6%, according to the Brookings analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics figures. That was a significant improvement compared to January 2010 through January 2017, when employment grew in those places at an annual rate of just 1.5%.
Throughout that earlier period, job growth in the Trump counties lagged behind the average annual rate of 1.7% in the Clinton counties. But since January 2017, the 2.6% annual job growth gain in the Trump counties has exceeded the 2.2% annual increase in the Clinton places. “
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/news/chicago-still-losing-population
Anon, because that data only goes through 2016 and explains the stagnating population. high earners were masking the population loss of the middle and lower classes.
But now even that trend is likely over. Newer data shows the chicago area losing population. I don’t have a *Great* link to show that now even high income earners are leaving (IL Policy is a bit biased)
www . illinoispolicy . org /illinois-rich-millennials-are-moving-to-other-states/
You have anecdata, HD.
Chicago is getting wealthier – its obvious looking at the real estate mkt (both commercial and residential) and services (restaurants, theater, etc) and backed up by the article that anon linked. Some of it is at the expense of the suburbs / downstate, some of it is just because the economy is doing well. The thing about Chicago is it doesn’t dominate any one category as a city – its just a well rounded one. If you want nice weather the entire midwest and northeast are off the table. If you want low taxes then west coast / north east are off the table. If you want to enjoy the summer then the south is off the table. Chicago is like the middle ground – everything you’d want in a city culture wise with mediocre weather (trust me the north east doesn’t have better weather) and average taxes. We are definitely back of the pack on crime / fiscal issues though.
“Chicago is getting wealthier –”
Compared to other areas, it’s not, and home values are stagnant..oh wait, you mean just north side neighborhoods? Then yes, that Chicago is wealthier.
“The thing about Chicago is it doesn’t dominate any one category as a city – its just a well rounded one.”
A jack of all trades is a master of nothing and that’s reflected in our population loss.
“Chicago is like the middle ground – everything you’d want in a city culture wise with mediocre weather (trust me the north east doesn’t have better weather) and average taxes.
Yes, Chicago gang culture is notorious around the world and has been so since the 20’s! Oh wait, you mean Chicago rich person culture, yeah, that’s pretty on par with most other second tier cities.
And the ‘average’ taxes is a flat out lie. Stop spreading ‘lies’. The ‘middle of the pack’ state income tax is offset by excise, sales, sin and real estate taxes. Come on now, IL has the 3rd highest gas tax in the country you know. So progressive of the state. Oh wait, most of the state doesn’t have public trans? TOO BAD, NOW LEAVE!!!
“As I understand it, it’s not the actual sale price that determines the taxable base of one’s house (maybe it’s a small fraction of some complicated taxing formula that nobody really understands), but rather the value is almost entirely based on neighboring comps;”
Yes, the comps matter a lot but if you buy a property for significantly less than it’s assessed value then you have a strong case for an appeal and will probably win. I’ve done it.
And then there is this. We’re #1 ! https://www.orkin.com/press-room/rattiest-cities-2018
“A jack of all trades is a master of nothing and that’s reflected in our population loss.”
OH MY GOD.
This is soooooooooooooooooooo wrong.
Do you even live in Illinois HD? I’m beginning to doubt it now by these comments. Truly. I’m beginning to think you live in the same state with Dan, and it’s not Illinois.
Okay- let’s start with what Chicago has been known for for 100 years and it STILL is (which also has thousands of jobs).
Transportation.
Not only is the largest airline maker headquartered here, but so is one of the largest US airlines. The largest train leasing company is also here as is the company that makes the jetways that connect an airline terminal to a plane.
This is why UberEats and UberFreight want to be here. We are the hub of transportation.
Food.
We have more food companies and farming companies than anyone. In Chicago and the suburbs is Caterpillar, ADM, Ingredion, CF Industries, Mondolez, Kraft, Sara Lee, Tootsie Roll, Wrigley just for starters.
We also have the most urban farming in the nation. There’s a reason University of Illinois has one of the best agriculture programs in the world.
You come to Chicago if you want to do advertising as we still have one of the largest advertising firms in the nation. We’re also great at the “practical” skills on the Internet. Groupon brought 30 other coupon companies here to Chicago. Same with Grubhub.
Oh, and if Common gets his way and they build a 20 to 30 production studio on the US Steel site on the south side, it would make Chicago a real competitor to LA for entertainment production. As it is, the half a dozen tv shows being filmed here already bring a ton of jobs and money.
I could go on.
Chicago isn’t Philadelphia.
“But now even that trend is likely over.”
Nope.
Sun-Times just had a great map showing the city split into 7 zones. It shows the population loss and gains since 2010. It would not be a surprise that the far southeast side is just getting crushed. No jobs, high crime, crappy schools, no housing gains. Why stay? I’d leave too.
Downtown is one of the healthiest in the nation. Not surprising as there have been over 10,000 apartments built so that’s thousands of new people as they are 94% occupied.
North side has seen big gains.
South lakeside areas also have seen population gains in the last decade. I won’t cover them this week but Kenwood, Bronzeville, and Douglas are soon to live up to their location. If you want appreciation, now is the time to get in there. I’ll have coverage of them soon.
“But since January 2017, the 2.6% annual job growth gain in the Trump counties has exceeded the 2.2% annual increase in the Clinton places. “
Coal country is doing better? Kentucky?
Gosh, they all must feel fantastic. What do they have to worry about then?
“And when I mention this to others, they also have their own stories of friends and family members who’ve left for greener pastures.”
Are they retiring?
10,000 boomers retire every day. Would I stay in Illinois if I was retired? No.
So, yeah, you probably DO know a lot of people leaving the state.
“Because Jack Dorsey is from St. Louis, that’s why.”
Um…not what I meant HD. Sonies claims Chicago is doomed because everyone can work from anywhere (ie from home) so why live in Chicago? There’s no job keeping you here.
So that brings up the question for Square with its new building in St. Louis. If all their employees can work from home, why would they have a Midwest office at all? Why would they need to expand it? Why would they need more space?
Similarly, why would Salesforce EVER need to lease a whole 80 story tower in Chicago? Why would Facebook? Why would Grubhub? Why would UberEats lease expensive space in the old Post Office if all those employees can work from home from Florida or Texas and be happy?
Because everyone ISN’T going to work from home.
DUH!!!!
I thought we were #1 in bed bugs?
Maybe it’s both. Lol.
“extremely cheap labor and office space? I am very familiar with St. Louis and people there don’t make any money at all compared to San Francisco, so why wouldn’t they put jobs there (as opposed to san franshitshow), if like I said they can be anywhere?”
Wouldn’t the same thing apply to Chicago?
Of course it would.
Thanks for making my argument for me Sonies. This is what I have been saying. Chicago is PERFECTLY situated with great talent. Tons of engineers that they only have to pay $90,000 out of school instead of $250,000 out of school as Lyft does in the Bay Area. Look at that savings!
But not just engineers. Apple pays mid-level marketing executives $400,000 a year. In Chicago, they can pay them $150,000.
Finally, all the big tech firms have figured it out. Also, there simply aren’t enough people in the Bay Area or Seattle to fill all the jobs. They are expanding to other cities because they HAVE to. Amazon had something like 8,000 job openings in Seattle. It just couldn’t happen.
Google now has 25,000 employees in Manhattan. It has 1,000 here and will have another 1,000 shortly.
What Chicago argued to get Amazon still holds true. We have several outstanding universities and the highest percentage of Millennials with college degrees compared to any other city in the country. And our housing is still relatively cheap. And we have one of the country’s best international airports.
Several other Bay Area firms recently announced they were hiring more people here because it just makes sense. It’s going to be a great driver for Chicago for the next decade.
“ps: It’s 57 stories, and Ohana will occupy about 40% of the RSF.”
57 stories?
What are you even talking about?
It’s the premier high rise on Wolf Point. The big kahuna. Right smack dab in the middle of the island.
The new apartment tower is probably 57 stories though.
I love it that you are all so negative. Wow. It means great things are coming for Chicago.
I lived in San Francisco during the dot-com boom. What is going on in Chicago right now reminds me of that time. Tons of jobs. Construction. People moving here. Big thinking winning out.
The city is being transformed.
Now if only the energy would spread to some of the neighborhoods that haven’t been benefitting.
“What are you even talking about?”
Reality. Something you are clearly detached from as it relates to Wolf Point.
I do seem to have had a slightly out of date recollection, tho; it is apparently 60 floors. From the Developer:
https://www.hines.com/properties/salesforce-tower-chicago-chicago
Note that Salesforce is *still* only taking about 40% of the 60 floor building, not 100% of an 80 story one:
https://www.hines.com/news/third-phase-of-wolf-point-development-in-chicago-announced
And here are the siteplans, etc, filed with the latest modification to the PD, showing a 813′, 60 story, tower:
https://gisapps.cityofchicago.org/gisimages/zoning_pds/PD98.pdf
Note that the center point of the N-S length of Salesforce Tower (WPS) lies about even with the southern side of WPW (the completed apartment building) and thus WPS will extend for 75′ the view blockage of Riverbend.
(nb–still believe this is rather conservative, and that it’s more like 95′ south of the WPW *building* and the 75′ measures from the pool deck/podium.)
“I lived in San Francisco during the dot-com boom. What is going on in Chicago right now reminds me of that time. Tons of jobs. Construction. People moving here. Big thinking winning out. The city is being transformed.”
oh yay so another insanely wealth disparate tax you to death city with a bunch of clueless left wing ideology runnning rampant making life miserable for the lower middle, middle, and upper middle class (aka the majority of people that work)
but hey at least you’ll have cheap labor (thanks to sanctuary city policy) to water your garden for your million dollar house in bucktown while you eat out at your $50 a head brunch on the weekends
Chicago is the 11th wealthiest city IN THE WORLD.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/top-15-cities-globally-hold-24-trillion-wealth/
It has not grown at the same pace as Seattle / SF / LA but it has grown. Its #4 in the US in total wealth after NYC / SF / LA and ranks higher than Paris and Frankfurt.
The report that chart is based on shows Chicago as #8 in the world in population of high net worth individuals (ie really rich people). The # of HNWI grew 7% from 2016 to 2017. The growth rates among the top 10 cities was a low of 7% (NYC) and a high of 31% (HK). Cities like London (+10.1%) and SF (+10.6%) didn’t dramatically out grow Chicago. Chicago outgrew NYC!
Here is a link to the HNWI info:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/14/the-richest-cities-in-the-world.html
Regarding taxes – for families that make $150k / yr Chicago is #17 in tax burden among US cities with an 11.1% total tax burden rate (factors in state and local taxes including sales, RE, auto and income). For families that make $25k it is #6 – so we have a regressive tax regime in Chicago. It is not shocking to see more wealthy people move into the city while more poor leave. As you increase the earnings Chicago continues to get better regarding tax burden because of the flat state tax and the regressive nature of sales and RE taxes. I can link that report if you want. For reference Milwaukee is #8 for $150k+ families with a 12.5% tax burden. NYC topped the list at 18.1%. The average is 9.8%.
Man, Sabrina, I know the cematary is big, but you’re whisling to beat the band.
“I love it that you are all so negative. Wow. It means great things are coming for Chicago. ”
Chicago is not Baltimore. But it’s only a world class city in some areas and much of it is only for top income earning households.
Chicago is staring at the precipice. It has a lot of issues that are starting to affect it’s standing, including:
~wealth disparity
~population loss
~confiscatory tax rates (which will continue to increase)
~looming debt and pension crisis
~unaffordability
~grinding poverty on the west and south sides
~stagnant or low home appreciation
~disappearing middle class
It’s no secret that many people are looking at these problems and moving elsewhere.
Same goes for Illinois. Our farmland is great, but we only grow corn, soy and pumpkins. and lots of dirty hog farms. California, even with its problems, grows all varieties of crops all year round.
Other cities and states in the US have tried to address these same concerns, and most have failed miserably. CA cities like SF and LA are virtually unlivable for ordinary people with median incomes.
Gov Cuomo in New York is proud of his state progressive tax but even he admits that the wealthy pay most tax, and after a 2.3 BILLION with B dollar budget shortfall earlier this year, he said:
“Cuomo warned that the loss of revenue could not be made up by continuing to tax the wealthiest New Yorkers — the top 1 percent of whom already contribute 46 percent of all government revenue — at increasingly higher rates.
“I don’t believe [in] raising taxes on the rich. That would be the worst thing to do. You would just expand the shortfall,” he said. “God forbid if the rich leave.””
– https://news.yahoo.com/cuomo-announces-2-3-billion-230018445.html
HD – this discussion has been about Chicago and IL vs other cities / states. Most of the issues you highlight are present in ALL metro areas as wealthy migrate into cities and displace the poor.
And regarding CA farmland – doesn’t matter what you CAN grow if you don’t have the water to actually grow it. CA was in a 376 week drought until March of this year.
This has been discussed ad nauseam on the site – but Chicago offers one of the best bangs for the buck among top tier cities.
“This has been discussed ad nauseam on the site – but Chicago offers one of the best bangs for the buck among top tier cities.”
It sure does provide the best bang for the buck, if your household income is part of the 9.9%. But for everybody else, well, they’re looking at other states right now. That fact is undeniable and uncontroversial.
But Chicago’s issues are certainly more acute, and more dire, and everyone knows it.
hd, Chicago’s the cleanest dirty shirt in the pile. Whatcha gonna do if you sell? Where you gonna go — to Utah, like me? Costa Rica?
Wolf Richter riffed on housing affordability. His Californian readers said they planned to move inland to Reno, Vegas, Austin, wherever. His readers in those towns fired back telling would-be migrants to stay away and not ruin their nice towns with the failed leftist policies of California. It was funny. But I’d guess there’s some genuine resentment of newbies ditching sinking ships for as yet unspoiled terrain. I think this is the post:
https://wolfstreet.com/2019/07/12/changes-in-house-prices-rents-and-household-incomes-since-1960-in-the-us-by-region-and-major-metro/
“But I’d guess there’s some genuine resentment of newbies ditching sinking ships for as yet unspoiled terrain.”
Californians have been “ruining” Oregon for 20+ years now. They take their home equity and buy homes in cash and drive up the prices there.
They’ve also been going to Austin for years. Could be the reason Texas is turning purple and could turn blue.
Additionally, if you visit Nashville, you’ll see dozens of California license plates. It’s a little shocking.
“But Chicago’s issues are certainly more acute, and more dire, and everyone knows it.”
But they’re actually not. I don’t understand what you’re doing in this state homedelete. Why are you suffering so? It’s soooooo horrible here.
And I don’t understand why people root against the place they live. Why would you WANT it to suck? I don’t get it.
“Our farmland is great, but we only grow corn, soy and pumpkins”
As if soybeans and corn suck. Lol. The Chinese would give their left arm to have the state of Illinois.
“oh yay so another insanely wealth disparate tax you to death city with a bunch of clueless left wing ideology runnning rampant making life miserable for the lower middle, middle, and upper middle class (aka the majority of people that work)”
Well- the Chicagoland area is much larger than the Bay Area, for starters. There is land as far as the eye can see. There is empty land, including huge sites like the US Steel site, within the city limits.
Chicago is one of the few cities building at nearly every transit stop, and no one blocks it or argues about it. A 12-story building next to the El stop? Build it. Another 80-story apartment high rise? Sure. Density isn’t our problem, but then we love the high rise (although I know that the West Loop is trying to stop the 40+ towers in that neighborhood.)
We will never be the Bay Area which is restricted by government regulations and geography.
So don’t worry your head about us here in Chicago. You moved. Why do you care anyway? It’s nirvana where you live. Cheap, beautiful, great weather. Who could ask for more?
And yes, I would love for Chicago to boom for the next few years. It’s so exciting to be in a city which is attracting the best talent from around the country, and the world.
There’s so much energy. Ideas. Creativity. In everything. From the arts, to food, to music, to architecture, to transportation.
Isn’t it exciting that the Old Post Office is about to be occupied again after more than 20 years? There will be LIFE there every time you drive under it. Thousands of workers will be inside. And they’ll be eating nearby, using the water taxi, the train, the El, riding bikes.
It’s so invigorating.
McDonald’s reported this week that it is seeing a real impact from moving its HQ to the city versus Oak Brook. In the last year, since it moved, it has seen over 200,000 job applications. They said that’s significantly more than before the move.
Talent wants to be in the city, despite Sonies arguing that people can work from “anywhere” so location doesn’t matter. It DOES matter. And Chicago has a ton to offer talent from all over the country, including cheaper housing.
“hd, Chicago’s the cleanest dirty shirt in the pile. Whatcha gonna do if you sell? Where you gonna go — to Utah, like me?”
I would do well in Utah actually. My voting patterns would be in the majority – my vote would actually be for a winner – although Mitt as a never-trumper has become quite the RINO lately.
Just the other day I noticed a lot of medical companies I have been doing business with are based in utah. I casually googled the locations of these offices. There are located in valleys surrounded by mountains surrounded by some of the most beautiful trails and hiking. It blew my mind actually that people finish the work day in the office and then go hiking in the mountains. And they vote republican. and the trails are maintained by…wait for it…the county!!! Have you tried any of Cook County trails? Like the three ravines trail down in Palos? Or burrito hill? It’s a joke compared to the stuff in Utah. No wonder that area is so booming!
Sabrina, why am i still here? Not for much longer!
Sabrina, sure the post office is booming. That’s awesome. Now let’s talk about Buffalo Grove or Harvey. Are they booming too? How are housing prices in Riverdale, or Crystal Lake, or Monee? Oh wait, you mean there are empty strip malls and empty houses and foreclosures and high property taxes and bad morale among all residents. Maybe they should just all move downtown!
“Sabrina, why am i still here? Not for much longer!”
It’s hard to compete in a global city. I get it. No harm in admitting you can’t do it, hd, and leaving for greener pastures. I left the Bay Area because it was just not worth it compared to Chicago. And I’m sure many leave Chicago for Nashville, Birmingham, or, like Sonies, Reno, or other cities for the same reason.
No shame in moving down to a second tier city.
People should consider St Louis or Grand Rapids, though. Lots of opportunities in both and affordable, gorgeous real estate.
“Now let’s talk about Buffalo Grove or Harvey. Are they booming too? How are housing prices in Riverdale, or Crystal Lake, or Monee?”
The strip malls aren’t empty HD. The unemployment rate for Illinois is around 4% now. The outer areas of Chicago are booming. Thousands of new jobs as the distribution centers bulk up. Heck, there’s thousands of jobs going into that online consignment business that’s out in the burbs.
Harvey? I’m surprised you didn’t mention DeKalb.
Heck, unemployment is down big even in Rockford. More to do there but the business corridor nearby is thriving.
If you aren’t booming in this economy, then something is wrong. They just put through the biggest corporate tax cuts in US history. It was a HUGE stimulus to the economy.
Are some areas being left behind? Sure. The best paying jobs are mostly knowledge-based now. If you don’t have a college degree or specialized training like tool-and-die, then it’s tough. But the trucking industry is looking for 800,000 drivers. The train industry is giving out bonuses to new hires and still can’t find them (too much drug use, I’m afraid.)
Buffalo Grove? That’s always been doing pretty well.
And are you talking about the economic conditions in Chicagoland or housing? I can’t tell. They are two different things. Suburban housing is suffering even in Glencoe. Why? Because the Millennials don’t want to live out there. They want an urban life in the beautiful and booming city of Chicago. They want to walk to Wrigley Field or the Art Institute. They don’t want to take the train from Glencoe every day to get to work.
The baby boomers are trying to sell to retire to Florida or Arizona. Millennials don’t want to buy. Housing prices are suffering.
Nothing “bad” about it. Oh- and those really big McMansions that the Baby Boomers built are “out” too. Other generations don’t want 6 bathrooms and big back yards.
I moved to Reno because I can do my Chicago job here… its literally a no brainer for me. And yes HD the hiking out here is amazing as well… I have a fantastic trail just off my house about 3 doors down. I start early but my day ends early and Mt Rose is only about 35 minutes away, so I could literally snowboard after work every day in the winter for 2 hours if I felt like it. No traffic no taxes, yeah its a small town and real estate here is appreciating like crazy but there’s a reason for it. Its fantastic.
Im still keep an eye on Chicago real estate because the architecture is interesting as is the provincial political dynamics and who knkows maybe one day when I’m loaded from not paying so much in taxes, I’ll buy a summer place in Chicago… lol It is still a fantastic city to visit. And of course the chatterati
“Isn’t it exciting that the Old Post Office is about to be occupied again after more than 20 years?”
———————
If Chicago doesn’t have severe problems, Sabrina, then why was the old post office empty for 20 years?
I can hear you now: “Sigh, if only they’d named the area ‘Bucktown-sur-la-rue.'”
The irony behind the Old Post Office renovation is that it sat vacant and dilapidated for so long, and then it had a smoldering fire going on in there too. Kind of like Chicago/IL politics.
And guess what was the impetus to renovate? More taxes!!! The Canal/Congress TIF!
You can’t make this stuff up.
“I casually googled the locations of these offices. There are located in valleys surrounded by mountains surrounded by some of the most beautiful trails and hiking. It blew my mind actually that people finish the work day in the office and then go hiking in the mountains. And they vote republican.”
Uh, no. Most SLC professionals hitting the trail after a day in the office aren’t voting Republican.
“Uh, no. Most SLC professionals hitting the trail after a day in the office aren’t voting Republican.”
As for SLC itself it is solidly blue like most major metro areas – but the suburbs are deep deep red. Davis county just to the north is really red, and that’s where I was specifically thinking of the Deuel Creek trail, because of a company I recently did business with in Centerville. It’s all republicans there and they’re all maintaining trails. You’d either have to be an idiot or a troll to think Republicans aren’t using those trials too.
The suburbs of SLC? Lol. If I recall that’s more of an Ogden burb. SLC burbs (if we must call them burbs; there isn’t quite the urban/burb difference as one would see in even a mid-sized city) are more like Murray or Sandy, or burb-sized hoods like Sugar House, no?
Centerville to downtown SLC is 14 miles
Centerville to Ogden is 26 miles
Sandy to downtown SLC is 17 miles
Not sure how to interpret the data.
HD – are you LDS? Because if you’re not, you will always be an outsider in those suburbs (and even in the office, honestly).
I’ve been kind of chuckling at this thread overall. I think, unlike some, that Chicago itself is doing OK, as is the region albeit unevenly spread (go look at all the new warehouse construction on the fringes), but a lot of the agricultural and former industrial small cities are not. Decatur for example is on a downward spiral (cousin is cop there) with a lot of problems due to vanishing jobs and environmental pollution.
I have a few friends who’ve moved, but none of them were natives, so less tied to the area, partially due to hyper competitive job market (I seem to have a lot of friends with very particular skill sets that have limited marketability). A lot of childhood friends went elsewhere after college, but more to be somewhere different than anything here pushing them. My transplant friends are here because some jobs don’t exist elsewhere (Milwaukee for instance, in some creative fields) or they like it here.
“a world class city in some areas and much of it is only for top income earning households”
Uh, which ones are world class everywhere for a population of over 1,000,000, and for everyone from the poorest, thru the middle, to the top??
Serious question.
The 10 undisputed “global” cities are:
NYC
London
Hong Kong
Beijing
Singapore
Shanghai
Sydney
Dubai
Paris
Tokyo
Which of those are great everywhere and for LMC households??
The next tier (which includes Chicago) is:
Bangkok
Brussels
Buenos Aires
Chicago
Frankfurt
Guangzhou
Istanbul
Jakarta
Kuala Lumpur
Los Angeles
Madrid
Melbourne
Mexico City
Miami
Milan
Moscow
Mumbai
São Paulo
Seoul
Taipei
Toronto
Warsaw
Zürich
Which of those is nice almost everywhere, and for a LMC/working class person/family–especially when comparing housing costs??
“Not sure how to interpret the data.”
Boots on the ground my good man, put boots on the ground. I think I’ve been there maybe a dozen times (mostly for 3 or 4 night stays, but a couple of couch surfing stays of more than a week). I’ve stayed up in PC a few times and a few times in Murray, but the other half of the stays were in Sandy. Other than I think one time heading up to Idaho, I’ve never had any reason to go north of what’s considered downtown SLC.
” why was the old post office empty for 20 years?”
USPS sat on it for a decade (they set a minimum bid of $500k when they sold it), then an english goofball held it for 7 more, trying to find money partners to make something happen. He sold to the folks actually doing the project now.
So, while it was empty for 20 years, “the market” was really only relevant for about 7 of it.
What I was told from someone involved with the goofball’s (apt description btw) project had a modus operandi of buying properties, getting plan approval for something wacky and then flipping it. But he was stymied on a sale by the city – he had to do that project he proposed (or the eventual buyer would). Then he died which threw another goof into the curve.
Also, it wasn’t entirely out of postal use for the first few years: they were using the truck loading docks on Harrison because the new building couldn’t accommodate the weight of some heavier trucks (I don’t know who’s goof that was or if there was resolution on that – a switch to lighter trucks or reinforcement or move of distribution or what…).
“HD – are you LDS? Because if you’re not, you will always be an outsider in those suburbs (and even in the office, honestly).”
No but considering that I feel like an outsider in my own state now, so at least we’d have the same political mind. But in all seriousness, Utah is not a serious consideration for me, it’s too far, I have no connections and it seems like a great place to visit.
But I was just commenting on the proximity to literally amazing outdoor things. The world class trailheads are like right there, minutes from home. I recently tried to meet a buddy in the SW suburbs to bike on a sunny tuesday in the early afternoon and I’m kidding it took me nearly 2.5 hours to make it 30 miles on 90/355/290/294/55 (yeah, 5 highways to get there). There was traffic, an accident, construction. I got off the highway and took side streets all the way down there because it could at least go mph with the occasional stop light vs. less than 10 mph. All to bike the infamous ‘three ravines’, which is the #2 rated trail in IL, but the #589 rated in the country. It’s difficult to even leave my community these days because it takes forever to get anywhere including just across town.
https://www.mtbproject.com/trail/7008339/three-ravines
HD, I am selling my motorcycle for that very reason. I really don’t have time to ride for fun anymore due to kids and no longer commute into the loop daily. I thought I’d keep it so I could ride on weekends or days when I could play hooky from work in summer. However, it takes so freaking long to get anywhere away from the city / traffic that I’d waste at least an hour or more before I even get to good riding roads.
It took me almost 45 minutes to 9 miles from Oak Park to the loop the other day at like 11am!
I used to try to go to Joilet to race my RC car and it would take me almost 2 hours or more some days from the loop even if I left work at like 3:30.
I envy folks in other cities where they have much easier access to outdoors activities…
I was thinking of getting in mountain biking but figured it would take so long to get to good riding trails I wouldn’t’ have the time…
Nobody lives in Chicago anymore because there’s too much traffic, eh?
h/t Yogi Berra
anon(tfo) “USPS sat on it for a decade (they set a minimum bid of $500k when they sold it), then an english goofball held it for 7 more, trying to find money partners to make something happen. He sold to the folks actually doing the project now.
So, while it was empty for 20 years, “the market” was really only relevant for about 7 of it.”
================
Wrong. If Chicago was as hot as Sabrina then said English goofball could have easily and QUICKLY found money partners. Seven years fallow speaks to a lack of investment opportunity that made sense.
Ditto $500k “minimum bid” for USPS. — I could put that on two credit cards with room to spare. Lots more people could do it much more easily than I could.
And it still took 7 years to get some action.
Sorry kiddies, but 20 years is 20 years, and Sabrina went radio silent when I challenged “her” on it.
Re Post Office “… the goofball… had a modus operandi of buying properties, getting plan approval for something wacky and then flipping it. Then he died which threw another goof into the curve.”
Iirc Bill Davies was a speculator not a developer whose m.o. to buy low (he won the bidding at $40 mil at the ’09 auction but defaulted instead of closing 60 days later & then closed 10 days later @ a renegotiated price of $17 mil) and just sit on deteriorating properties until aggravated municipalities finally bought him out at a huge profit. Chicago dodged a bullet when his sale to 601 W closed (the contract to sell may well have been executed by a corpse).
“Chicago is one of the few cities building at nearly every transit stop, and no one blocks it or argues about it.”
Actually the city is working overtime to kill new development. The Aldermen with their affordable housing requirements have totally destroyed many developments. Look at that vacant land in Pilsen just south of the tracks. And then I keep hearing about Aldermen and their constituents concerned about density (but I thought they were worried about affordable housing).
johnc posted “…said English goofball could have easily and QUICKLY found money partners. Seven years fallow speaks to a lack of investment opportunity that made sense….”
You completely discount ownership motivation (ie greed) imo. Iirc current owner 601 W paid $130 million in 2016 to buy from Davies who paid $17 mil in 2009. There was no shortage of bidders in 2009 which is why bidding concluded at $40 million. Neither was there was ever a shortage of qualified prospective money partners – one was Sterling Bay who contracted in 2014 to jv with Davies but according to Sterling Bay Davies was an eternal re-negotiator and Sterling Bay finally walked away in late 2014 after unsuccessfully trying to buy it from Davies
“The Aldermen with their affordable housing requirements have totally destroyed many developments.”
Aldermen aren’t “the city.” And yes, every development has to pass Aldermanic approval.
Aldermen are blocking the building of new luxury developments in neighborhoods that otherwise were never luxury, like Logan Square. It’s gentrifying quickly and clearly has growing pains. Ever try and get an apartment there? There are few for middle class people. This is a big challenge for the city (and all cities.)
I’m sure many on this blog would be shocked by the rents in Logan Square. Heck, check out the rents in Hyde Park. No deals there either.
“Chicago dodged a bullet when his sale to 601 W closed”
He died the day after that deal was signed, right?
Rahm was going to do eminent domain on the property, was he not?
“Sorry kiddies, but 20 years is 20 years, and Sabrina went radio silent when I challenged “her” on it.”
It sat empty for 20 years and, wait a minute, we had the worst economic crisis in the United States in 75 years during those 20 years. Was ANYTHING happening while that was going on? Chicago lost 50,000 jobs.
Lol.
Come on johnc. Give me a break.
Empty is empty. It’s a massive building and a historic landmark. NO ONE wanted to take that on.
But since we’re booming, yeah, they’re going to get it rented out. Word is that CBOE may move its headquarters from LaSalle into the Post Office (they wouldn’t comment on the rumors that it’s happening.) CBOE owns their current building. Presumably they either rent that out or sell it to move to the new digs.
They are much smaller now and don’t need as much space.
And, once again, if you think I’m a man then you’re really bad at this Internet thing. “Voice” is pretty clear on the Internet. It’s pretty obvious who are the female posters on this site.
But I know most men can’t believe that a woman would run a successful blog for over a decade. Reality is hard, for some.
“But I was just commenting on the proximity to literally amazing outdoor things. The world class trailheads are like right there, minutes from home.”
Move to Madison, HD. It has the most bike trails of any city in the Midwest and lovely state parks. Every time I go there, there are bike riders all over.
And it’s hilly and beautiful.
“If Chicago doesn’t have severe problems, Sabrina, then why was the old post office empty for 20 years?”
Because it was huge and in a crappy location for large parts of the 20 years but now that we’ve re-discovered the river and people actually commute on it (which, by the way, Chicago Water Taxi is building another boat because there’s too much demand and they’ll be able to add stops at the Riverline and other developments and maybe even the post office) it has become popular and hip.
“Aldermen aren’t “the city.””
You didn’t say anything about “the city”. You said “no one blocks it or argues about it”. Aldermen aren’t “no one”. The effect is the same. It gets blocked.
Rising home prices should not be a challenge for any city. It translates into a higher tax base = more revenue potential. It’s the only way Chicago can work its way out of its problems.
“$500k “minimum bid” for USPS. — I could put that on two credit cards with room to spare.”
Wow, high roller!!
Who are these banks giving you $250k+ credit limits? I’d like to be prepared to short them hard at the first sign of market weakness.
“Move to Madison, HD.”
Other than the gd hippies, I’d second that for HD. Grand Rapids would be much more his political speed.
“Rising home prices should not be a challenge for any city. It translates into a higher tax base = more revenue potential”
That’s not quite how it works in IL, bc of the system and PTELL.
Lets say that Chicago needs $1b per year from property taxes. They will get that $1b assessed whether the Aggregate EAV is $100b, or $1b. Yes, obviously, at the low end of AgEAV (ie, huge tax rates), there would be a mass exodus, as everyone walks away from properties with essentially negative values, but that’s how it works. But as AgEAV goes up, the applicable rate (for the Chicago portion of the tax bill) generally goes down–of course, rising values allow for increases to the levy without too much squawking until there is a downturn, and the levy remains the same.
Chicago, being a home rule city, isn’t subject to PTELL. But CPS is. So the CPS levy can only go up by as much as the increase in EAV (slight oversimplification), or with legislative action. But even with that, the CPS $4b levy will get billed in full even if Aggregate EAV dropped from $100b to $75b.
“But I was just commenting on the proximity to literally amazing outdoor things”
HD: Woke up this morning, and today’s Facebook “Memory” was a pic from 9 years ago today, taken near the top of Deer Valley (lift ride up), with Jordanelle Reservoir in the distance. Pretty amazing. That was a weekend trip from Chicago. We stayed at the Stein Eriksen, mainly because it was one of the only places with an outdoor pool (would never stay there in the winter, partly because DV is still discriminatory, but also because it’s way too expensive). If you keep your eyes open, I bet you could find a deal there in late August, especially if you can do a mid-week stay. You wouldn’t need to rent a car – you can Uber or taxi to and from the airport and PC. Might be a nice end of summer surprise for the whole fam, or for Mrs. HD if you can deposit kids with grandparents.
“But I know most men can’t believe that a woman would run a successful blog for over a decade. Reality is hard, for some.”
said nobody ever… come on get outta here with that crap
and I don’t think HD would like Madison very much… thats about as liberal as you can get here in the midwest, outside of the major cities
and traffic sucks there too
Gary Lucido on August 1st, 2019 at 8:33 pm
“Actually the city is working overtime to kill new development. The Aldermen with their affordable housing requirements have totally destroyed many developments. Look at that vacant land in Pilsen just south of the tracks. And then I keep hearing about Aldermen and their constituents concerned about density (but I thought they were worried about affordable housing).”
My observation has been that those developments are getting destroyed because the most vocal minority (of older-white homeowners) are working to kill development and challenge responsible spot-upzoning in the courts, effectively delaying until the developer walks away. The Chicago community is essentially shooting itself in the foot when it comes to long term sustainability and increasing its tax revenue. It’s an ongoing issue in the 45th ward where NIMBYs and our Alderman puppet are resistant to any sort of new development and affordable housing and then kill a senior-home development at Six Corners because…. it’s not affordable enough!
I’ve come to the conclusion that local control just isn’t working and can’t continue this way. The city can’t grow with this lingering anti-density, affordable housing fearing sentiment. Chicago, on average, is an affordable city but ultimately lacks affordable options in the most job-rich and transit-rich areas, which is not sustainable in the long term. There are no penalties for deconverting perfectly good 2-3 flats to SFHs and no incentives, or policies in place, that allow people to add affordable units to their existing properties. I don’t want to completely strip away a community’s right to oppose larger development but I wish there was a more blanket city-wide policy that would overrule/prevent the often irrational neighborhood exclusionary tactics for the benefit of the city as whole.
““Move to Madison, HD.”
Other than the gd hippies, I’d second that for HD. Grand Rapids would be much more his political speed.”
I have a family member that lives in Madison and he said that public records show his typical suburban neighborhood voted for HRC over Trump at 4:1 ratio. I couldn’t imagine having to deal with neighbors like that.
“HD: Woke up this morning, and today’s Facebook “Memory” was a pic from 9 years ago today, taken near the top of Deer Valley (lift ride up), with Jordanelle Reservoir in the distance. Pretty amazing. That was a weekend trip from Chicago. We stayed at the Stein Eriksen, mainly because it was one of the only places with an outdoor pool (would never stay there in the winter, partly because DV is still discriminatory, but also because it’s way too expensive). If you keep your eyes open, I bet you could find a deal there in late August, especially if you can do a mid-week stay. You wouldn’t need to rent a car – you can Uber or taxi to and from the airport and PC. Might be a nice end of summer surprise for the whole fam, or for Mrs. HD if you can deposit kids with grandparents.”
I may start looking into this. I know a guy in the neighborhood who says he goes to one of the smaller more local ski resorts outside of SLC every spring break. He said the crowds are manageable, the flights are cheap and he avoids the DV and Sundance athmosphere. It’s on my list of things to do but right now I got a little kid who still gets car sick when we try to drive anywhere and the grandparents all live hours in opposite directions of Utah.
“The city can’t grow with this lingering anti-density, affordable housing fearing sentiment.”
The funny thing about that complaint is that the opposite is happening in Logan and along the 606.
As to the fiefdom issue, one thing that could work is to take designated areas out of local control–XXX feet from el stops, etc.–as they are matters of regional or citywide import. The aldermen would freak, but they all need to freak.
“The city can’t grow with this lingering anti-density, affordable housing fearing sentiment. Chicago, on average, is an affordable city but ultimately lacks affordable options in the most job-rich and transit-rich areas, which is not sustainable in the long term. ”
‘Affordable housing’ contributes to the unaffordability for everyone else. Those tax breaks provided for affordable housing units aren’t free – they’re passed on to every other tax paying resident who makes up the difference. So your proposal really should be called “affordable housing for some; more unaffordable for everyone else.”
“They will get that $1b assessed whether the Aggregate EAV is $100b, or $1b.”
Yeah, I know that but my assumption is that the city needs $1.1 B next year and $1.2 B the year after that, etc… It’s easier to grow the tax revenue by 10% (for example) each year if the aggregate assessed value also grows by 10% each year.
“The city can’t grow with this lingering anti-density,”
Why focus on housing density when there are literally suburban sized swaths of neighborhoods on the south and west sides that are underpopulated?
Englewood had 98k people in 1960 and 26k today.
Lawndale had 102k people in 1940 and 35k today.
Even Austin had 132k people in the 40’s and it has less than 100k people today.
There’s no need to build up when there are so many places to build out with existing infrastructure.
There is plenty of transportation in these neighborhoods and in the past these neighborhoods supported so many people. And there is always the option to add more buses. And many were built when cars were around so there is good and ample street parking and they have garages.
There’s really no need to cram high rises down unwilling resident’s throats when there are so many other options…
The only thing holding back this growth is CPS. It’s terrible and anyone of means – of all ethnicity – sends their children to the magnets or private.
In fact, a new private high school (well, relocating) is opening up in Roscoe Village next August just blocks from Lane Tech.
“And then I keep hearing about Aldermen and their constituents concerned about density (but I thought they were worried about affordable housing).”
——————
Gary, Gary, Gary, H-O-W many times do you have to be reminded of the first rule in sales AND politics? SELL THE SIZZLE, NOT THE STEAK!!!!
“It sat empty for 20 years and, wait a minute, we had the worst economic crisis in the United States in 75 years during those 20 years. Was ANYTHING happening while that was going on? Chicago lost 50,000 jobs.
Lol.
Come on johnc. Give me a break.”
—————–
Okay Sabrina, I confess I’m beginning to think that JoeZ is out of the picture. Why? Because you’re really bad at math, and that’s a girl thing. Break this down: 2019 – 20 = 1998. 1998 through 2005 = hellyeah boom times in US economy except for Clinton’s mind recession in 2000-2001 when dotcom bubble broke. Old Post Office empty with no one, during boom times in country, taking it on.
Sorry “babe,” but you ran out of whistle before you ran out of graveyard.
“Who are these banks giving you $250k+ credit limits? I’d like to be prepared to short them hard at the first sign of market weakness.”
——————
Actually, I could do it on one, but I wouldn’t bother my banker for such a modest increase.
BTW — you can’t short it; private institution.
” Chicago, on average, is an affordable city but ultimately lacks affordable options in the most job-rich and transit-rich areas, which is not sustainable in the long term. There are no penalties for deconverting perfectly good 2-3 flats to SFHs and no incentives, or policies in place, that allow people to add affordable units to their existing properties. ”
——————-
Auxiliary dwelling units should be explored, granted. Cheap density increase without changing neighborhood character that much. You will find, however, that transit costs and housing costs are a function of each other. Hence the old real estate broker’s adage “drive ’til you qualify.”
Chicago need to INTELLIGENTLY invest in mass transit (extension of Red Line beyond 95th should come after Metra integration). Why individuals should bear the burden of providing public goods is beyond me. Your “no-penalties” remark makes no sense. Why SHOULD individual owners – be forces/have a responsibility – to house other people? Social good? Put the expense in social taxes. Don’t have the money? Gee, Mr. Politician, looks like you have to make a decision.
“There’s no need to build up when there are so many places to build out with existing infrastructure.
. . .
The only thing holding back this growth is CPS.
—-
True in part (CPS is terrible). Problem is that you are asking whites to live in majority black neighborhoods, and Chicagoans don’t “do” that.
“Problem is that you are asking whites to live in majority black neighborhoods, and Chicagoans don’t “do” that.”
Heck EGP had 70,000 residents in 1950 and 20,000 today. There’s tremendous room to build on vacant lots and abandoned housing just west of Western Ave. Close to downtown, Highway and Public trans. it’s a dream come true. Except that families with kids don’t want to live in a war zone with bad schools. EGP has a murder rate of 111 per 100,000 people. That got to fix that too I guess. Fix those problems and EGP – with it’s great location and infrastructure – could become the most black/white integrated neighborhood in Chicago.
“I could do it on one, but I wouldn’t bother my banker for such a modest increase.”
What’s that doublespeak mean? That you have a limit under $500k, but “could” have it increased?
Suppose your girl/boy/they friend is from Canada, too, so we probably haven’t met her/him/they.
“Even Austin had 132k people in the 40’s and it has less than 100k people today.”
Austin had more than 135k in the *80s*.
I could easily put $500k on credit cards. Except that it would take between 500 and 1000 Capital One and First Premier cards with limits of $500 and $1,000. and probably a few social security numbers other than my own.
“Except that families with kids don’t want to live in a war zone with bad schools.”
It won’t be families with kids who live in EGP. It will be singles and DINKS who first move there to restore the homes. That’s how it always works. Families didn’t come to Wicker Park, for instance, until 20 years after the first renovators moved in. And now the renovators have left because they can’t stand all the strollers and kid friendly restaurants. Lol.
They will move onto other neighborhoods now. EGP, Bronzeville, McKinley Park etc.
“Fix those problems and EGP – with it’s great location and infrastructure – could become the most black/white integrated neighborhood in Chicago.”
Hyde Park/Kenwood is the most integrated neighborhood.
It would be fantastic if EGP could take its crown.
“Because you’re really bad at math, and that’s a girl thing.”
Actually, it’s not. But keep going with your sexist statements.
And 1998-2005 wasn’t a “hellyeah boom times in the US economy” as there was a recession from 2000-2001 and the stock market was actually down for 3 years straight during that time. Not to mention 9/11 and the Fed doing an emergency interest rate cut and the country going to war.
But yeah- we had the housing boom as interest rates kept falling and everyone was flipping houses.
There were plenty of condos being built all over Chicago during that time but commercial wasn’t nearly as hot (see the recession.) There wasn’t yet a Chicago tech boom and social media didn’t exist. There was no need to convert the Post Office into commercial space. They were going to put a hotel and condos in there during that time but the building was so big it wasn’t manageable (plus you couldn’t open the windows in that location which simply wasn’t going to work for condos).
And then the Great Recession hit and, so, it was doomed to sit empty for several more years during those hard times.
Lots of big commercial spaces in Chicago had a hard time during this period including the Willis Tower (was seen as too “old” and didn’t have high speed internet connections) and many tenants left (also due to fears over 9/11 which literally had people who worked in there quitting their jobs.)
The cities are really coming into their own now as jobs shift to urban cores. People don’t want to work at home like sonies. They want to work in exciting, vibrant cities with food halls, food trucks, museums, music and outdoor beauty.
This makes the Old Post Office perfectly situated for this era- not to mention its location near one of the largest train terminals in the country.
“The only thing holding back this growth is CPS. It’s terrible and anyone of means – of all ethnicity – sends their children to the magnets or private.”
Wait a minute. The magnets ARE CPS. Lol.
Chicago has several of the best high schools in the country. If you can get into one of them. Far superior to any of the private high schools.
Grand Rapids isn’t as beautiful as Madison, in my opinion. And the bike culture isn’t as big.
But it does have a nice downtown and some good museums. Grand Rapids is the home of Gerald Ford and is still Republican but as younger people move in it’s changing like lots of America’s cities.
“The effect is the same. It gets blocked.”
Yes. Thank goodness the Alderman can block some of the idiotic development projects. It cuts both ways though. They can also green light the crappy ones too.
But Lightfoot is getting rid of this privilege, isn’t she?
Chicago has several of the best high schools in the country. If you can get into one of them. Far superior to any of the private high schools.
And if you aren’t connected or lucky, you’re SOL
“‘Affordable housing’ contributes to the unaffordability for everyone else.”
Keep an eye on the building cost for affordable housing projects. The last several I have seen were tagged with construction costs (ie, excluding the cost of land) that exceeded the fair market resale value for similar sized units by at least 25%, and in some cases 50%.
It is 100% bananas that it seems to be impossible to build affordable housing for the same or slightly lower psf construction costs, and–presuming that they are built to be “affordable” meaningfully lower per unit costs, because each unit is (say) 20% smaller than a typical market rate unit.
ALSO: I want to put out there that I think that developers *absolutely* should be allowed to use “poor doors”. Dedicate the lowest 5 floors to affordable units, with a different floorplan, and no access to the $3psf amenities. Developer avoids having less desirable low floor apartments, affordable tenants get the desirable location, no one is free riding on the pool and coffee vending machine. Really seems like a win-win-win, but for some reason (ok, I *do* understand the reasons, but vehemently disagree) housing advocates hate the poor door.
“if you aren’t connected or lucky”
Um, no, it’s mainly about having smart/motivated kids, and not being a “Payton or Northside are the only acceptable schools”.
“The cities are really coming into their own now as jobs shift to urban cores. People don’t want to work at home like sonies. They want to work in exciting, vibrant cities with food halls, food trucks, museums, music and outdoor beauty.”
I don’t work from home (office is downtown, which by the way is also beautiful in places and they have tons of activities just like Chicago parks here) but either way, after you’ve eaten the same aioli laced deep fried crap from every food truck and food hall, its not really worth the hassle of getting downtown and working your way to your job like a freakin ant. Who has time to visit museums or see music during the work week? I would go to millennium park once a week for music but thats about it.
Commuting on public transit is a hassle and totally sucks. I just can’t fathom how people spend over 2 hours a day commuting to and from WORK just to go work some crap ass $20 an hour job… for fucks sakes life is way too short for that
I love how this thread has brought out so much discussion.
Sonies: this board seems to have some MUC or much better (some guy is a dr making 600k? with a Porsche) but there are many reasons people go to work for a crp as $20/h job, like having no choice and trying to support a family.
not everyone is a six figure earner with choices. Our IT guys ride those 2 hour commutes and I respect the heck out of them.
“some guy is a dr making 600k? with a Porsche”
Yeah, those f’ing guys with $100k sports cars, amirite Sonies?
took it in for a trade in valuation the other day… they offered me $38k… lmao
think I’m gonna keep it for life if its gonna be like that
but yeah I’m not an idiot, I would never buy one new or even close to new… one i bought was 6 years old at the time and had depreciated 50%! already
“Commuting on public transit is a hassle and totally sucks. I just can’t fathom how people spend over 2 hours a day commuting to and from WORK just to go work some crap ass $20 an hour job… for fucks sakes life is way too short for that”
They don’t.
That’s why the city is booming. People want to live near their job. 2 hour commutes are so 2005.
“And if you aren’t connected or lucky, you’re SOL”
Not really.
Lane Tech is a good high school. 5,000 kids are apparently “connected or lucky.”
I knew someone who graduated from Lake View High School 20 years ago and he has a fine job and lives in Southport. He turned out okay and that was before the big push on the schools.
I also know people who’ve sent their kids to Lincoln Park High and they’ve turned out fine too.
The old view of Chicago public schools is just that. Old.
Kenwood Academy is another good Chicago public high school. I know there are others around the city.
Are they all great?
No.
But this isn’t 1995 anymore. The “quality” of the schools wasn’t an issue in the last mayoral campaign.
“It is 100% bananas that it seems to be impossible to build affordable housing for the same or slightly lower psf construction costs, and–presuming that they are built to be “affordable” meaningfully lower per unit costs, because each unit is (say) 20% smaller than a typical market rate unit.”
Good observations but I don’t think a 20% discount is going to qualify as “affordable”. I suspect they need it to be like 50% cheaper. From Depaul IHS the Tribune says “The report defines an affordable rental unit as one that would cost about $940 a month, or about 30 percent of the monthly earnings of a low-income household that makes $37,641 a year or less.”
I think the government is basically powerless to fight the laws of economics. They can make some marginal improvements around the edges but that’s it. And if you solve one problem you just create another. In the end subsidized housing just ends up subsidizing low wage industries by giving them access to cheap labor. Better to have low wage earners move away and drive up wages.
“2 hour commutes are so 2005.”
haha oh they still exist… especially since living in the city is more expensive than ever
In fact, a new private high school (well, relocating) is opening up in Roscoe Village next August just blocks from Lane Tech.
Is that the former Gordon Tech aka DePaul College Prep? Heard that they are taking over the space from DeVry. Is that correct?
As I understand a lot of subsidized affordable (or plain old low income) housing is built to very rugged specifications (lets say, for example cast iron vs pvc waste pipe) which costs more than standard construction. Private affordable developers can build to other specs, obviously, when there is no subsidy.
” don’t think a 20% discount is going to qualify as “affordable”. I suspect they need it to be like 50% cheaper.”
Well, yes. But there are two steps in any “affordable housing” project:
1. Acquisition (purchase, rehab, ground-up)
2. On-going operation.
Part 2 will almost always involve some degree of subsidy; the question is how much.
Part 1 has a huge influence on how much part 2 costs.
One thing I saw somewhat recently on this was here:
https://chicago.curbed.com/2019/5/24/18636937/modular-affordable-housing-design-skender-sterling-bay
wherein there is the claim that a $350k/unit cost for a 3-flat was 20% less than “regular” construction, implying that market-rate construction costs in Chicago are something like $225 psf. Which is horseshit–a non-luxury three-unit condo building doesn’t cost $1.2m to build, on top of the $600k for the dirt, plus carrying costs; construction-only costs
(again, for non-lux) for the developer (ie, not retail) is ~40% less than that.
There is no real reason that you cannot construct smaller rental-grade “affordable” housing in Chicago for ~$100-125 psf (assuming waiving of fees, etc, and ignoring carry costs, etc) or about $150k per unit for *bigger* units, and with a typical mix of sizes, more like $100k per unit. Hell, Related spent less than $175k per unit for acquisition and rehab of 3000+ units of affordable housing (the Baskin portfolio).
Gotts provide zoning relief, in order to put the 6 smaller units where 3 big units might have been, or 35 instead of 20 on a larger parcel, but that’s really it (apart from making the units “affordable” sized).
How that works with the poor door is you have a building that has, say, 10 units per floor on the market rate floors–say 15000 sf dedicated to the units. On the affordable floors, you squeeze in 15-18 smaller units, times say 6 floors, you have 100 units. Maybe make the ceiling heights 8 feet vs 9.5. Then, for zoning purposes, you still allow the developer the same number of units and floors as they could have built w/o the affordable units. Voila–on-site affordable housing, that is exactly as separated from the market housing as the office space and condos are in the Hancock. That’s something you can get developers to buy into.
“Commuting on public transit is a hassle and totally sucks. I just can’t fathom how people spend over 2 hours a day commuting to and from WORK”
—————————-
I spend an hour a day each way from door to door in my commute on public transportation. That’s 2 hours a day. I get to read the newspaper or a magazine. Can’t do that in a car.
“Kenwood Academy is another good Chicago public high school. I know there are others around the city.
Are they all great?
No.
But this isn’t 1995 anymore. The “quality” of the schools wasn’t an issue in the last mayoral campaign.”
You were talking about Great Schools, now its down to good. As competitive as ‘rents are today, they’re going for great not good and will make decisions accordingly
“Related spent less than $175k per unit for acquisition and rehab of 3000+ units of affordable housing (the Baskin portfolio).”
You make good points but there are a couple of flaws in the example. First, half of this particular acquisition was outside Chicago. And within Chicago the properties were in low income neighborhoods where the property values are cheaper.
Sure, Chicago could build affordable housing on land in low income neighborhoods or on city owned land but that’s not what they are shooting for. They want developers to build affordable housing on prime real estate. And that’s part of the problem.
“haha oh they still exist… (2 hour commutes) especially since living in the city is more expensive than ever”
Basically most commutes on public trans from outside the city into the city takes an hour or more door to door. The express trains shave a few minutes.
Still beats the 90 minute drive from the millenium park parking garage, down randolph street, to 90, spend ten minutes just to get on the on ramp, so you can do stop and go traffic for 80 more minutes.
“As competitive as ‘rents are today, they’re going for great not good and will make decisions accordingly”
But gosh JohnnyU, that’s just it. THEY AREN’T.
Young families are staying in the city in droves even though there is no guarantee their kids can or will get into one of the four top magnets or the other good schools like Lane Tech.
You do know that most suburban high schools are only so-so, right? That’s the thing. The city schools are as good and, in some cases, much better, than those in the suburbs.
There’s no doubt that the top 4 magnet high school are among the best in the country. Some would even say top 5 in the country.
But not every kid needs that kind of high school with those academic pressures. Nor could they perform there.
Not everyone’s child is in the top 5% in academics. Even if you go to a public high school in the suburbs.
We’ve discussed this many times on this site. Most kids will NOT be trying to get into Harvard. Sorry. University of Missouri. Michigan State. Wisconsin. Alabama. Nebraska and the like is the goal. These are great schools where you get a great education.
Plenty of high schools in Chicago sends kinds to all of these schools. Kenwood Academy, for instance.
If young families were staying in the city in droves, then why is CPS enrollment plummeting in large swaths of the city? Could it be the local public schools are terrible and parents are afraid their children will get caught up in the gang violence?
Enrollment has fallen from 407k in 2009, to 400k in 2014, to 361k in 2018.
“And within Chicago the properties were in low income neighborhoods”
The majority of the reno $$ was for Marshall Field Apt. Those likely have a cost basis closer to $250k, and the other 2400 units more like $125k.
But the cost to construct new is basically the same in Englewood or Lakeview–honestly, it’s probably slightly higher in a “bad” neighborhood, as you really can’t have an unsecured construction site.
“could build affordable housing on land in low income neighborhoods ”
Did you read the link about the Skender modular housing–they’re planning to put them in low income areas, and *bragging* about the units only costs $350k, and assuming free land.
“They want developers to build affordable housing on prime real estate.”
That was the *whole point* of my poor door discussion. I know that, and think that “they” are shooting themselves in the foot with a stubborn (and imo stooooopid) insistence on affordable housing being essentially identical to market rate housing. That insistence is an absolute bar for most developers including sufficient count of affordable units in good locations.
“If young families were staying in the city in droves, then why is CPS enrollment plummeting in large swaths of the city?”
It’s plummeting in the south / west sides in line with the exodus of lower income people. Lincoln Elementary is bursting at the seams. Same with Bell and Blaine and its spreading to schools that were once considered only mediocre like Alcott / Ogden / Audubon. I know several $1mm+ income households that send their kids to CPS in the above districts. It is still yet to be seen if they will end up keeping their kids in non-magnet CPS high schools when the time comes though.
CPS extending the school day / year was a BIG deal. Even in the good districts it was tough to send your kids to a school with the shortest in school time in the nation. CPS is no longer the laughing stock of the nation.
“I spend an hour a day each way from door to door in my commute on public transportation. That’s 2 hours a day. I get to read the newspaper or a magazine. Can’t do that in a car.”
ew… spending 12% of your waking hours on public transit… just… no
life is way too short for that, nothing is worth that hassle
same with driving downtown from anywhere outside the city limits… just hell to the no on that as well
” why is CPS enrollment plummeting in large swaths of the city?”
The decrease is *entirely* in the black student population. Indeed, the non-african american population of CPS has grown by over 10% in 20 years.
Sep-98 enrollment:
White 43,523
Black 229,148
Native Am 759
Asian/Pac 13,593
Hispanic 144,062
Total 431,085 (non-af-am = 201,937)
White 38,016
African Am 132,194
Asian/Pacific 20
Native Am 1,061
Hispanic 168,888
Multi-Racial 4,333
Asian 14,933
Hawaiian/Pac 616
Not Available 1,253
Total 361,314 (non-af-am = 229,120)
Total count = -70k
Af-Am count = -97k
Yes, white student count is down, too, but is up ~5k from the circa 2005 low.
And, yes, those numbers count all the kids in charter schools (~77k).
Also, from the 09-10 school year to the 18-19 school year, the percentage of low income kids dropped from 86.87% to 76.6%.
“one of the four top magnets or the other good schools like Lane Tech”
Somehow, Lane Tech has been ranked as the #3 HS in Illinois two years in a row. Yet it is considered only the 5th best in Chicago. Hmmm.
“if they will end up keeping their kids in non-magnet CPS high schools”
The $1m+ hhs? I would doubt it in 90%+ of cases.
“CPS extending the school day / year was a BIG deal.”
Mostly the school day. The extra 5 days is actually a huuuge PITA. But less of a pain than the 5.5 hour school day was–how does a two professional couple manage a 8:30-2:00 school day? You had to have a f’ing nanny until the youngest was a 5th (or so) grader.
johnc – “Why individuals should bear the burden of providing public goods is beyond me.”
…Because we use those public goods too. Is that a serious question?
“Your “no-penalties” remark makes no sense.”
My no-penalty remark would make absolute sense if you understood zoning. There is no penalty for deconverting a 2-4 unit into a single family home because most residential zoning areas allow it as-of-right. Yet if I have the money to finish/rehab my basement in-law unit or build a garage ADU I need to absorb additional costs & time: A minimum of $6000 to hire one of two (city-connected) zoning fairy lawyers that *might* succeed in allowing me to temporarily upzone the property. This would be in conjunction with getting alderman approval, sending notices to neighbors, and defending it public meetings. None of that, aside from permit costs, is needed to de-convert a 2-4 unit to a SFH.
If someone’s grandfathered-in three-flat burns down or is demolished in an RS-3 zone and doesn’t meet the Lot-Area-Per-Unit standard for 3 units (7500 sq/ft) it can’t be rebuilt with three-units. It has to be rebuilt as a single family.
This discrimination towards multifamily housing is not sustainable. It’s ridiculous and it only encourages lower populated neighborhoods and more inefficient per-capita infrastructure costs. Why the public should bear the burden of paying for that excess is beyond me. Low density is incredibly inefficient; it creates sprawl, environmental burden, and increases infrastructure costs. Zoning and NIMBYism are major perpetrators of this. So is our lust for cars, but I won’t go down that rabbit hole.
Why SHOULD individual owners not be allowed to responsibly modify their homes that could provide them additional income AND be a force of social good by increasing available rental units?
A long time ago, Mike Royko famously wrote that the motto of Chicago should be changed from “Urbs in horto” —”City in a Garden” — to “Ubi Est Mea.” -“Where’s mine?”
You’re welcome to be a force of social good after you’ve paid the City of Chicago, and fairy friends, many thousands of dollars.
“Low density is incredibly inefficient; it creates sprawl, environmental burden, and increases infrastructure costs. ”
So what. Maybe some Chicagoans don’t want to live like rats in a cage. High density tends to be an expensive pain in the butt. Humans are not meant to live on top of each other at high density. All throughout history the overwhelming majority of humans have lived in smaller communities at lower densities. It’s healthier mentally and physically.
“All throughout history the overwhelming majority of humans have lived in smaller communities at lower densities.”
And all throughout history, for the overwhelming majority of humans, life was nasty, brutish and short.
“And all throughout history, for the overwhelming majority of humans, life was nasty, brutish and short.”
If you could live through childhood, you’d likely live a long life. The high child mortality rate skews the average life span younger than it would otherwise appear to be.
“If you could live through childhood, you’d likely live a long life.”
ok, so, nasty, brutish, and relatively long, if you managed to live past 5.
That’s sooooo much better.
anontfo
Poor Doors
Is there a separate elevator? or shared? I am guess shared, but if separate how many floors do you need before it becomes economical?
“Is there a separate elevator? ”
Totally separate. Just like when there is a hotel and a condo, or offices and a condo. Think Hancock, Trump Chicago, Four Seasons, IBM (now AMA, with Langham). They’re all over the place in NYC, but also with controversy.
eg: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/nyregion/separate-entryways-for-new-york-condo-buyers-and-renters-create-an-affordable-housing-dilemma.html
As in NYC, it would be easier if the market rate portion is condos, rather than rental, for a lot of reasons, but not truly necessary.
But NYC foolishly banned them based on appearances:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/30/nyc-bans-poor-doors-separate-entrances-for-low-income-tenants/
Which means that developers are *always* going to opt for offsite options. If you have amenities that are “worth” $X00/month, how do you justify that if there are units paying $800/month? If it is $10m condos, how do you justify it at all?
Poor Doors
Would end up being racial segregation in a building. Separate elevators for different peoples.
Terrible idea.
“All throughout history the overwhelming majority of humans have lived in smaller communities at lower densities.”
They did?
The Mayans lived in cities with over 100,000 people hundreds of years ago. They were incredibly urban. And there was more than one of those cities.
Even Cahokia was very urban over 1,000 years ago.
From Wikipedia:
“Between AD 1050 and 1100, Cahokia’s population increased from between 1,400 and 2,800 people to between 10,200 and 15,300 people”.[19] an estimate that applies only to a 1.8-square-kilometre (0.69 sq mi) high density central occupation area.[20] Archaeologists estimate the city’s population at between 6,000 and 40,000 at its peak,[21] with more people living in outlying farming villages that supplied the main urban center. In the early 21st century, new residential areas were found to the west of Cahokia as a result of archeological excavations, increasing estimates of area population.[22] If the highest population estimates are correct, Cahokia was larger than any subsequent city in the United States until the 1780s, when Philadelphia’s population grew beyond 40,000.”
“Humans are not meant to live on top of each other at high density.”
Sure they are. We’ve been doing it for 100 years now in Chicago and Manhattan quite easily.
“Low density is incredibly inefficient; it creates sprawl, environmental burden, and increases infrastructure costs. ”
I have a theory that there are hidden costs to high density. It works great until the infrastructure breaks down and then all hell breaks loose. The cost of the NYC subway renovation is what…$37B? Look at the disruption in the city when a new building goes up or they need to replace a water or sewer line. High density means you have to move massive amounts of people and supplies through a fixed geographical area and it’s not easy. Look at how delivery trucks block roads all the time around here.
Just posted my July update. IAR will report a 5.3% decline in home sales but it’s really more like 2.7%. Not bad really. It’s really a tale of two markets with the condo market getting worse and the SFH market getting better but neither market is doing too badly in terms of market times – just a tad over 2 months.
http://www.chicagonow.com/getting-real/2019/08/chicago-real-estate-market-update-july-home-sales-down-slightly/
“I have a theory that there are hidden costs to high density. ”
Yeah, of course; in similar (but mostly flipped) ways as there are hidden costs to low density.
“Would end up being racial segregation in a building. Separate elevators for different peoples.”
So, you are suggesting that the only people who need/use affordable housing are non-white? And the only people who pay market rate are white??
You’re carrying water for the radical left when you make those sorts of comments.
Is it a terrible idea to have the office lobby separate from the condo lobby at the Hancock? Should the office tenants get access to the pool??
“Is it a terrible idea to have the office lobby separate from the condo lobby at the Hancock? Should the office tenants get access to the pool??”
This is something different. Office workers don’t live in the building or pay assessments.
Poor doors are like separate water fountains. it’s common sense to think that the affordable housing recipients would be mostly colored people. The optics of poor POC going in a separate door, living on lower floors and not accessing all the amenities beacuse it’s ‘affordable’ has horrible optics. Terrible. I think in theory it’s a good idea and it would allow more poors to access housing in expenisive areas. but the optics of a POC door and a white door (which is totally what it would end up being too in places like where affordable housing would be built) is really really bad.
By ‘colored’ people I mean POC, I don’t mean the 1950’s usage of the term. I mean POC.
” it’s common sense to think that the affordable housing recipients”
I forgot to add to the post that the white poverty rate in Chicago is negligible. The average white household in chicago actually earns far more than the national average. The only ‘white’ peole getting affordable housing would be the connected ones who are scamming the system.
“it’s common sense to think that the affordable housing recipients would be mostly colored people.”
I’m a little surprise that Jeff Sessions has been posting on Cribchatter for all of these years.
“the white poverty rate in Chicago is negligible”
It’a actually 9.3% (26,000) of families (meaning married couple, or married or single with kids). And for white single mothers, it’s 24%. Hardly negligible.
“The optics of poor POC going in a separate door, living on lower floors and not accessing all the amenities beacuse it’s ‘affordable’ has horrible optics. Terrible.”
I assert that it is far far better than all of the available housing being in Roseland.
WTF should subsidized housing be *identical* to market rate housing? It diminishes the number of units, and creates resentments for everyone except the lucky few who either clout in or win the lottery.
“WTF should subsidized housing be *identical* to market rate housing? It diminishes the number of units, and creates resentments for everyone except the lucky few who either clout in or win the lottery.”
Welcome to the Republican Party, anon(tfo), I’m surprised it took this long.
Roseland:
https://www.redfin.com/IL/Chicago/10511-S-Forest-Ave-60628/home/13081804
“I think in theory it’s a good idea and it would allow more poors to access housing in expenisive areas.”
Chicago has already did this in the Old Cabrini green development. We now have over 10 years of data as to how it’s working having affordable housing next to market rate condos/townhouses.
So far they’ve found it hasn’t worked out as they thought. Those in the affordable housing have said they feel alienated from their neighbors as, really, they don’t have much in common (except where they live.) The kids may not even go to the same schools. So instead of creating MORE of a connection, it created less.
As a result, neither group is very happy with living there.
Some of the condo buildings downtown have affordable housing units. No one here comments on it. Domain in River North is one of those buildings.
“Is it a terrible idea to have the office lobby separate from the condo lobby at the Hancock?”
Additionally, as has already been mentioned, several condo buildings have separate entrances and elevators. Trump Tower has a separate lobby and elevator for the condos.
One Bennett Park in Streeterville has a separate entrance for the apartments versus the condos.
“Just posted my July update. IAR will report a 5.3% decline in home sales but it’s really more like 2.7%.”
But this is coming off of a low year a year ago. We’ve now gone over 12 months with lower year over year sales which means the data is now lapping the “easy” data from last year.
And yet it STILL fell again.
Wow.
That’s really bad data.
Hopefully we should see SOME kind of improvement over the next 2 months with these mortgage rates. Buyers can afford $50,000 higher prices this year versus last year for the same monthly payment.
I think you mean sellers will ask for $75k more than last year due to rates dropping to try and move up
Or maybe some buyers are waking up and realizing that over leveraging themselves to buy a house isn’t a prudent business decision
“Welcome to the Republican Party, anon(tfo)”
Fuck that. The Republican Party thinks my family should pay higher taxes. The Republican Party thinks that any dickhead who claims to be an “originalist” is qualified to be a federal judge. The Republican Party thinks that the 2d Amendment is the only part of the Bill of Rights actually worth defending.
Fuck the Republican Party.
” thinks my family should pay higher taxes.”
Thats not totally true, the republican party thinks that the feds shouldn’t be subsidizing the retarded spending habits of states and local municipalities… (ya know, states rights) I mean they did lower the overall marginal rates to compensate… did you really pay more in taxes?
The anon(tfo) doth protest too much, methinks. because of social pressure and groupthink.
We have a big tent here on the R side. You don’t have to agree with the party on everything. But welcome home anon(tfo), welcome home. We welcome ALL comers with open arms.
I guess Anon(tfo) was surprised to discover he is part of the
“wealthy and rich” who aren’t paying their “fair share.”
People are liberal right up until the policies start hitting their own wallets…
“People are liberal right up until the policies start hitting their own wallets…”
you said you were going to pay for that with other people’s money, not MY money!!!
“Just posted my July update. IAR will report a 5.3% decline in home sales but it’s really more like 2.7%.”
What is current inventory like in raw numbers? Redfin keeps sending me emails for $650,000 split levels and it seems like there are more and more of them coming onto the market every day.
“did you really pay more in taxes?”
Yes.
“The anon(tfo) doth protest too much, methinks. because of social pressure and groupthink.”
Well, then, fuck you, too, HD.
My principle interest in federal elections is the federal courts. I disagree, personally, uninfluenced by petty f’ing social pressure and “groupthink”, *vehemently* with the judicial “philosophy” that the Republican party seeks to install on the federal bench.
“I guess Anon(tfo) was surprised to discover he is part of the
“wealthy and rich” who aren’t paying their “fair share.””
WTF? Which librulz raised my FIT bill?? Or are there Republicans saying that the “wealthy and rich” aren’t paying their “fair share”??
The 2017 tax bill was intentionally structured to “punish” blue state professionals. Whatever, I expect such treatment from *them*.
“The 2017 tax bill was intentionally structured to “punish” blue state professionals. Whatever, I expect such treatment from *them*.”
Nonsense.
My federal tax bill was $10,000 less based upon the same income. That’s right, $10,0000 less. Child tax credit doubled (use to phase out of it); 20% small business deduction and lowered tax rate.
I am a blue state professional.
The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one…
” I disagree, personally, … with the judicial “philosophy” that the Republican party seeks to install on the federal bench.”
I don’t think you understand the purpose the constitution and separation of powers. Maybe if you read the federalist papers you’d have a better idea of what this all means. The founding fathers were smart men and there’s a reason we have one of the longest constitutional republics in history.
C’Mon, Anon… The Democrats can’t stop talking about taxing the “rich.” They typically define rich as anyone who makes $250k/yr or more. The Republicans raise taxes on the rich and now it is a problem?
People only support taxing the rich as long as they aren’t considered rich…
You’re being a fucking troll, HD.
“The Republicans raise taxes on the rich and now it is a problem?”
You’re being facile, Russ.
This goddamn insistence on a foolish consistency (aka purity tests) is probably the biggest problem with political discourse right now. I can disagree with everyone on most things, and support one side over the other because I mainly agree with them about what I find most important.
Anyone who can’t see that needs to deal with their hobgoblins.
“You’re being a fucking troll, HD.”
No i’m not. I’m showing you a path to #walkaway.
I can lead you to the creek, but I can’t make you drink.
I can’t wait for the 10th annual cribchatter Holiday party this year!!!!1
“What is current inventory like in raw numbers? Redfin keeps sending me emails for $650,000 split levels and it seems like there are more and more of them coming onto the market every day.”
Months of supply was up slightly but only because sales have been down. Actual raw numbers of homes for sale was down by a trivial amount.
http://www.fox32chicago.com/news/local/blagojevich-to-be-released-from-prison-soon-sources-say
Blagojevich to be released from prison soon, sources say
THIS is the big F U to IL. It’s already spiraling down the drain and now this? Ravenswood Manor is going to be a pretty busy place next weekend. News crews will everywhere. Bad weekend to schedule an open house.
Thanks Gary. I have a feeling that property listings are going to start rising after seasonal adjustments. People are literally fleeing the state. The half a million for a 60’s split level emails I get on a daily basis from Redfin are a sign of desperate times for sellers trying to cash out for as much as they can, as quickly as they can.
“People are literally fleeing the state.”
But they aren’t. And those that are leaving are being replaced by those that are coming.
You can keep saying all you want that Chicago is in hard times. It ain’t.
That’s fake news and propaganda.
You would know people are “fleeing” if there is suddenly an 80% occupancy rate on the thousands of apartments being built all over the city. But there’s not. There’s a 95% occupancy rate.
Watch the rents. That’s the real indicator of demand right now.
I know you don’t live in Chicago, HD. But if you did, it would be obvious what is going on. All you have to do is ride the subway and look out the window at all of the construction. There are hundreds of apartments being built all up and down the subway lines (not just downtown.) Heck, there are new apartment high rises being built in Hyde Park.
“Ravenswood Manor is going to be a pretty busy place next weekend. News crews will everywhere.”
Gosh. What happened?
He wasn’t released.
And yeah, if Trump does it, it should be a campaign ad. Because that’s not exactly “draining the swamp.”
“The 2017 tax bill was intentionally structured to “punish” blue state professionals. Whatever, I expect such treatment from *them*.”
Yep. Which it certainly did.
But guess what? All those suburban Republican voters who are paying higher taxes are just as pissed.
The suburbs, even in red states, are going blue again in a big way in 2020. The Republicans cannot win a national election without them.
I said in 2016 that it was just a matter of time before Texas turned blue but that pace is accelerating faster than I thought possible 3 years ago. I thought it wouldn’t turn until 2024. But given the retirements from Congressmen who barely hung on in suburban districts in 2018, the writing is on the wall now.
“Or maybe some buyers are waking up and realizing that over leveraging themselves to buy a house isn’t a prudent business decision”
When has this EVER happened?
Um…never.
Lol.
““People are literally fleeing the state.”
But they aren’t. And those that are leaving are being replaced by those that are coming. ”
This is the fake news Sabrina, and a simple google search would show you otherwise. Has this site been taken over by Russian Bots? How’s the weather in Siberia, Sabrina?
I don’t live in Chicago any more; i live in Chicagoland. I travel all throughout the 6 county area (Cook, Will, Lake, Kendall, Kane, Dupage) and occasionally outside of this region. And it’s certainly not booming everywhere, not by a long shot.
https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/population-loss-in-illinois-is-driven-by-larger-numbers-of-people-leaving-for-other-states/f1bf43a4-0e93-407c-8240-7c3b9d58547b
WHEN even WBEZ has stories that don’t reflect the narrative, you know the weather is really cold in St. petersburg this time of year.
“In 2013, Illinois witnessed a net loss more than 67,000 people to domestic migration. By 2017, that loss had deepened to more than 114,000, according to census figures. The states to which Illinois has suffered the greatest net losses in population between 2011 and 2017 are Indiana, Wisconsin, Florida, Texas, and Missouri.
In addition, the state is experiencing more deaths and fewer births. In 2011, the difference between births and deaths — something the Census Bureau calls “natural increase” — in Illinois was more than 60,000. In 2018, that natural increase had shrunk to just 38,000, according to the latest census estimates released last month.”
saw this the other day… holy cow its worse than I ever thought
it is not just “poor blacks” leaving Chicago like you hypocrites wish it was
“Where the wealthy are moving out
Affluent residents have also abandoned states with high costs of living, hefty taxes and cold winters, causing those states to lose a substantial amount of income.
Among the five states that experienced the biggest net drop in adjusted gross income – Connecticut, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Illinois and New York – around half of the income those states lost came from people earning more than $200,000 a year.”
https://www.lendingtree.com/personal/where-americans-are-moving/#Migrationbyincome
https://www.gq.com/story/court-packing
and then
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/28/mitch-mcconnell-supreme-court-1346094
This is old, fake news chichow.
It’s called the JOE BIDEN RULE where a senate shouldn’t confirm a pick of a president from the other party in an election year.
Garland – D prez, R senate = Biden Rule
Today – R prez, R senate = no biden rule
The stacking of the supreme court is an affront to our democracy. You should be against it.
Court packing is only bad if the other guys do it…
Coincidentally, just received an anonymous reporter inquiry looking to interview Chicago and surrounding state realtors for stories about people leaving the area to reduce their taxes and cost of living. You see these stories all the time.
HD
“It’s called the JOE BIDEN RULE where a senate shouldn’t confirm a pick of a president from the other party in an election year”
your remark is a republican coining of remarks made by joe about a hypothetical statement. It’s not citing legal precedence.
Do you believe that Mitch will confirm a Supreme Court justice in 2020 if the situation arises?
“You see these stories all the time.”
Sure. As I’ve already mentioned, I know people selling family homes in Oak Park and moving to Berwyn now that the kids are off to college to reduce their property taxes.
More people are selling in the suburbs and trying to move into the city than are selling simply to escape taxes. But that’s not a “story” right? The booming city doesn’t sell the same as “the state is doomed” does.
Oh, anyone else see that the Chicago Water Taxi is building more boats because they anticipate adding service at some of the big river developments like Lincoln Yards, the 78 and Riverline. There could be a whole fleet of 10+ water taxis going up and down the river.
Instead of being a city that focuses on the Lake, Chicago will be a city that is centered on the River.
“It’s called the JOE BIDEN RULE where a senate shouldn’t confirm a pick of a president from the other party in an election year.”
What the hell are you even talking about HD?
McConnell made up the “rule” and now wouldn’t follow it if it happens to him. It’s also a travesty that the court is being stacked with guys who have a very narrow view and actually went to the same high school. What a crock. We need justices from Texas, Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota. SOMEWHERE other than inside the beltway. Please. ANYONE is better than another judge from inside the beltway.
Oh- and how about some different law schools? Where is the Stanford or UCLA grad?
It’s awful. The justices are supposed to represent the country, not this narrow 20 mile radius.
“Affluent residents have also abandoned states with high costs of living, hefty taxes and cold winters, causing those states to lose a substantial amount of income.”
Gosh sonies. NEWSFLASH: the baby boomers are RETIRING!
Ba ha ha ha.
10,000 a day.
Where do you think they want to go? They have big assets (homes paid off) and the stock market is at highs. Texas, Arizona and Florida here they come.
Yawn.
Nothing surprising here. Has been happening for 30+ years. The last few winters have been brutal so they’re moving en masse again as they did in the late 1970s when those winters were bad too. And now it’s the largest generation in America’s history.
“In 2013, Illinois witnessed a net loss more than 67,000 people to domestic migration. By 2017, that loss had deepened to more than 114,000, according to census figures. The states to which Illinois has suffered the greatest net losses in population between 2011 and 2017 are Indiana, Wisconsin, Florida, Texas, and Missouri.”
You site your article and I’ll site mine HD which shows that Illinois created the second most jobs in the country, other than NY, over the past 12 months.
Will those jobs actually result in population gains in the state? Unclear as, again, more baby boomers may be moving out than Millennials, GenXers and Zers coming in.
According to the journalists, we won’t know for a few months until the data is confirmed. Stay tuned.
But it is BOOMING in job creation. The best job market I’ve ever seen in Chicago.
“And it’s certainly not booming everywhere, not by a long shot.”
My god HD. Open your eyes then! I can cite 5 or 6 new huge apartment developments just looking out the window on the subway when it’s above ground.
I’m sorry your life is so narrow. That you travel on the highways and never go out to our great downtowns or come into the city of Chicago and walk the Riverwalk or take a boat tour and see the cranes EVERYWHERE.
Have you ever been to Fulton Market? I’m kind of doubting it because the energy coming off that place is incredible. Trendy hotels opening. Tons of restaurants. Condos everywhere. New apartments going up in the West Loop.
Hell- the urban lifestyle is booming so much they are building new construction condos right in downtown St. Charles, right by the river. Could be good for some baby boomers who want single floor living and want to walk to amenities in the burbs.
Do they build those condos when things suck?
Lol.
This “Chicago is doomed” sob story is hilarious. Truly. Again, you need to get out more HD. And not just sitting on the Kennedy.
“This is the fake news Sabrina, and a simple google search would show you otherwise.”
The only fake news is what you’re spewing HD.
Just a reminder from TWO weeks ago. This is recent data not 2017:
Extending a trend that’s been developing for several months, the Illinois Department of Employment Security reported today that the state has gained nearly 100,000 non-farm jobs in the past 12 months. That’s the biggest pop since July 2015, when a year-to-year increase of 105,300 was recorded. Figures shortly before that were much smaller and have dropped off since then until now.
If validated in later months—the data is preliminary, not seasonally adjusted, and can bounce around a lot—the figures could have major implications. Chief among them is that if the state is gaining lots of jobs, it finally may be gaining population, too, instead of losing it.
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg-hinz-politics/illinois-job-engine-suddenly-kicks-high-gear
I actually track Chicago metro area employment at http://chicaghousingstats.com Search the page for the word employment. Employment growth has been pretty strong but it appears to be plateauing. The last time I updated the graph was May but May was only like 9K higher than last May.
Sorry. Typo in the link: http://chicagohousingstats.com
yeah Sabrina, builders build… and build… and build… until they don’t
Also if you look at the article I linked, Illinois is losing income from every single age bracket, in fact the age 65+ bracket is the second lowest amount (next to zoomers) in terms of income leaving… here’s the amounts from largest to smallest
x1000 these amounts
55-65 -$1,321,136 #5 worst in the country
35-45 -$1,011,242 #2 worst
45-55 -$866,538 #2 worst
26-35 -$803,112 #2 worst
65+ -$722,233 #5 worst
under 26 -$146,278 #3 worst
so actually no, its not boomers and poors leaving the state… its people in their prime working ages… but hey theres lots of shiny new buildings downtown in a 2 mile radius so yeah, BOOM TIMES! Lmao @ the water taxis… yeah wow awesome, a transit system that people will take 3 months out of the year, very useful and sounds like a good use of money. As for the excellent job market you can thank president Trump for lowering corporate income taxes so that companies have extra funds to expand!
Sonies, HD, at what point do you think Illinois’s real estate woes will have hit bottom? For the past 3 years we have seen price stagnation and even decline in some areas as the new tax law no longer subsidizes upper middle class and wealthy homeownership. Many homes in good suburban school districts (particularly Hinsdale Central) have become quite affordable, especially in light with record low interest rates on the horizon. These towns generally have good access to downtown via Metra (think 20-35 minute express commute trains). While I’m aware that property taxes have increased and will continue to do so, at what point should I buy low?
“While I’m aware that property taxes have increased and will continue to do so, at what point should I buy low?”
I don’t think anyone knows. The legislature seems more concerned with infanticide than pension reform. Taxes are going to keep rising in the city and in many suburbs as this last ‘blue wave’ ushered in a number of progressives – almost everywhere except mchenry county – that seem to have even worse fiscal discipline than the previous bunch of losers. None of them seem too concerned about much of anything other than legislating by the popular twitter opinions of the day.
If you want to know what IL will look like (and it’s already half way there) look to Connecticut or Michigan. The brain drain and outflow from Michigan has absolutely insane. It’s practical a right of passage to leave MI. flint has been terrible for a generation, Detriot for 2. The same is happening to Connecticut. Even formerly immune Greenwich can’t seem to sell the mansions anymore. There are short falls in the budget and only the ultra rich and the ultra poor seem to be interested in staying. IL is halfway to this point already. Chicago (in areas) might be booming, but it’s at the expense of the rest of the metro area that is losing. Sabrina keeps talking about booming off the subway lines but is ignoring the declining enrollment on the north shore, or the empty strip malls dotting the suburbs of the various counties, or the people in Cook County who just don’t pay property taxes – and no tax buyer even wants to buy the taxes, and the county doesn’t do a dang thing about it. The entire south suburbs are in a downward spiral since the great recession. Sabrina will give lip service to FLoosmoor but ignore Harvey, Hazel Crest and Cal city. There is no end in sight. Get what you can , and, get out while you can.
“The legislature seems more concerned with infanticide than pension reform.”
Really HD?
Maybe that’s because the pension reform was done years ago, under Rauner. There is no other “reform” to do. We simply haven’t saved enough to fund the pensions of those that came before so we’re paying the price now.
Same for most municipalities in the state including some you may not even realize. But I urge people who are truly interested as to what is going on to seek out the Tribune’s excellent series on the cities from a few years ago that showed exactly how underfunded the city funds were.
Oh- and the state actually passed rules that those underfunded cities had to come up with the money by certain dates. Hence why Chicago has been under the gun with deadlines several times in the last few years.
And brain drain about Michigan? It’s one of the top retirement destinations because it’s so great for retirees in terms of taxes. You can live really cheaply in retirement there. Detroit isn’t seeing a brain drain anymore, by the way. That city is booming. $500,000 loft condos in midtown. Hottest hotels in the country. Attracting jobs. Just had a restaurant boom but now is feeling the growing pains from that. Great place to go if you’re a recent grad. Just like St. Louis.
Gosh HD, you are a really depressing person. Honestly. Almost as bad as Dan. Damn. And that says a lot.
The country is big. No reason to hate your life in one state unless you’re in jail and can’t make the change. Same thing I’ve said to Dan. If you hate Chicago, move. Odds are whatever you do for a living can be done in 20+ other states. Very few people are going to stuck in one city unless they’re a movie star, a politician in DC or a professional athlete with a contract in one city. Or working on an oil rig, which I doubt many on this blog do.
“Lmao @ the water taxis… yeah wow awesome, a transit system that people will take 3 months out of the year, very useful and sounds like a good use of money.”‘
The Chicago water taxis are run by Wendella. They’ve told me they’re profitable. Very.
It’s good you left sonies because you never knew Chicago. It’s really too bad. But I’m sure Nevada is right up your alley.
The water taxis don’t run 3 months out of the year. Buzz. Wrong. Try again.
Right now, they’re running about mid-March (right when the spring forward happens) to Thanksgiving weekend. But they’ve told me that they expect to build boats that will be able to traverse the river all year round (can go through ice) like they do in other northern European countries. The new boat they’re getting this fall will be heated. They have one other ship right now that is also heated but the others can get a bit nippy in November. Lol.
In 2018, 400,000 passengers used the water taxi on their 4 ships. The 5th ship will be a larger one with capacity at 120 passengers. But they will need to double their fleet to service Lincoln Yards, Riverline, The 78 and Southbank in the coming years (if they all get built, of course.) There will be thousands living and working at each of those developments.
But apparently no one will be living in any of these developments because no one is moving to Chicago. Northwestern is opening a biomedical research lab in Streeterville that will employ 2,000 people but NO! No one will be working in that big building apparently.
No one will be working in the re-designed top floors of the Macy’s on State Street. No one.
There’s no reason they are opening a food hall in the loop as well as one in the Willis Tower and another in Union Station. They are just doing it. But no one will go there because they have all fled the state.
That’s why they’re going to convert this big industrial site in West Humboldt Park into a creative lab by next year. So that it can sit empty and no one will work there. Yep- $50 million down the drain.
https://blockclubchicago.org/2019/08/13/50-million-creative-office-campus-planned-for-old-lighting-warehouses-in-west-humboldt-park/
Yep. Chicago isn’t booming. No, not at all.
Lol.
“Maybe that’s because the pension reform was done years ago, under Rauner. There is no other “reform” to do. We simply haven’t saved enough to fund the pensions of those that came before so we’re paying the price now.”
Are you familiar with the $100,000 club? Google it, it will blow your mind. There is no amount of saving that can pay these pensions. Its just basic math. At every level of government. This is not some fringe or republican talking point. Its math and it will never work, it never had a chance to work because the pensions will eventually eat up all revenue and spending. Our near junk bond status isn’t just some crazy thing. It’s real because real actuaries have done the math and there’s no way in hell we can ever pay these obligations, even if we did save every penny along the way to pay for it. It was impossible at the time – which is why the can was kicked so far into the future – and it’s even more impossible now.
“It was impossible at the time – which is why the can was kicked so far into the future – and it’s even more impossible now.”
Sigh. Not more of this. It’s actually not impossible. But there you go again being a fear monger.
There have been huge studies done as to what our responsibilities are. There is nothing they can do about the old pensions except fund them. They have already reformed the system for younger workers.
But the problem is a dual one. Both state AND city pensions are underfunded (depending on what city you live in, of course.)
And brain drain about Michigan? It’s one of the top retirement destinations because it’s so great for retirees in terms of taxes. You can live really cheaply in retirement there.
Brain drain has nothing to do with retirees.
You also realize there’s more than one city that produces oil?
“It’s good you left sonies because you never knew Chicago. It’s really too bad. But I’m sure Nevada is right up your alley.”
I’ve done all there is to do in Chicago, I’ve lived there my entire life, and it is a ridiculously hypocritical and provincial place, where doing something exciting is eating out at a new restaurant. yay. Outdoor activity (when its actually nice weather, rare) involves one crowded path along the lakefront. yay. Sorry but I just got sick and tired of every weekend stuffing my face with food and booze in between going to shows or the same old festivals. I make good money but never had enough to really “see” all Chicago had to offer like Theatre, museums, sports, etc. tickets are ridiculously expensive. The only times I’d go to those were super special occasions or free tickets from friends.
Nevada ain’t without its problems, but hey at least I get to keep more of my money and the government leaves me the fuck alone. Do you know how refreshing it is not to see useless cops on every corner, not having cameras watching you, not worrying about tickets, fines, disgusting humans trying to scam you or steal from you every other block, ridiculous soul crushing traffic, or taking the gross public transit system as an alternative to that, and other nonsense involved with ‘city livin’
Doing something exciting here is climbing a new mountain, or doing 400 mile offroad motorcycle races, going snowboarding, or having money to travel somewhere cool (because its not being stolen from you to be wasted on boomers that aren’t working) and hey if you want to stuff your face with food and booze you can do that too, since there are a ton of new and exciting restaurants opening here as well, just like any other city in the US right now.
and sorry but those 400k passengers on the water taxis sound crazy inflated to me, (considering max capacity on any given day is 8400 passengers) just like the tourism numbers Rahm was always spouting
I can’t wait to hear about the budget shortfall on the 28th of August…
grabbing my popcorn now
as for when it is going to bottom out… who knows… governments have the fantastic ability to kick the can… I would think the shit would start to hit the fan when the bonds get rated junk, probably in the next recession whenever that will be. After that its going to be lawsuit after lawsuit, meanwhile the taxes will start skyrocketing. there are billions in “Alternate Revenue Bonds” that will “The Chicago Public School District (CPS) is one of many tax jurisdictions nationwide
that utilize alternate revenue bonds as a source of additional funding. If the debt is not timely paid, it triggers a property tax increase.”
https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-chicago-public-schools-debt-property-tax-20160316-story.html
IIRC they had to borrow to pay their prior debt and it was a last second sort of deal to not miss payment… with people leaving overall, net AGI decreasing… yeah it could take a decade but it is not looking good at all for homeowners or residents that aren’t either super rich or super poor.
The $100,000 club Forbes article is horsecrap. First, it’s not about pensions, it’s about salaries: “71,000 public employees at every level of Illinois government received six-figure paychecks.”
What the Forbes article fails to mention is the equivalent jobs in the private sector are also paying over $100,000. I fail to see the panic in paying public employees prevailing wages.
“Do you know how refreshing it is not to see useless cops on every corner, not having cameras watching you, not worrying about tickets, fines, disgusting humans trying to scam you or steal from you every other block, ridiculous soul crushing traffic, or taking the gross public transit system as an alternative to that, and other nonsense involved with ‘city livin’”
Finally- you admit what the real issue is. It’s not Chicago. It’s big city living.
As I’ve said before- nothing wrong with admitting that the big city isn’t for you. I’ve never lived in NY or LA. No desire to. Both are too big and crowded for me.
There’s plenty to be said for the smaller cities like Reno, St Louis, Nashville, Detroit, Salt Lake City, Birmingham, New Orleans. Less crowds. Less traffic. Less competition. Cheaper.
Again, nothing wrong with that.
But the problem isn’t “Chicago.” It’s just that you didn’t like big city living. You’d have the exact same problem with San Francisco, NY, LA, or Washington DC.
I would definitely have issues living in San Francisco, LA, DC… ew… Pretty much lived in Chicago my entire life, and yeah, gets kind of old and frustrating as you get older. The fiscal mismanagement issues that I am not responsible for and do not wish to pay for gave me the final push out the door. Thankfully I can do my big city job in a small town which is nice. Medium size fish, small pond sort of thing. And its not that I don’t like big city living, its just that it could be a lot better if not for centuries of graft, corruption, and mismanagement by the public servants.
Strange how clueless some are about CPS. There are no strings to pull to get into a magnet school. You get good grades and test in or you don’t. It’s that simple. I live in Tier 4 and my son is going to a top Magnet HS. He worked hard and got in.
“There are no strings to pull to get into a magnet school. You get good grades and test in or you don’t. It’s that simple.”
Hahahahha, this is hilarious. I needed a good laugh today and this was it!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Thousands of students improperly won seats in CPS schools, a ‘pervasive problem,’ inspector general says
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/breaking/ct-met-chicago-schools-elementary-enrollment-problems-investigation-20180220-story.html
* * * * * * * * *
”
At fault is a “widespread pattern of inconsistent and improper admissions practices,” combined with a series of loopholes, which Schuler’s office said “leave the system vulnerable to fraud and undue influence.”
“This constitutes a pervasive problem,” the IG report said.”
“Why SHOULD individual owners not be allowed to responsibly modify their homes that could provide them additional income AND be a force of social good by increasing available rental units?”
—————————
Far different from a mandate forbidding deconversion. If the City wants to have a social good (high density housing) then let it pay for the privilege — lower the cost to go to higher densities. But saying that the City should be allowed to forbid deconversion because of social needs is externalizing City costs and desires.
“There are no strings to pull to get into a magnet [sic] school. You get good grades and test in or you don’t. It’s that simple.”
“Hahahahha, this is hilarious. I needed a good laugh today and this was it!
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Thousands of students improperly won seats in CPS schools, a ‘pervasive problem,’ inspector general says”
The report found only one improper admission among selective enrollment spots audited.
This article seems to contradict the popular narrative that everyone wants to live in a city: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-number-of-americans-who-super-commute-is-on-the-rise-184529879.html
Gary- a lot of Gen Xers who are aged 40 to around 55 already own homes in the suburbs, right? They’re not moving. And if you live somewhere like LA, you can’t afford to move from your suburb closer into the city core.
It makes sense that there are a lot of super commuters on the coasts due to house costs as well. In the Bay Area, people are commuting from areas like Modesto. Modesto isn’t even a “suburb” in the way that we know it. It would be like commuting to Chicago from Champaign every day.
But the article says the number of people with super commutes is on the rise. Then there is this article: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2018/03/26/us-population-disperses-to-suburbs-exurbs-rural-areas-and-middle-of-the-country-metros/
a super commute (90+ minutes each way) sounds effing miserable, why do people do that to themselves
“In the Bay Area, people are commuting from areas like Modesto.”
They’ve been doing it for 30 years. Family friend was doing in the late 80s. It’s nothing new.
“This article seems to contradict the popular narrative that everyone wants to live in a city”
What does that say (or even imply, even with torturing the words that are there) about people’s desires? Here’s what I see:
1. People in boo-foo, working in mining and construction, are having to travel further to find work. There is no implication that the jobs are in cities.
2. In metro areas, job growth is outpacing housing development (indeed, the article sez: “housing costs get really expensive, and folks get pushed out to the peripheries of the metro”). This is contra your suggestion, Gary, it states that people are priced out.
NO ONE (that has any sense of balance, or desire to be correct or accurate) is suggesting that everyone wants to live in the city. That’s so easy to falsify as to be laughable. That you present is as if a serious contention makes your argument a strawman, even if you had cited an article which supports your argument, which this one does not.
“(90+ minutes each way) sounds effing miserable, why do people do that to themselves”
90 minutes total every day sounds miserable. On the days that traffic/weather stretches my total over ~60, I question why I left the house.
Is it 90 minutes from mileage or 90 minutes from traffic? My wife works in northern burbs and it can take upwards of 2 hours during rush hour/bad weather for her to get home. She hates it. However, when no traffic it is maybe 35 minute drive at worst.
It has taken me almost an hour to go 9 miles from Oak Park to Loop before…
I’d rather drive 90 minutes doing 75mph the whole way with little traffic versus 90 minutes crawling along in bumper to bumper at 25mph, but maybe only going like 20 miles.
“Is it 90 minutes from mileage or 90 minutes from traffic?”
The tables in the link show that a lot of the folks doing it are taking public transit–so some of it is the goofs who live in Princeton or Morristown and work in Manhattan, taking the train for 100+ minutes each way. I’ve known a few of them.
“NO ONE (that has any sense of balance, or desire to be correct or accurate) is suggesting that everyone wants to live in the city.”
This whole thread is punctuated with Sabrina’s promotion of urban living. Per Sabrina: “That’s why the city is booming. People want to live near their job. 2 hour commutes are so 2005.” I could provide 10 more quotes.
But Sabrina is not the only one making these claims. I read it all the time.
“This whole thread is punctuated with Sabrina’s promotion of urban living.”
Does she so much as ONCE even imply that “everyone” (much less, actually everyone) wants to live in the city?
The scent of the farm is clinging to your argument.
OK. I’m using the term “everyone” loosely, just as Sabrina used the term “people” loosely. What does “People” mean? All people? Most people? Many people? A majority of people? The average person? A specific group of people? The people on this blog?
“What does “People” mean?”
More than one person.
It’s use by Sabrina is squishy, to be sure, and thus is pretty much unfalsifiable, certainly on the margins. But it is also pretty easily understood to be closer to “many people, especially among upwardly mobile, educated, 25-50 year old people” rather than “all people”.
I think this guy’s analysis is insightful. Basically, it depends. The analysis only goes as far as 2016 and I think things have changed a bit in Chicago since then. https://www.forbes.com/sites/petesaunders1/2018/10/14/the-urban-growth-debate-cities-suburbs-exurbs/#d203f256a651 But I don’t see a clear preference for cities vs. suburbs except for a few cities.
“The analysis only goes as far as 2016”
and only from 2010.
So much of the perception has to do with a change in the trend. And you won’t see that by looking at a 6 year period, or by looking at San Antonio (mostly about as urban as Naperville) and San Diego (ditto).
And it’s also about who is choosing to live in the urban areas. There has been a socio-economic shift in the past 20 years. Undoubtedly more so in some cities than others, and not affecting “all” people of a given education/income cohort. But it’s pretty apparent in most cities. Hell, it’s even apparent in Detroit, notwithstanding the numbers shown in that article.
“And you won’t see that by looking at a 6 year period, or by looking at San Antonio (mostly about as urban as Naperville) and San Diego (ditto).”
San Antonio is like most Texas cities: it’s all about the car and sprawl.
BUT, in 2010 Mayor Castro enacted a 10-year urban plan to bring housing/jobs back to the downtown. If any of the Texas cities has the opportunity to “urbanize” it’s San Antonio as it has the conventions, hotels and restaurants focused on the River Walk.
They have brought some apartment complexes downtown and are doing some conversions into lofts. They only recently opened up a supermarket. But I saw a stat that said about 16% of the downtown is surface parking lots so there’s a lot of “dead” zones. The energy is not there yet.
San Antonio has extended the River Walk up to the Museum/Pearl area and all the way down to the Missions. That helps. It’s putting in food destinations, like food halls, and new parks with cafes/coffee shops.
San Antonio is a real opportunity for urbanists.
They expect another 1 million people to move there by 2050. If they can get some of them to move into the downtown, it would help with traffic, commute times etc.
And, again, if you’re 23 and have your choice of Austin or San Antonio, which do you move to? San Antonio actually has more historic neighborhoods and cooler architecture but it’s usually the second choice.
As it is, the San Antonio downtown project expects to build another 14,000 apartments in the next 10 years.
“San Antonio has extended the River Walk up to the Museum/Pearl area and all the way down to the Missions. That helps. It’s putting in food destinations, like food halls, and new parks with cafes/coffee shops.
San Antonio is a real opportunity for urbanists.”
I’m waiting to see what a developer can put in the basement of the Alamo.
This article came out a few days ago. Apparently “workers” are fleeing the big cities: https://www.wsj.com/articles/workers-are-fleeing-big-cities-for-small-onesand-taking-their-jobs-with-them-11567848600
“Apparently “workers” are fleeing the big cities”
Denver is still a “city” for the purposes of the discussion above–provided that they are moving to Denver and not Boulder or Golden or Centennial. Hell, Boise probably is, too (not familiar enough) IF people are moving to “downtown”
“This article came out a few days ago. Apparently “workers” are fleeing the big cities:”
Yep. They are moving from the Bay Area to Las Vegas. Seattle to Boise. Chicago to Nashville or Austin. Miami to Orlando. New York to Charlotte or Austin.
If you can “work from home” you’re going to where the real estate prices are lower and you can raise a family more easily.
It’s a real opportunity for the second and third tier cities. Why not get some of this great talent to move? Heck, cities like Cincinnati, St. Louis and Milwaukee should be putting up billboards in the Bay Area with the homes that are available. Lure that talent with the great architecture.
On the topic of young people starting a career in a second or third tier metro area (or relocating from a first tier city relatively early in their career), I can’t help but think of the (nice) Chicago burbs. Denver, for instance, has absolutely boomed, with loads of new apartments in and around downtown. The place is buzzing with 22-35 year olds. Twenty, even ten years ago, that demographic would have had several inexpensive but attractive options in nearby burbs if they wanted to move for family reasons (there’s only a few highly desirable SFH hoods in the city, but they’ve become very pricey, yet their attendance area schools aren’t great), but those burbs have gotten expensive, and only a handful have strong schools. For the typical professional Chicago family who’s considering leaving the city for a bigger home and great public schools (with a tolerable train commute), they’ve got many more options, at better prices (insane taxes notwithstanding), than their peers in Denver. And there are still lots of boomers in the nicest Chicago burbs that need to move on, which will only further depress prices. About a year ago, I think we paid maybe $100k more for our house in Boulder than some relatives did last year for their house in Wilmette. Our taxes might be a quarter of what theirs are, but their house is at least twice as large and much, much nicer inside and out.
” Our taxes might be a quarter of what theirs are, but their house is at least twice as large and much, much nicer inside and out.”
Two things, assuming five figure real estate taxes for the house on the north shore, a house in Boulder that cost $100k more might turn out to be the cheaper option in the medium to long term, especially considering that home values are stagnant (if not dropping) back home in Illinois.
Secondly, not sure if you’re comparing similar properties. I could show you a condo in bucktown in a crappy school district for $100k more than some split level west of green bay road that is half the size with half the taxes too. Need more info about the boulder property.
Eventually, my theory is that, especially with half of all Illinois college bound high schoolers leaving the state for collage (And many never returning), Illinois will be a bit like Michigan. Grosse Pointe MI is a value place to live. $550,000 for a really nice updated Tudor on a 10000SQ FT lot with schools rated 8/9/10 out of 10. But you’re still living outside of Detroit Michigan.
We’re not there yet, of course, but it’s a possibility.
https://www.redfin.com/MI/Grosse-Pointe-Park/1235-Yorkshire-Rd-48230/home/98663271
$550k tudor in grosse pointe
“Illinois will be a bit like Michigan.”
Sure.
This is an absurd argument.
But- I believe with climate change both Michigan and Illinois will be gaining quite a bit of population. We have the water sources and food. And our climate change impacts won’t be nearly as severe as other parts of the country. Detroit will rise again when there is no water in Las Vegas and it is consistently 120 degrees nearly every day in the summer in Phoenix.
And to argue “we’re not there yet” is a joke HD. Come back to the blog 20 years from now, just as the Millennials who make up the bulk of those living in the great high rises downtown, are reaching “peak” income.
I think part of your issues with Chicago and Illinois is that you live in Long Grove. You probably haven’t been downtown in ages. You have no idea what is happening in Fulton Market or in Wicker Park. You have no idea the dozens of apartments that are being built right now and the momentum the city has. Go to Bronzeville. Damn. I can’t believe the vibe that’s there.
Climate change is a scam perpetuated by the left to keep people scared to move to warm and dry places away from the northern tax n’ spend shithole cities… well that and to control the cheap energy supply. Literally the opposite of what the alarmists are saying is happening
you know we just had one of the coolest and wettest years in the country’s history right? You know that it was way fucking hotter in the 1930’s right? We haven’t had a June hurricane in like 10 years, it barely reaches 100 degrees anymore and with the extended solar minimum and cosmic ray maximum coming our way, the future is going to be COLD
“Secondly, not sure if you’re comparing similar properties. I could show you a condo in bucktown in a crappy school district for $100k more than some split level west of green bay road that is half the size with half the taxes too. Need more info about the boulder property.”
I can’t recall if their place is east or west of GBR, but in any event I think it’s very close to GBR (it didn’t really seem walkable to downtown/train), and is admittedly on a somewhat busy street (huge front yard that’s a nice buffer, but tiny backyard). But it’s an impressive looking house, as are the nearby homes. It’s got to be at least 3,000 sq ft, attached full-sized two car garage, recent updates throughout.
The Boulder property is about 1,450 sq ft, a “tri-level” three bed/two bath, under-sized one car garage (too small to comfortably park a typical mid-size SUV, so serves as a bike/gear/craft/play space), no significant updates (new paint, made a handful of other modest cosmetic updates, added a paver patio, that’s about it), pretty nice yard (though I’ve managed to kill the lawn in just one year, having failed to restart the sprinkler system in time this summer), and “seasonal” views (i.e., when the leaves drop, we see utility lines and neighbors’ houses, but also mountains). It’s walkable to what are among the best elem/middle/HS in the state (and my bus stop to Denver).
“you know we just had one of the coolest and wettest years in the country’s history right?”
Where’d you hear that BS? Facebook? You do know that you cannot measure “climate” based on the weather in a single area.
July 2019 was the hottest month EVER:
https://www.noaa.gov/news/july-2019-was-hottest-month-on-record-for-planet
Next thing, sonies will tell us we’re all brainwashed bc of vaccines.
total nonsense and nothing but propaganda…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heat_waves
this guy explains it well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMldKLR0Vwc
he uses US data due to it being the longest and best data
Some pundit on the AM radio this morning – as I was driving into work – was reading ‘climate hysteria’ headlines going back to the 1920’s. According to those articles the ice caps were supposed to have been melted by now and NYC and LA are supposed to be underwater already. The pundit read headline, after headline, after headline over the last 100 years of climate hysteria. It’s so old. Man made climate change is so nonsensical at this point, its even crazier than the anti-vax crowd. Climate change conspiracy theorists are right up there with the infowars chemtrails crowd. You call me a climate change denier, I call you a climate change conspiracy theorist. AOC says we have 12 years to fix this or its over. Yang says its already too late. Bernie wants poor third worlders to abort their children en mass so that he and his elite friends can save their oceanfront beach homes.
Liberals are remarkably hypocritical when it comes to climate change practices. They want green everything and to raise the price of electricity and cost of living on the middle class, but you better believe they’re flying international twice a year for vacations, have the heat turned to 78 in the winter and a/c at 72 in the summer. Then they refuse to have a big oak or elm tree in their front yard because it creates too many leaves to clean up. They fill up their suv to drive 3 blocks to drop junior off at school, then drive to Starbucks and yoga. They knocked down a perfectly good 3 flat to build their multi million mansion creating an enormous amount of carbon in the process. Oh, and they’re closet is stacked with the newest clothes which is a massive carbon producer. For dinner, they’re headed in a cab to the latest restaurant to eat Kobe beef. Reusing goods, they’re too good for that.
“the heat turned to 78 in the winter and a/c at 72 in the summer”
WTF? That’s 6-8 degrees too warm in the winter and 3-5 degrees too warm in the summer. What are you, 85 years old??
“he uses US data”
Also because it supports his thesis.
Climate =/= weather.
“It’s walkable to … my bus stop to Denver).”
So you ride the RTD bus into the city? What’s that, a one-hour trip each way? ugh.
Denver’s leading teh nation: up 59% since 2007:
https://wolfstreet.com/2019/08/27/the-most-splendid-house-price-bubbles-in-america-august-update-western-markets-see-the-dip/
That is nutz. And Boulder’s probably up more than Denver; even Ft. Collins is pricey.
Question: will prices go higher? (What’s left to legalize?) More importantly, how long does it take to drive from your place to Winter Park on Saturdays in Jan?
“creating an enormous amount of carbon”
That’s not how that works.
Also: if human-influenced climate change is mere propaganda, who TF cares??
well in the video he discusses noaa’s worldwide bull-crap charts as well, but im sure you won’t watch it… And when the propagandists tell you the word climate can mean whatever the fuck suits your argument at the time, I suppose you are technically correct.
“who TF cares??”
everyone who’s having their rights eroded should care
Climate change certainly isn’t stopping Obama from dropping $15 million on a beach front property in Martha’s Vineyard…
“And when the propagandists tell you the word climate can mean whatever the fuck suits your argument at the time”
Same thing applies to your guy.
“Climate change certainly isn’t stopping Obama from dropping $15 million on a beach front property in Martha’s Vineyard…”
And…what?
Wyc could give it to them, like you give a panhandler a twenty.
“You have no idea the dozens of apartments that are being built right now and the momentum the city has.”
There is a growing movement to kill that momentum. Think it can survive? https://www.chicagobusiness.com/government/head-tax-lasalle-street-tax-vacancy-tax-progressives-checklist-lightfoot
then drive to Starbucks and yoga. They knocked down a perfectly good 3 flat to build their multi million mansion creating an enormous amount of carbon in the process. Oh, and they’re closet is stacked with the newest clothes which is a massive carbon producer. For dinner, they’re headed in a cab to the latest restaurant to eat Kobe beef.
Starbucks? Cabs? Kobe Beef? Yoga? You need to update your anti-liberal screed. It’s stuck on 2003.
Sabrina:
“This is an absurd argument. ”
——————————-
I agree. Ranks just below the absurdity of the argument that Bucktown extends South of Armitage.
Keep shilling, Sabrina, keep shilling.
“There is a growing movement to kill that momentum. Think it can survive? https://www.chicagobusiness.com/government/head-tax-lasalle-street-tax-vacancy-tax-progressives-checklist-lightfoot”
——————————-
I don’t mind economically agressive arguments. I mind economically ignorant arguments. Thanks, Gary.
“Starbucks? Cabs? Kobe Beef? Yoga? You need to update your anti-liberal screed. It’s stuck on 2003.
Peets, Uber, Soy & Equinox?
“Equinox”
Get into q3-19, HD:
https://www.businessinsider.com/stephen-ross-hamptons-fundraiser-trump-campaign-raises-millions-2019-8
“Climate change certainly isn’t stopping Obama from dropping $15 million on a beach front property in Martha’s Vineyard…”
It will be insured by federal flood insurance, which makes ALL of the homes on both coasts even possible. Every time they wash away in a storm, we all pay.
Rad!
Who is worried about Obama’s new home? He has plenty of money to buy another one. $15 million? That is NOTHING. He and Michelle made over $60 million just from the books. They also got mucho bucks to develop content for Netflix.
“You call me a climate change denier, I call you a climate change conspiracy theorist.”
So, you’re willing to move to Miami and buy a place HD?
I didn’t think so.
It’s also going to be interesting to see what happens now that the Pacific is out of its 100 year calm period (not related to climate change.) We built too close to the ocean along the west coast over that time period. We thought it was safe. It wasn’t. Whole towns won’t survive the erosion and flooding. But everyone is paralyzed as to what to do.
I encourage everyone to read the excellent stories from the LA Times about the doom coming to the coast, all most of the most expensive real estate in the country.
“We haven’t had a June hurricane in like 10 years”
Hurricanes have cycles. They usually last about 20 years, give or take a few years. It was really bad in the 1930s through the 1950s. Then it was a quiet period. Then there was another strong cycle and then the quiet period. We are in an active period again. Florida didn’t get hit by a hurricane for 10 years. People got complacent. Thousands of baby boomers moved there thinking it was nirvana. But now we’re in an active period again which will last for years.
And “climate change” doesn’t mean “hot.” It means “change.” Can be both hot AND cold.
The scientists believe Chicago will be 4 to 5 degrees warmer so its weather will be like St. Louis’ now. And that the weather changes will be stronger the further you get from the equator. So Miami’s weather will basically be unchanged. The ocean may not be though as it’s already getting more sunny flooding days now than 10 years ago. By 2030 I read they will be getting 30 of those days a year (it’s just a handful right now.) You can’t drive down the streets or even go out your front door, in many cases.
That should be fun.
Charleston just met with a contingent of people from Amsterdam to begin discussion about what they have to do to save the city. Already, the flooding is bad. Some homeowners want to elevate their historic homes (like Galveston has done- on the stilts. Up 7 or 8 feet.) But because its in a historic area, the city was reluctant to do it. The woman who wanted to do it had a large home. It was going to cost her $300,000 just to elevate it.
Eventually, either they elevate, or the historic district won’t survive anyway. The woman already has had her house flood in major tropical storms every few years apparently. It’s going to get worse.
Questions will have to be asked: which coastal cities do we “save”? The technology may be there to build barriers. Will it be Charleston and New Orleans? Will it be Tampa and Miami? What about the Keys? Let the sea take them? Should we move the French Quarter inland versus trying to build barriers?
All things that will need to be asked. And likely soon.
“So you ride the RTD bus into the city? What’s that, a one-hour trip each way? ugh.”
Just under an hour total (10 min walk from house to bus, 30 minutes on the express bus, 12 minute walk to office). Often work from home on Fridays (almost all Fridays during the winter; if I go in on Fridays in the winter, and we’re heading to the hills, I take the light rail out to Golden and they pick me up). Hoping we open a Boulder office in the next year or two, but I’m not counting on it.
“That is nutz. And Boulder’s probably up more than Denver; even Ft. Collins is pricey.”
Boulder’s pricing has indeed gotten nutz. But as far as dips go (or will go), I’ve seen some cooling in terms of market times, but that’s about it. While living in Chicago I followed listings in Boulder from late 2008 through the end of 2010 (when we bought a place in ELP), and prices really didn’t drop that much (they did pretty much everywhere else in CO, in many places by a lot). Things certainly seemed to have peaked for this cycle around this time last year (our timing was not ideal). I don’t think many people expected Fort Collins to increase quite as much as it has, though the state’s residential growth has been and is projected to continue to head north/northeast from the Denver metro. I get to drive to FC at 9 am this Sat for a soccer game – yeah!
“More importantly, how long does it take to drive from your place to Winter Park on Saturdays in Jan?”
No idea, haven’t gone up on Saturdays the past few seasons (we did so when we first moved back from Chicago to Denver, and quickly learned that I-70 today is much busier than it was a couple decades ago). We head up on Fridays right when school lets out, and it usually takes the normal hour and a half or so (we’re on the far southwest side of town; starting from central or north Boulder would add another 15-20). We typically put in a full day on Sat and a half on Sunday, heading back before things get bad on I-70 (though an express lane added a couple of years ago is a big improvement). Later in the season we sometimes head up mid-day on Sat, spend Sat and Sun night, and head back Monday morning in time for school (zero traffic; I hop out in Golden for the train). I think we got about 25 days in at Winter Park last season. Usually try and get a few weekday mornings up at Eldora (40 minute drive) in over the season. Planning to do one long weekend in Aspen this season, and possibly one in Steamboat (we get five days at each on the Ikon); will wait another year or two before dragging the kids all the way to Jackson. I’ve gone on kidless trips to Silverton the past couple years, will probably do it again this season, but who knows. I don’t get the 150+ days a season in that I did during what would have been my college age years, but life goes on.
“So, you’re willing to move to Miami and buy a place HD? ”
Gulf side…
“but life goes on.”
Great report nonny. It sounds like you’ve got a good thing going on. Congrats to you & yours for making it work.
Sabrina, no one cares that Obama spent $15 million. It is the rank hypocrisy of it. Ragging on the wealthy while you become wealthy yourself. Alarmism about climate change while you have a carbon footprint the size of a Wal-Mart on the beach no less (so much for the threat of rising seas). The problem with leftist elites is that they propose policies that affect use plebes, but exempt themselves.
“no one cares that Obama spent $15 million.”
That’s not at all true. Both that no one cares, and that they’re going to pay $15m for the place.
Russ said: “HD says we are on a slow decline, but what is going to be the tipping point? Will Chicago just turn into Manhattan with only rich folks and those subsidized?”
Russ, we are already there. The middle class of the city is gone.
https://www.wbez.org/shows/wbez-news/the-middle-class-is-shrinking-everywhere-in-chicago-its-almost-gone/e63cb407-5d1e-41b1-9124-a717d4fb1b0b
The reason why people flock to SF/Manhattan/NYC and pay so much for a 2/2 is first, the high incomes. A job with Goldman or Google or a potential movie/tv career is much higher paying than….a brand manager at Kraft..and it’s more exciting too! People flock to Chicago to get a mid level manager job at…Aon. Its different here.
As for expensive, I’ve heard from numerous people that Cook county isn’t any more expensive than Seattle or Portland. Sure Seattle proper is expensive, just the green zone is here, but as soon as you get the suburbs or fringe areas, like Hoffman Estates vs. Tacoma (about the same distance from major cities) the prices are similar there too. We have higher sales tax and gas taxes and all that too.
Which brings me back to the middle class. Here’s a map of how Chicago voted for president in 2016.
Check out the “2016 General Election Results, by Precinct”
https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/November-2016/Chicago-Election-Results-President/
Trump had like 12.5% of the vote or something. But compare the map of his voters (red areas and ligher blue areas) with the ‘middle class map’ from WBEZ.
It’s the same map. The middle class areas of Chicago voted Trump, or barely Clinton, while the rest of the ultra rich/grinding poverty areas voted Democrat. I’m not going to go off on a tangent about Orange Bad Man but you clearly see that yes, we are already a city of ‘rich’ and the ‘subsidized’.
“ultra rich”
The map WBEZ shows has “very high” income as a census tract with average income 40% above metro-wide average. That’s not even close to “rich” nevermind “ultra rich”.
Or do you consider yourself to be “ultra rich”, HD?
“Russ, we are already there. The middle class of the city is gone.”
Hd pretends to be surprised while he’s very pleased R’s won their war waged agst the MC workers including those who populated Chicago ‘hoods in ’70’s & 80’s over their ‘obscene wages & benefits’. R’s understood corporate profits & stock values would skyrocket if MC & LMC labor costs could be dramatically lowered which could benefit only the UMC & above. Outsourcing jobs to foreign places accelerated. The Koch network of political donors differ w hd in that the Koch network continue to push for more open immigration to increase supply of local (as well as agricultural) low cost labor options – imo it’s that group of immigrants who re-populated neighborhood like Gage Park & the nw side.
southbound, such a smart comment you made. Those union benefits and pension are driving the city of chicago into near bankruptcy and is contributing to a nearly billion dollar deficit! Talkabout whistling past the grave yard! That’s why right to work states having population increases but the union labor states are decreasing!
“The map WBEZ shows has “very high” income as a census tract with average income 40% above metro-wide average. That’s not even close to “rich” nevermind “ultra rich”. ”
Here’s the forest, and here are the trees. Try to pay attention a little more. Look at the maps and reread my comments. You might be able to discern something from it instead of attacking the messenger with the ad hominen attack.
“…Those union benefits and pension are driving the city of chicago into near bankruptcy and is contributing to a nearly billion dollar deficit!”
As hd knows I wasn’t referring to city workers – they still live in Chicago. I support Chicago taking all steps including filing for BK reorganization in order to rationalize pensions that propelled workers into UMC (anyone w/ $100k+ yr pension ‘holds’ the equivilent of a risk free $5 mi+ annuity imo).
But in large part those super entitled ‘public servants’ think just like hd’s ilk – imo they’re in large part the 19th & 41st Ward voters who voted for Trump in ’16. They believe (like Trump & hd imo) that their problems are caused by challenges to their ‘rightful place’ in US’s hierarchy – the white supremacism view that propelled& protected their parents & grandparents in the same secure over-compensated jobs that in their opinion are now being ‘given’ to their inferiors instead of their kids.
Imo the graveyard hd whistles abt is where the former local MC jobs are buried. One example of R behavior that killed those MC jobs is when Chgo Trib abrogated its contract w its printer employees in mid 80’s. Trib had contractually agreed to protect jobs in exchange for installing new tech which would eventually eliminate those printers jobs. Once the new tech was installed Trib decided it was time to see who had more money & clout. Or abt the same time when new car dealers decided to ‘lock out’ their mechanics/ body repairmen rather than continue to pay them per contracted piece rate basis which allowed employees to earn $50-60K/yr if they were skilled & hustled – ignoring the reality that owners reaped the lions share of those labor charges. Those new car dealers now live in Hinsdale & the N Shore while their former employees struggle.
hd’s a big fan of those corporations and gov’t entities paying his firm up to $500/hr for legal work (landing gov’t work due to political connections according to hd) but like many R’s hd can’t stand the idea of smart (but not college educated) skilled, hustling US workers earning $15-$30/hr.
The most ironic observation re hd is hd pays lip service to our constitution but only where it supports hd’s beliefs. In Sharia law like fashion hd & his ilk (incl hh/trump) are absolutely comitted to imposing their abortion beliefs on the rest of us, ignoring the laws of our land. jmho
“The reason why people flock to SF/Manhattan/NYC and pay so much for a 2/2 is first, the high incomes. A job with Goldman or Google or a potential movie/tv career is much higher paying than….a brand manager at Kraft..and it’s more exciting too! People flock to Chicago to get a mid level manager job at…Aon. Its different here.”
Career opportunity is certainly a big reason why many high performing/well-credentialed young people target NYC or the bay area (for finance/law and tech, respectively), but it’s not the only factor. NYC is “NYC” for many other reasons other than Wall Street and the attendant mega/white shoe law firm industry and consulting. And SF is in CA and and an easy drive to the coast. When I moved from CO to NYC in 99, it sure wasn’t because of my sterling credentials at the time (i.e., a high school diploma from 88). And neither I nor anyone I hung around with in NYC was renting a market rate luxury two bedroom apartment (even people I knew who had the means weren’t doing that).
“Those union benefits and pension are driving the city of chicago into near bankruptcy and is contributing to a nearly billion dollar deficit!”
Anyone ever see the pensions of the muni bus drivers in San Francisco?
If you think Chicago is the only city where there are union benefits and pensions that are bankrupting the city, think again.
It will be interesting to see if Lightfoot tries to coordinate with Pritzker and the GA to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to drop the Cola to 2% from 3%. That would at least be in line with inflation.
“we are already a city of ‘rich’ and the ‘subsidized’.”
All cities in America are now like this. Urbanization is back. The rich have moved back in town from places like Hinsdale, Lake Forest, Glencoe. Chicago is now more akin to the 1910s and 1920s when the rich ALL lived in the city before the crime of the Great Depression forced many to flee to the suburbs. Had to get away from “the masses.”
In the 1970s and 1980s, the cities were a disaster. The suburbs were great, and some still worked “downtown,” but otherwise, anyone who wanted a decent school for their kids fled. Again, that’s why the suburbs got rich and powerful.
But it’s the complete opposite now. The rich are back in the city. The middle class is fleeing (or has fled.) This is true of SF, LA, NY, DC, Chicago and others.
Chicago still has a middle class. Ever been to McKinley Park? Bronzeville? Morgan Park? Jefferson Park? Just to name a few. But some neighborhoods, like Portage Park, for instance, where you used to be able to get a bungalow for $150,000, have really gentrified.
“People flock to Chicago to get a mid level manager job at…Aon. Its different here.”
My god. These comments just show your age HD! You are SOOOOO old. And working in the suburbs isn’t helping you. At all.
Jesus. UberEats just announced it was hiring 2,000 more people here in the same jobs in which it is hiring for Uber in SF, basically. Engineering and tech jobs. All the same social media jobs, engineering jobs, content and digital marketing jobs that you can do on either coasts, you can do in Chicago. We even have quite a few television/media/production jobs that puts Chicago in competition with the entertainment centers on both coasts now.
You can work for Google, Pinterest, Facebook, Cisco or Salesforce without spending $4,000 for a 1-bedroom apartment and a still hefty salary. And you don’t have to take the Google bus for over an hour each way to get to your job! Imagine that.
Also, Chicago is quite the transportation hub. Many businesses here that revolve around that either airplanes, trains or trucks or all three.
“That’s not at all true. Both that no one cares, and that they’re going to pay $15m for the place.”
No one gives a damn. He’s a former president. No one cares what the Clintons are doing with their $100 million either. Did anyone care that Ronnie owned a $5 million home in Bel Air that he had to get a loan from rich friends to buy?
No.
But while we’re talking about it, Jimmy Carter still lives in his same house in Plains Georgia and walks to church every Sunday. Oh, and in his 90s he’s still building houses for Habitat for Humanity.
“Ragging on the wealthy while you become wealthy yourself.”
When did Obama EVER rag on the wealthy?
You mean all the times he put the Wall Street tycoons who nearly put the country into bankruptcy in jail? Or when he bailed out the auto industry? Or when he told people in the spring of 2009 to buy stocks?
All those times?
“When did Obama EVER rag on the wealthy?”
The first public figure I ever heard bring up wealth inequality was Obama. Then there was the time during the financial crisis when he said “this is no time for profits”, which is essentially bashing the wealthy. Then there is this: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-17019542/obama-wealthy-should-do-their-fair-share
I could go on.
Sabrina, you’ve got to be joking. The entire Democrat platform these days is about class warfare.
Again, I don’t care that Obama bought a place for $15 million. I don’t care that he gets $500k a speech. I am a greedy capitalist pig. If that is what he can get, more power to him.
It is like how Ted Kennedy was fighting a wind farm off the coast of Nantucket. Climate change is important, but don’t screw up my ocean views!
I could careless what is on other people’s pockets.
The point is the hypocrisy of it. When you build your political career on social justice and claiming rich people don’t pay their fair share, wealth inequality, etc but then turn around and enjoy those same riches, it is rank hypocrisy. The seas are going to rise because of climate change doom, yet you still find it OK to buy a beach front estate.
It is the optics and hypocrisy that is the issue.
The first public figure I ever heard bring up wealth inequality was Obama.
What? You never heard of Martin Luther King? Gandhi? Abraham F’in Lincoln?
“the ad hominen attack”
Nothing in the comment where I pointed out that your maps show NOTHING about where the “ultra rich” live was ad hominem, and you know that.
Here’s an ad hominem attack: quit being a strawman wielding douchebag.
“SF is in CA and and an easy drive to the coast”
Dude, who needs a car? N-Judah to Ocean Beach! And it’s a lot closer to central EssEff than the NYC beaches are to Manhattan.
“The entire Democrat platform these days is about class warfare.”
The entirety of American political discourse is about class warfare, Russ. The only difference between the parties, on the national level, is how they define “class”.
“The seas are going to rise because of climate change doom, yet you still find it OK to buy a beach front estate.”
HOW THE FUKC IS THAT HYPOCRITICAL???? In what way does owning a beach house aggravate climate change?
That’s just nonsense.
Anon(tfo), stop playing dumb. Oh, the world is going to end with rising seas due to climate change, but don’t pay attention to me being an empty nester buying a 7000 sqft vacation home on 30 acres of beachfront for $15 million.
Remember, Obama said “At some point you’ve made enough money…” I guess he hasn’t reached that point.
People are leftist right up until it is their own life and money…
I thought you didn’t care how he buries his money under the sea?
As we say here all the time, the really rich are really different. It’s perfectly compatible to believe that climate change will cause a significant sea level rise withing 50 years and spending ~10% of your net worth on a piece of real estate that will be affected by that. Cause you know where they will both be in 50 years? 6 feet under the ground (and possibly another 20 feet under sea level).
If the sale price ends up at even $12m, I’d be shocked, shocked!
You want to harp on private jet travel by them, go right ahead. Buying on the beach ain’t hypocrisy.
“UberEats just announced it was hiring 2,000 more people here”
UberEats is hiring, too? Where are their offices going to be?
Uber Freight is putting 2,000+ into the Old Main PO, but I haven’t heard about UberEats taking down a 400k+ sf space.
“Nothing in the comment where I pointed out that your maps show NOTHING about where the “ultra rich” live was ad hominem, and you know that.
Here’s an ad hominem attack: quit being a strawman wielding douchebag.”
anon(tfo)isn’t playing dumb, he just misses the forest for the trees a lot. Just like my comment above said that the ‘ultra rich/grinding poverty” he attacks the hyperbole of the phrase instead of the substance of the content. He should fact checked my ‘grinding poverty’ characterization which is defined as a dollar or less a day. I mean, most poor people in Chicago have cell phones, cable television, internet, access to public trans (even if its a bus). Grinding poverty is walking with water on your head to the community well, or, using oxen to plow the rice fields.
It’s absolutely hypocritical to buy a beach front home if you believe in climate change. He’s essentially asking everyone else in the world to reduce their carbon emissions…to save his beachfront, carbon belching mansion. Bernie takes it one step even further – he wants poor, colored people around the world to abort their children, so that there are fewer people on earth releasing carbon…to save the beachfront mansions of the elites. It’s truly, truly despicable. Bernie, in his youth, in a different time, would have been a carbon copy of Louis Antoine de Saint-Just, the Ange de la Mort. Thank the founding fathers a guy like him can only represent a small state, and never had too power, despite yielding disproportionate power nationally for the million or so people he represents.
“he attacks the hyperbole of the phrase instead of the substance of the content”
I know you aren’t stupid enough to misconstrue that as “ad hominem”.
“I mean, most poor people in Chicago have cell phones, cable television, internet, access to public trans (even if its a bus).”
They do?
If you went to the Harold Washington Library (ever) you would realize the “internet” part isn’t true. That’s the libraries #1 service now.
Also the main St Louis library says it gets at least one person a week in their main branch that has never used a computer and needs help so they can apply for a job online. All the major libraries now have basic computer and Internet classes.
Additionally, the LA Times is running a great series on the homeless and has been following an encampment which has been cleared. The residents have been put into public housing and they need training on how to use the kitchen appliances, among other things. Some have been on the streets for over 10 years.
Social services also helps them with computer training and such as well. Most jobs you have to apply online now. It’s easy to assume everyone has the Internet. They don’t.
There are about 50,000 homeless in LA. They don’t have cable tv, cell phones or Internet. Same for Chicago’s homeless. When the big homeless shelter was next to Jones Prep, the residents would hang out in the Harold Washington Library using the computers nearly every day.
“UberEats is hiring, too? Where are their offices going to be?”
Sorry UberFreight.
And Amazon just announced it was adding another 400 jobs in its tech center here, not the distribution facility. It’s going to take 70,000 square feet of more space in its current Loop building. It will double the size of the tech center. It has 18 tech centers across North America.
“The first public figure I ever heard bring up wealth inequality was Obama.”
Well, we DID have a financial crisis right when he got into office because the rich financial elites were idiots and greedy as all hell. That’s why he told them to sit down.
Was he blaming ALL of the rich? Not what I recall.
Did Oprah get blamed? No. Did Apple? No. But Wall Street did. (As it should have.)
And Obama isn’t in Wall Street. Hell, he never even owned stocks before he became president which is financial malpractice as far as I’m concerned. Same with Hillary. In her taxes she has almost NO stock portfolio. No dividend payments at all from stocks. Shocking.
What is wrong with rich politicians? They are awful investors. Like actors. That’s why they buy real estate. They understand it.
“Dude, who needs a car? N-Judah to Ocean Beach!”
No one goes to the beach in San Francisco. That is laughable. I knew people who grew up there that hadn’t seen the ocean in like 10 years. (The Bay? Yes. The ocean? No.)
Interestingly, Ocean Beach is likely not going to be there much longer due to the 100 year cycle that the Pacific Ocean is now entering. Even Lands End and everything in that area will go away due to erosion. Even as it is, the road is constantly covered in sand and shut down. It’s only a matter of time before it reclaims that whole area and probably some of the homes that run along that beach.
It’s too bad.
On the 60 days a year when there is sun there, it’s lovely. Otherwise, it’s too damn cold for me. This week’s fog is giving me the creeps because it is WAY too similar to San Francisco for my tastes. Cold, humid and dreary.
“No one goes to the beach in San Francisco. That is laughable”
Might you be basing this claim on the selection of folks you knew there when you lived there for a period of time? Out of the dozen or so separate times that I’ve been there (mostly for long weekends, but a couple of times for a couple weeks), I don’t think I ever didn’t go to a beach. Typically near Half Moon Bay or in Santa Cruz (often there over winter, so rarely went in the water). And that’s just the bay area. If one lives in the bay area, what coastal areas are within a couple hour drive? Lots more.
“What? You never heard of Martin Luther King? Gandhi? Abraham F’in Lincoln?”
Tell me exactly what you think those guys wanted. I know they were concerned about poverty. But when someone talks about wealth inequality it sure sounds like equality is the desired state and that’s a totally different objective.
“If you went to the Harold Washington Library (ever) you would realize the “internet” part isn’t true.”
He said “most”. 82% of people with income < 30K use the Internet: https://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/internet-broadband/
“Same with Hillary.”
But she knew how to trade cattle futures.
I thought she took a bath on cattle futures, or am I thinking about Whitewater?
“Tell me exactly what you think those guys wanted.”
Tell me exactly who is calling for exact income equality. Not some convoluted if this then slippery slope to that. Where’s the “everyone should have exactly the same” rhetoric coming from (aside from “in Gary’s head”)?
“Or do you consider yourself to be “ultra rich”, HD?”
That was the ad hominem attack, or at least I look it that way, like I’m some schmuck w/ a six figure income who thinks he’s some ultra rich dude driving around town in his Chevy, taking frivolous vacations to the dells, and spending food at Jewel like I’m a king eating at a feast! look at me, I’m “ultra rich”.
“But when someone talks about wealth inequality it sure sounds like equality is the desired state and that’s a totally different objective.”
It’s a little more nuanced than this. The current discussion about wealth inequality isn’t about making everyone equal wealthy. It’s not even about taking away the wealth of the ‘rich’ people.
It’s about giving the opportunities and advantages ‘rich’ people have to everyone else. This is everything from colleges not using the ACT/SAT score because it correlates well with household income, to allowing kids to apply to multiple schools for free because rich people can do that too, to giving poor people housing assistance to live subsidized in rich neighborhoods, to giving earned income credit to poor people to give them more money, and so one. They don’t want to take advantages away from rich people, they just want to give those same life advantages to everyone else. In some cases, I think it is justified; in other cases, not so much.
“That was the ad hominem attack, or at least I look it that way”
Oh, ok.
So you wrote that people like you are “ultra rich” ‘as hyperbole’, and then got upset when I asked if you were serious in making the suggestion that people like you are “ultra rich”? Snowflake much, my dude?
“It’s a little more nuanced than this. The current discussion about wealth inequality isn’t about making everyone equal wealthy. It’s not even about taking away the wealth of the ‘rich’ people.”
I agree with you completely HD. And I also agree with the subtext of your last sentence that the implementation of the policies (and, truly, a lot of the policies themselves) are seriously questionable in attempting to reach the goal. IMO, the worst mistake is not working to reduce/eliminate abuse of the programs, as that is contra to the purpose in soooo may ways (increases costs, hurts public perception, gives cover to those who want to consider them all grifters, etc).
“82% of people with income < 30K use the Internet"
That includes people who use it at the public library, or at work.
That said, 56% of under $30k income cohort has home "broadband" and 26% of the 44% who don't have hoe broadband have smartphones (which does not mean "data plan"–they may rely on free wifi). Means 4-5% "use the internet" but not at home or on their own smartphone.
Re hd’s tendency to post misdirection lies/bs – exemplified by:
“…The middle class areas of Chicago voted Trump, or barely Clinton, while the rest of the ultra rich/grinding poverty areas voted Democrat.”
hd’s linked articles confirm conclusively that Chicago’s middle class areas voted overwhelmingly D/HRC in ’16 – hd chose to focus on a couple of trees (the extremely few precincts T won) instead of the forest of MC votes for HRC:
EX: SW side 19th ward was 35% T & 60% HRC but Trump only won several Mt Greenwood MC precincts (where many city workers incl CPD/CFD & white supremacists live & support candidates hd likes). NW side 41st/38th/36th wards were at highest 43% T v 52% HRC (41st) w extremely few precincts won by T. There I fact checked it for hd
Thank you southbound for confirming my argument. The middle class HAS disappeared, and the few areas that are left, had significant Trump support. KAG 2020.
I appreciate your effort for doing that. I just looked at the map, I let WBEZ and the Chicago Mag do the heavy lifting for me.
“…The middle class HAS disappeared…” Wrong again.
Many jobs held by MC workers in Chgo in 70′ & 80’s (ex: administrative ass’ts & typists/factory workers/manual laborers) were eliminated – some by tech advances but many more by c-suite employees who bettered their own financial outcomes by out sourcing,/off shoring & union busting. But hd’s wrong again b/c not all MC jobs & workers disappeared from Chgo – one example is construction workers are minting money again.
More importantly are the many new MC jobs – aside from the many new tech jobs. Paralegals for example were rare in 70’s & 80’s but are now ubiquitous. Avg local paralegal pay is abt $60k/yr but experienced paralegals can earn more than $100K. Property values in neighborhoods like McKinley Pk, Brighton Pk, Beverly & Morgan Pk… are currently surging due to expanding MC employment in Chicagoland.
As the media likes to say, southbound’s claims are, “without evidence”. Furthermore, southbound is conflating middle class jobs in chicago with middle class residents of chicago.
The maps I linked to – not just southbound’s opinion – clearly shows the middle class has left chicago. southbound just can’t give up and admit the obvious. He’s rather dig a deeper hole just to try and ‘own HD’.
“…The maps I linked to – not just southbound’s opinion – clearly shows the middle class has left chicago.”
More hd misdirection & bs. I don’t want to ‘own hd’ – ime the smart play is to short hd not own hd.
Since hd either didn’t look at his linked maps or is trolling/bs’ing/lying again I’ll report the
map absolutely does not “…clearly show the middle class has left chicago..”
The maps conclude the % of MC residents of Chicago has fallen from 18% betw 2000-2010 to 16% in 2017 (EVIDENCE OF NOT 0% & AN INSIGNIFICANT DROP IMO). Otoh higher income Chgo residents increased from 12% in 2000 to 22% in 2017 – not supporting the Detroit-like death knell hd is selling!
I’ll remind hd that making RE decisions in 2019 and beyond based on 2017 reports of trends over the previous 50+ yrs is like driving a car on the Kennedy via the rear view mirror view. But ime that’s the conservative way!
For evidence re optimism of increasing MC residency in Chgo see:
http://www.bls.gov/regions/midwest/news-release/areaemployment_chicago.htm
Short quote “…In the greater Chicago metropolitan area, professional and business services had the largest employment gain from May 2018 to May 2019, adding 18,300 jobs. Local employment growth in the, professional and business services supersector was concentrated in the Chicago division, which added 11,200 jobs. The Chicago area’s 2.2-percent rate of job growth in professional and business services was similar to the nationwide advance of 2.3 percent….”
Those new employees in Chgo division jobs (particularly millenials) aren’t aspiring to live in Pk Ridge/Long Grove/Mt Prospect or southern WI imo. They’re accepting jobs in Chgo b/c of the amenities of Chgo’s core. Imo they’ll largely be renting in the new GZ bldgs or heading to one of the ‘hoods w easy access to jobs in the core. A final knock agst flawed RE predictions is that if a recession impacts local employment & demand for residential, ime the most likely outcome will be softening from $3.30 PSF rents to $___ PSF not 50% vacancies in the new/newer bldgs.
“The maps conclude the % of MC residents of Chicago has fallen from 18% betw 2000-2010 to 16% in 2017”
Seriously, stopping digging your hole southbound. The city is only 16% middle class? Let’s just agree that you are wrong, and end this conversation. No one is reading this thread anyone and no one will emember how wrong you were in 24 hours. I’m not even keeping score, really, I don’t even care to convince you otherwise.
On a different note, will you be civil to me at this year’s Crib Chatter Holiday Party?
“Tell me exactly who is calling for exact income equality.”
If inequality is a “problem” then doesn’t it follow that it will always be a problem until it’s equal? If not, then how much inequality is not a problem? The whole narrative is dangerous.
” They don’t want to take advantages away from rich people, they just want to give those same life advantages to everyone else.”
Then they should stop talking about income and wealth inequality and talk more about opportunity equality. Everyone can pretty much agree on that. And, yes, their solution to the “problem” is to make rich people poorer via a variety of taxes, which don’t necessarily make poor people better off.
“The maps I linked to – not just southbound’s opinion – clearly shows the middle class has left chicago.”
Who’s living in all those houses in Norwood Park? Or McKinley Park? Or Jackson Park? No one? The poor? The rich?
What about Pullman? Wouldn’t that be a middle class neighborhood?
Lol.
The city of Chicago is HUGE. Most have probably only been to about 25% of the neighborhoods. Even with all the years of running Cribchatter, I’ve probably only been to about 60%.
“Might you be basing this claim on the selection of folks you knew there when you lived there for a period of time?”
I lived there for 7 years. 6 of them in the city of San Francisco. I hiked to Lands End. No one I knew EVER “went to the beach.” The only people down there were surfers in wet suits because it was damn cold and fogged in. But I drove by Ocean Beach in my car many times because I liked to watch the waves come in. It was beautiful. Oh, the rip currents are something fierce at Ocean Beach. People die every year even going just up to their knees. And even though they post warning signs everywhere.
You could go to Baker Beach on the rare fall day after the fog left and it was 80 degrees. I went once. It was nice but you walk on the sand and that was it. Water is cold.
Half Moon Bay? Only in the fall after the awful fog burns off. And then it’s yellow sand and gross. But I’ve sat at a restaurant near the water down there in Princeton-by-the-Sea. It’s not Marina del Ray by any means but pleasant.
I haven’t been to Santa Cruz. It is much further south. It has the amusement park so it probably has better weather.
No one in the Bay Area cares about beaches. If you did, you live in SoCal. Hiking and biking are other things altogether. That’s really why you move to the Bay Area so you can just be up in the hills/mountains on the weekends. In some cases you can be hiking within just 30 minutes. It’s nice.
“If inequality is a “problem” then doesn’t it follow that it will always be a problem until it’s equal? If not, then how much inequality is not a problem? The whole narrative is dangerous.”
So, It’s just slippery slope BS in your head. Got it.
“clearly shows the middle class has left chicago”
per capita personal income for the whole metro was $58,315 in 2017. The ‘BEZ map has the “very high” category as 40% above that, so $81,641. Meaning, that for a census tract to be dark blue on the map, the average (not median) personal income for the tract was $81,461 or higher.
Are you actually saying that a single person who makes $82k in Chicago is not middle class?
“Are you actually saying that a single person who makes $82k in Chicago is not middle class?”
So your beef is with WBEZ’s premise supported by maps and arguments. That’s legitmate because WBEZ is Chicago’s local fake news radio station. Still, $82k is on the low end of the upper middle class for a single person, especially since relative to the rest of the city, it is most certainly on the high end. Two single people earning $82,000 each, operating as a household, but not filing a joint tax return, is certainly upper middle class.
“So your beef is with WBEZ’s premise supported by maps and arguments.”
Your premise now seems to be that people with the talent and motivation to be UMC are presumptively Ds. Fair enough.
“Your premise now seems to be that people with the talent and motivation to be UMC are presumptively Ds. Fair enough.”
I don’t even understand what your point is. What are you talking about.
Voters with income between 50-100k voted Clinton 46/Trump 49; and voters with income over $100k voted Clinton and Trump equally at 47/47.
https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2016
CHICAGO is Democrat; and CHICAGO has lot most of the ‘middle class’.
I don’t understand why this is such a controversial thing that people need to argue over. It’s such a F’d up world with you can’t even agree on basic facts with Democrats, even though I’m using fact presented in an article by an extremely Democrat and liberal organization, WBEZ.
On second thought, maybe I’ll skip the cribchatter holiday party again this year.
Anon(tfo), according to PEW, a household of one needs to earn $78,281 to be considered “upper class” in America.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/14/how-many-americans-are-considered-upper-class.html
According to a calculator on this link, $82,000 for a household of one puts someone in Chicago in the top 22% of all households. They call it “upper class”.
This is uncontroversial stuff here.
Fwiw less uncontroversial stuff in a quote from a discussion re hd’s info on ycombinator :
“There is one very key issue here that is often overlooked. Here are two datums. The first [1] is Chicago community areas by per capita income. The second [2] is the same areas by fertility rate. There is an extremely strong correlation between these two datums. This holds everywhere from our world at large, to individual countries, to even community areas within an arbitrary city in the US. The areas with the lowest fertility rate is “Loop” with a fertility rate of 24.3 and a per capita income of $65,526. The area with the highest fertility rate is South Lawndale with a fertility rate of 99.6, more than 400% that of Loop. And they have a per capita income of $10,402.
While there may be some exceptions, they are indeed the exception. This holds true everywhere. These [3] are data for the US as a whole contrasting fertility vs income. Once again those earning less than $10,000 have a fertility rate more than 20 points higher (150%) the rate of those earning $200k+ per year. And there is a disconcertingly smooth gradient in between. As an aside there are also strong links between fertility and low education and high religiosity as well as low income.
Think about what this means for each generation of children. An ever larger portion of children end up coming from these families with low income, low education, and high religiosity. And now this even larger portion of society will go on to spread their genes in a comparable way meaning you’ll see an even higher chunk of children from the next generation coming from these groups. Poverty gets turned into a virus. Bringing people out of poverty might be a solution if not for the fact that then when people emerge from poverty, they stop having as many children……….
[1] – https://data.cityofchicago.org/Health-Human-Services/Census-Data-Selected-socioeconomic-indicators-in-C/kn9c-c2s2/data
[2] – https://data.cityofchicago.org/Health-Human-Services/Public-Health-Statistics-General-fertility-rates-i/g5zk-9ycw/data
[3] – https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/
” according to PEW, a household of one needs to earn $78,281 to be considered “upper class” in America.”
ok, so you’re an entrenched member of the upper class!! Congratulations on your 15 years as a member of the UPPER CLASS!!!
“I don’t even understand what your point is.”
Has been and remains that this is a bullshit statement:
“The middle class areas of Chicago voted Trump, or barely Clinton, while the rest of the ultra rich/grinding poverty areas voted Democrat.”
But since you are arguing that your family is a clear upper class family, then I guess it almost makes sense.
My brother grew up in Sunset – they went to the beach (rarely), but never to go in the water. And then not like in LA or even in Chicago…
Anon(tfo),
I don’t live in Chicago.
“Think about what this means for each generation of children. An ever larger portion of children end up coming from these families with low income, low education, and high religiosity. And now this even larger portion of society will go on to spread their genes in a comparable way meaning you’ll see an even higher chunk of children from the next generation coming from these groups. Poverty gets turned into a virus. Bringing people out of poverty might be a solution if not for the fact that then when people emerge from poverty, they stop having as many children……….”
You’re an awful, bigoted racist white supremacist southbound. There’s so many dog whistles and undertones about ‘poor’ and ‘religious’ people aka dog whistle “non-white” people in your awful awful post. You call the lifestyles of non-white and poor white people a virus.
You’re disgusting, I never spent time arguing with or responding to HH because he a racist. Apparently you’re the same as he is. Post all you want from here forward, I’m never responding to your insane white supremacist comments again.
But when someone talks about wealth inequality it sure sounds like equality is the desired state and that’s a totally different objective.
I know the convo has moved on, but c’mon, really? Anyone who is concerned about wealth disparity is a raging socialist?
I mean, Jeff and Mackenzie Bezos divorced recently, and the divorce settlement was enough to make her the 22nd wealthiest person in the world. And after relinquishing enough money to make someone else the 22nd richest person IN THE WORLD, Jeff Bezos is still, by far, the richest man alive. Even if his wealth wasn’t derived by mistreating and underpaying his employees, that is an obscene amount of money for one person to amass. (Side note, the health benefits that were recently cut for part-time whole foods workers? The full cost of those benefits for all of those employees for a year is what Bezos makes in 6 hours).
I love organic produce and getting stuff delivered to my door the same day I order it as much as the next person, and yes, Bezos truly revolutionized the retail landscape and he deserves to be rewarded for that. He, as much as anyone, should be rich. But he could be taxed at a higher rate and he could be required to pay his workers a higher wage and he would still be rich. Obscenely and outrageously rich, even.
But while we’re talking about it, Jimmy Carter still lives in his same house in Plains Georgia and walks to church every Sunday.
Anyone who hasn’t read last year’s WaPo story on Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter should read it right now: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/08/17/feature/the-un-celebrity-president-jimmy-carter-shuns-riches-lives-modestly-in-his-georgia-hometown/
It’s absolutely hypocritical to buy a beach front home if you believe in climate change.
I believe in climate change and I own a home in a city that will be severely impacted by climate change (not beach front, though). Not sure how that makes me a hypocrite.
Climate change is a scam perpetuated by the left to keep people scared to move to warm and dry places away from the northern tax n’ spend shithole cities
If it’s a scam by the left, it’s kind of a dumb one. As more people move to the South and SW, those areas become more and more lefty.
I don’t really understand the “climate change is a scam” thing. Usually, someone benefits from a scam, right? Who’s benefitting from this one? Like, if climate scientists wanted to make big money, wouldn’t they work for the oil companies? It’s pretty hard to get rich in an academic setting, grubbing for grants and such. And I don’t think the metal straw lobby is powerful enough to perpetuate this kind of scam. So, what’s the end game?
Madeline:
People call climate change a scam because much of the data sets have been manipulated and the climate models wildly inaccurate. There have been multiple scandals showing how data has been massaged to produce certain results… just google “hide the decline” to get an understanding of the issues. Or “hockey stick global warming”
Here is a good article:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/12/understanding_climategates_hid.html
Professors and others have incentives to continue the hysteria because much of their funding for research comes from virtue signaling to the woke crowd.
Academics have long moved away from facts and data into feelings and virtue signaling.
The other issue is that global warming solutions always end up at the same place…. taxing people. Any climate change solutions will be for the plebes, not the elites. You can bet on that.
The hypocrisy is evident to those of us without blinders on. At Davos, 1500 PRIVATE jets flew in the business and political elite to discuss….. GLOBAL WARMING. You can’t make up this kind of hypocrisy.
Professors and others have incentives to continue the hysteria because much of their funding for research comes from virtue signaling to the woke crowd.
But if this were the case, wouldn’t academics at universities in red states have wildly different conclusions than those in blue states? And wouldn’t the consensus change based on who controlled the US congress?
And again, what is the end game? Who is benefitting from the scam, which has somehow ensnared the majority of researchers at every reputable university and the governments of most developed countries?
Universities are liberal group think islands regardless if the state is blue or red. Any opposing research that doesn’t virtue signal whatever the cause du jour is squashed or ignored.
Go look up Dr. Judith Curry, a former Climatologist Professor at GA Tech. She routinely pointed out flaws and criticized much of the research and modeling that has been pushed as gospel. She resigned.
Judith Curry – “A deciding factor was that I no longer know what to say to students and postdocs regarding how to navigate the CRAZINESS in the field of climate science. Research and other professional activities are professionally rewarded only if they are channeled in certain directions approved by a politicized academic establishment — funding, ease of getting your papers published, getting hired in prestigious positions, appointments to prestigious committees and boards, professional recognition, etc.
How young scientists are to navigate all this is beyond me, and it often becomes a battle of scientific integrity versus career suicide (I have worked through these issues with a number of skeptical young scientists).”
https://reason.com/2017/01/04/georgia-tech-climatologist-judith-curry
Research and other professional activities are professionally rewarded only if they are channeled in certain directions approved by a politicized academic establishment — funding, ease of getting your papers published, getting hired in prestigious positions, appointments to prestigious committees and boards, professional recognition, etc.
From her wikipedia page:
Curry serves on NASA Advisory Council Earth Science Subcommittee whose mission is to provide advice and recommendations to NASA on issues of program priorities and policy. She is a recent member of the NOAA Climate Working Group[9][10] and a former member of the National Academies Space Studies Board and Climate Research Group.[9][11]
I can see that her “appointments to prestigious committees” and “professional recognition” have certainly suffered from airing views that don’t align with the majority.
“Anyone who is concerned about wealth disparity is a raging socialist?”
Because it’s a slippery slope, Madeline. Can’t possibly so much as mention a higher rate on $10m+ incomes, or a tax on assets over $1b, without meaning that you want everyone to equally divide the GDP in a money-oriented version of Harrison Bergeron.
When a presidential candidate has a campaign staffer named Diana Moon Glampers, everyone watch out.
“I don’t live in Chicago.”
Does that mean the threshold for upper class is higher or lower?
Since the ‘BEZ map was based on *metro* average income, I’d have to go with “it’s still the same number”. And I’m guessing your census tract out in Long Grove (or wherever) is a “very high income” tract.
“I love organic produce and getting stuff delivered to my door the same day I order it as much as the next person, and yes, Bezos truly revolutionized the retail landscape and he deserves to be rewarded for that. He, as much as anyone, should be rich. But he could be taxed at a higher rate and he could be required to pay his workers a higher wage and he would still be rich. Obscenely and outrageously rich, even.”
While I agree with you in principle, I think it’s a little more nuanced than this. You continue to shop Amazon and Whole Foods and make him richer. I stopped shopping at both those places years ago. There are so many other online retailers begging for my business, no need to shop through Amazon. You are part of the problem.
As for Bezos, he’s a typical rich guy scumbag. His wife actually loved him and fell for him while they worked together before he started amazon. She had all three or four of his children and raised them. How does he repay for her being the mother of his children? He loses interest in her and cheats on her with a skanky bimbo with all sorts of plastic surgery. The man essentially abandoned his family and his teenage children so he can travel around the world with his past her prime but still fake bosomy former bikini model.
As for being taxed at a higher rate, let’s just start with getting Amazon to pay any tax at all. They use all sorts of crazy accounting tricks to not pay money anywhere. And then they get tax breaks, off the backs of local communities, to open warehouses and facilities all over the country. The man is not paying any tax, the conversation needs to be making him pay tax, before even getting to taxing him at a higher rate.
As for the health insurance, again, yes, offloading his part time employees on to medicaid insurance so he doesn’t have to pay it is wrong, and it’s anthoer example of socializing his costs while privating his profits. It’s crony capitalism at its worst.
And before anyone does the whataboutism with Trump – he cheats too thing – you’re right, Trump is a scumbag too. Please let’s not make Bezos about Trump because that’s where all these conversations go too
Climate change scam: I’ll tell you who benefits from the scam – politicians who use it for power. Nearly every leading Dem candidate wants to fundamentally transform the United States economy because of climate change. Think of all the power that will be concentrated in the hands of a few power hungry politicians who get to make or break entire industries based on their will alone because climate change. They said that they want to do that. I’m not making this stuff up. It’s going to end up as a bloodbath of political vendettas against red and red areas in blue states with any sort of energy, mining or agricultural production. Why should I believe that Elizabeth warren knows what industries should live or die? Trump’s tools so far have been pretty limited with tariffs and he can’t barely get his guy at the fed to cut interest rates. Imagine if Trump had the power to immediately shut down entire industries any reason. you’d be going crazy! But when Biden or Bootyedge says that he wants to eliminate fossil fuels in short order – in short, remaking all utilities, all mining, all agricultre, all energy and manufacturing, everyone throws up their fists in solidarity,
anon(tfo) “So, It’s just slippery slope BS in your head. Got it.”
————————————-
Nice try anon(tfo), but if correlation is merged into causation, then God help us all.
I want good philosophy. I want good plumbing even more. That means I want good maths and good logic over everything.
“Think of all the power that will be concentrated in the hands of a few power hungry politicians who get to make or break entire industries based on their will alone because climate change.”
You mean like what has happened with sugar and ethanol and so many other agricultural products the whole of the 20th century? I don’t understand what the difference is–we still aren’t voting for a King, no matter how much our current president, or the 2 before him, wished it were so.
“When a presidential candidate has a campaign staffer named Diana Moon Glampers, everyone watch out.”
—————————
Yea Gods! Who knew that in the 1970s, Frank was willfully limiting the life options of Moon Unit Zappa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
” I don’t understand what the difference is–we still aren’t voting for a King, no matter how much our current president, or the 2 before him, wished it were so.”
Here is what sanders wants to do:
Sanders’ three-pronged, $16 trillion plan includes transforming the U.S. energy system to 100 percent renewable energy by 2050, holding the fossil industry accountable for climate change and rebuilding the U.S. economy to ensure justice for frontline communities and a just transition for those currently employed by the fossil fuel industry.
$16 Trillion? That’s just slightly less than the US GDP. If this isn’t making himself a King of the entire United States ecomomy, well then, I don’t know what is. He calls it an ambitious plan; in reality, this is major communist power grab under the guise of climate change.
Heck the Iraq war was 1.1 trillion, quantative easing was only 4.5 trillion was unwound. TARP was only 700 Billion. And the tea party came about as a result of the $700 billion to save the banks.
Sanders wants $16 trillion.
$16,000,000,000,000 dollars for him and his party in power to decide how to entirely make the United States economy. Has anyone, ever, asked to spend that much money in the United States? If you think it will be orderly banning fracking on day 1, and forcing people to renovate their home with money they are forced to borrow from the government to emit less carbon.
Why aren’t people calling out what this is? it’s a pure unadultered power grab over the US economy, the type of stuff a King would do. Yet, all fists go up in solidarity for crazy old bernie. Orange man bad. But if you call it combating climate change, well then, it’s OK to give Bernie $16 Trillion Dollars.
Imo hd just went all Rudy Guiliani on me when in response to my posting SOMEONE ELSE”S QUOTE (whoever rjf72 is) from a ycombinator discussion (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19298369 ) re articles hd posted here:
“…You’re an awful, bigoted racist white supremacist southbound….. You’re disgusting, I never spent time arguing with or responding to HH because he a racist. Apparently you’re the same as he is…..”
Imo hd is projecting his beliefs on me to misdirect/bs/& lie. I have many shortcomings but they don’t include racism or bigotry as hd well knows. But if lying can help make hd’s case or deflect attention to others, like DT & Rudy hd just lies, lies lies.
It’s particularly ironic to read hd’s next misdirection attack re Bezos “…How does he repay for her being the mother of his children? He ….cheats on her with a skanky bimbo….. The man essentially abandoned his family and his teenage children so he can travel around the world with his past her prime but still fake bosomy former bikini model….”
Hd’s hero DT has … ah never mind. Ime people are what they repeatedly do so imo DT & Rudy are both cheating, lying & conniving pos’s and hd is at least a lying & conniving pos.
I’m pleased but skeptical re that as hd deems me just like HH (who hd regularly supported in posts here for years) hd will “… never respond to your insane white supremacist comments again….”
I will continue never posting any white supremicist comments but will feel free to refute hd’s lies, bs & misdirections whenever I see fit
I looked for hd’s past posts supporting HH but bogged down reading other posts (hd liking 4 channel & claiming annony was a class traitor &s worse than HH etc).
The most illuminating post revealing who hd is at his core imo were when hd was whining his ACT score apparently in high 20’s should’ve gotten hd a full ride to UIUC if only he wasn’t white. hd bragged about his undisclosed ACT score but never mentioned his HS GPA or class rank,
Iirc hd previously posted he grew up in the part of Wheeling in Buff Grove HS district. In my experience most of the “low wage immigrants from foreign countries and the gangs that come with that” in west Wheeling immigrated from SE Asia.
I believe hd’s real beef w/immigrants stems from those non-white ‘gangbangers’ who came to Wheeling from India, Pakistan & Nepal but then out worked hd earning better HS GPA’s & class ranks. hd’s endless whining about how the deck’s been stacked agst him exemplifies the dark side of ‘white privilege’. jmo
I say a lot of things southbound, it’s all just distraction. I’ve moved from long grove to tinley park to park ridge to Wisconsin; and I went to high school in Palatine, Wheeling, Buffalo Grove and Long Grove. I have a friend who lives in the wheeling part of buffalo grove and HIS taxes were really high. That’s what that post was about, I never said I was from wheeling. REgardless, None of this is true, and I have no obligation whatsoever to you or anyone on this board to use real personal identifying info. Sabrina regularly claims I don’t even live in IL. maybe she’s right!!!
Except this: You are a white supremacist. You called the lifestyles of non-white poor and religious people a virus. Your own words, earlier in this thread. It’s not misdirection, its your own words. It’s despicable. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I know I said I wouldn’t post to your racist comments, but I need to set the record straight about the comments and info I post here.
Go back to your KKK rally with the rest of your blackface wearing democrats.
“So, It’s just slippery slope BS in your head. Got it.”
Putting my questions in a nice little box doesn’t answer them. Why not answer them?
” He, as much as anyone, should be rich. But he could be taxed at a higher rate and he could be required to pay his workers a higher wage and he would still be rich.”
1) Just because he could be taxed at a higher rate doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. The goal of taxation should not be to make someone less rich. It should be to raise revenue and I have a problem with singling out a few people to pay for benefits to everyone else. 2) Why should the government ever require anyone to pay their workers more than the market wage? It’s just friction in the system. You want to accelerate automation? Artificially raise wages.
now HD goes all Corey Lewandowski on me & posts big lies, little lies & lots of lies but hey per HD CC readers have no reason to expect truth in HD’s posts. Sorry that another bad week in Trump-land is making HD so crazy.
Here’s two quotes from HD posts – imo HD wasn’t lying to his buddy Bob then:
“….Hey to each’s own you talk about returning to your original home, a mid-western city, i talk about returning to my original place, the nw suburbs. same difference.”
“And Bob, I grew up in a NW suburb very close to Arl. Hts. It’s a great place to live and grow up. There’s nothing wrong with living out there; I’d much rather have Johnny attend a district 214 high school than send my kid to virtually any high school in the CPS or even a private school. And 214 is already paid for with my property taxes. And with the exception of the ‘gang’ school in 214 *you know which one I’m talking about* there’s not much riff raff or even poor people out there.”
So what that hd’s BGHS classmates who immigrated here from southeast Asia worked harder & outperformed HD. It explains why HD hates immigrants – apparently in hd’s opinion they cheated him by taking his rightful white privileged place in US’s hierarchy.
I don’t care who hd is IRL (although I believe it’d be poetic justice if hd’s clients read his hate filled CC posts I certainly wouldn’t do anything to assist them find out who HD is). And one final lie HD posted (beside calling me what hd sees every time hd looks in his mirror) – Wheeling’s taxes aren’t high.
“You want to accelerate automation? Artificially raise wages.”
No one needs to “artificially” raise wages. Companies will raise because they can’t find anyone to do the work. Hence, Bank of America now paying $17 an hour as the basic entry level rate.
Restaurants in Chicago are having a hard time getting and keeping chefs. They are trying to do as many benefits as possible in order to avoid paying higher wages which means higher food prices. Those $15-$20 entrees? Must go to $20 to $25 per dish.
There are 7 million job openings. There are signing bonuses going on.
The rich never pay higher tax rates. They pay lower than the middle class. How about making it equal? Most people would settle for just that instead of Mitt Romney’s 12% rate.
“Sabrina regularly claims I don’t even live in IL.”
Not true. I regularly say you don’t live in Chicago, not Illinois. I have no doubt you’re out in the burbs somewhere. But there’s a big difference from living in Lake Zurich or Woodstock and living in Streeterville.
“Why aren’t people calling out what this is? it’s a pure unadultered power grab over the US economy, the type of stuff a King would do. Yet, all fists go up in solidarity for crazy old bernie. Orange man bad. But if you call it combating climate change, well then, it’s OK to give Bernie $16 Trillion Dollars.”
No one is giving Bernie anything and never will. Get a grip HD. It’s the current president who is spending like a drunken sailor. Whatever happened to the tea party? At least you could respect their position even if you disagreed with their tactics.
But there’s no end in sight to what the current administration is willing to spend money on. And, once again, there are troops going to the Middle East. I thought that was going to end?
There’s more money going to the farmers for the tariffs than ever went to the auto industry which had to be saved. Why isn’t anyone talking about this? Yet Obama is still railed on for bailing out Detroit. Thank god he did. Oh, and the farmers will need ANOTHER $12 billion in just a few months because the trade war is going to go on and on.
Imagine what the country could have done with $40 billion? That could pay for a lot of infrastructure, including high speed rail between Chicago/St Louis/Milwaukee AND Detroit with some left over to probably go to Cleveland.
We could upgrade New York City’s entire subway system to a state of the art system with it too.
“Here is what sanders wants to do:”
It’s a stupid argument to even talk seriously about Bernie. Warren is eating his lunch.
“Think of all the power that will be concentrated in the hands of a few power hungry politicians who get to make or break entire industries based on their will alone because climate change.”
This has already happened. One tweet from Trump calling out a company has brought its stock down. Trump’s refusal to allow California to have its own emissions standards is also, basically, making or breaking an entire industry. And the trade war has fundamentally changed the entire apparel industry. Some may say having to move your entire supply chain is a “good” development, while others would argue the opposite.
Were some too concentrated in China? Probably. This will help diversify their manufacturing. But the price increases on the consumers has been brutal.
Also, look at what is happening in the steel industry. EVERYONE predicted this, by the way. Layoffs are here now. Just like in the early 2000s when the Bush Administration tried tariffs to “level” the steel playing field and found out it led to more layoffs. Supposedly, the republican party was supposed to have learned from that experience. But, here we are, with it basically Groundhog Day again.
Coal is already going away HD. Has been happening for years. Hillary was right when she said that they all need to be retrained. Those jobs aren’t coming back. But she was creamed for saying the truth. The Obama Administration, by the way, put in a really comprehensive program for retraining in that industry. The government will pay for you to go back to school. It’s a pretty good deal in a really sucky situation. Average pay of many of those coal jobs was close to $100,000. That pay will never come back to those towns. That’s the challenge going forward.
The US economy has always adjusted to changes. About 80 years ago, half the population was still farmers. Hard to believe. Even 15 years ago there was no such job of social media director or SEO specialist, among others. We have to have a labor force that can adjust. People will change careers once or twice probably. We need to make it easier to go back and get retraining to move into areas where the job openings are.
“Anyone who hasn’t read last year’s WaPo story on Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter should read it right now:”
I read this Madeline. Thanks for posting it. Everyone should read it. Jimmy is just a really decent and honorable American. Our country is better for having had him in the White House and for what he has done afterwards. He is STILL building houses, in his 90s, for Habitat for Humanity.
“If it’s a scam by the left, it’s kind of a dumb one. As more people move to the South and SW, those areas become more and more lefty.”
The Atlantic just did a whole article about this. As Northerners move to TX it is turning the major cities and the suburbs blue. And since 80% of the people in Texas live in the top 5 major cities and suburbs, it won’t take much to turn the state as well.
Lol.
Kind of ironic.
“No one needs to “artificially” raise wages.”
But that’s exactly what Madeline was suggesting when she said Bezos could be “required” to pay people more.
“The rich never pay higher tax rates. They pay lower than the middle class.”
Totally not true. The data is readily available. Please don’t make me look for it. Each higher income bracket pays a higher effective rate until you get to like the top 0.1% or something.
“Putting my questions in a nice little box doesn’t answer them. Why not answer them?”
I found a lot of unsupported statements, and one, two-part question:
“If inequality is a “problem” then doesn’t it follow that it will always be a problem until it’s equal? If not, then how much inequality is not a problem?”
Here are the answers:
1. No. You’re being facile. That’s an embarrassing position for freshman at a directional school to adopt.
2. Let’s just go with “the amount of inequality that existed among white men in about 1970, but applied out to all American labor and capital”. Right around 1970 (wanna say 67 or 73 or whatever, fine, won’t argue) was a definite inflection point in stats that add up to a measurement of inequality.
There is NO ONE with so much as a statewide voice who is actually calling for anything that would lead to a slippery slope to absolute equality of income/assets, much less actually calling for the policy of absolute equality. Hell, CTU boss Jesse Sharkey, who uses all of the vocabulary of late-19th century socialists, ain’t interested in absolute equality.
“No one needs to “artificially” raise wages.”
But that’s exactly what Madeline was suggesting when she said Bezos could be “required” to pay people more.
I think the minimum wage should be higher, and I think it should be indexed to inflation. I guess I’m just a raging socialist who thinks that people should be paid a living wage.
I also think executive pay should be indexed to worker pay, but I doubt that could be effectively legislated.
Anon,
Going a bit ad hominem on me I see. That’s OK. I don’t think those are dumb questions at all. Sure seems to me that those politicians want more equal outcomes to me. The only question is how equal they want it to be. Everyone would have a different answer, agree? Not sure why the 1970 level is OK for you but not some time period after that.
And the suggested policies that attempt to “solve” “inequality” are pretty lame. Nothing focused on the root cause at all. Just focused on the result. I have no doubt that if rich people became poorer, without poor people becoming any better off, that all the people wringing their hands over this issue would be happier. It’s just such a twisted perspective. Frankly, I don’t care if my next door neighbor suddenly wins the lottery and becomes better off than me. Doesn’t impact me at all.
Madeline,
The whole living wage discussion gets really weird really quickly. Living wage for whom? A 20 year old single person? A 40 year old single mother of 3? A person with $100K/ year in medical bills? Should an employer be responsible for the personal responsibilities of each of their employees and pay them differently?
And do you seriously not think there are any consequences to forcing employers to pay employees more than the market wage? Automation? Lost opportunities to high school dropouts in favor of high school graduates? Businesses closing? Cutting staff? In fact, I walked by a restaurant last night in SF with my son-in-law and he told me they closed because their labor costs got too high. They had always offered their employees nice benefits in lieu of higher pay but then had to raise the pay with the new laws. There are countless examples of this.
” Not sure why the 1970 level is OK for you but not some time period after that.”
————————-
I like what you said Gary, but the 1970s cut off makes sense. That’s when productivity started increasing big time but wages stagnanted.
Your model assumes that the R.O.I. of investors is inviolate. Yes, it does have economic consequences, as well it should. It is a legitimate question to ask, however, whether we should kow-tow to an MBA with a spreadsheet and no skin in the game as opposed to factory workers who refuses to accept the fact that he is economically obsolete. The dispassionate economic analysis must inform the political choices.
In the early 1930s FDR stated that companies that refused or couldn’t pay a living/decent (I forget which) should not be in business.
Ya really wanna tell us here and now that FDR was wrong? I’m sure you don’t, but for all the wannabe heros out there, I say this: Think– if the social costs your “corporation/artificial entity” impose exceed the benefits society receives from their existence, then why should society allow their creation?
And do you seriously not think there are any consequences to forcing employers to pay employees more than the market wage?
No, I just think the consequences of employers not playing their employees a living wage are more serious.
The whole living wage discussion gets really weird really quickly. Living wage for whom? A 20 year old single person? A 40 year old single mother of 3? A person with $100K/ year in medical bills?
That does seem complicated. I guess we should do nothing!
Frankly, I don’t care if my next door neighbor suddenly wins the lottery and becomes better off than me. Doesn’t impact me at all.
I don’t care if my neighbors are rich, either. I do care if someone is working full time (or more than full time with multiple jobs) and they still qualify for SNAP. That really should not be the case.
I walked by a restaurant last night in SF with my son-in-law and he told me they closed because their labor costs got too high.
Sounds like maybe they weren’t very good at running a restaurant.
“I do care if someone is working full time (or more than full time with multiple jobs) and they still qualify for SNAP. That really should not be the case.”
Here’s an easier fix–lower the income that qualifies for SNAP. Problem solved, amirite??
“Going a bit ad hominem”
Yes, I should have written “that’s a ridiculously facile argument”. Apologies. A college freshman should still, imo, be embarrassed to make it.
Too much simply means too much. The logical conclusion of wanting to reduce “too much” is not “none”. A sedentary person who eats 8000 calories a day is eating “too much”, the right number ain’t zero, and isn’t something that can be properly modeled. The logical outcome of reducing too much inequality is not no inequality, it’s less inequality.
Do I think that the unnamed (but apparently numerous!!, but you can’t answer my question, either) people who are saying that there is too much inequality have a specific answer for what is “just right”? hell no. I don’t claim to, either, but I’d probably do a better job that these unnamed anarcho-syndicalists.
Why’d I pick 1970, you ask? I already said so, but I’ll say again–it was just before stuff started to change a lot, and at the end of a 25 year run of (almost) all boats being lifted. You wanna say 1960 instead, fine. But the 20 years of the 50s and 60s were pretty good economically, overall, and particularly for white dudes of (almost) all class backgrounds and working situations. You want to say 75 or 65 (when CEO to working stiff comp was 20 to 1, as opposed to 250+ to 1 today) or 55, whatever.
“But the 20 years of the 50s and 60s were pretty good economically, overall, and particularly for white dudes of (almost) all class backgrounds and working situations.”
Huge rebuilding after the war. Men went back to work in the factories making cars and refrigerators for all those new families. They had wives at home to cook and clean using the latest appliances.
“I walked by a restaurant last night in SF with my son-in-law and he told me they closed because their labor costs got too high.
Sounds like maybe they weren’t very good at running a restaurant.”
Not really. This is happening all the time in the Bay Area. They just can’t find enough workers, frankly. I don’t know how ANY restaurants are staying open that are in the middle range. The waiters can’t make enough money to pay their rent, even in a group house situation where you just have a bed in a room. And who is driving 2 or 3 hours one way to their job in a restaurant?
It’s a serious issue.
Add to that restaurant rents that have doubled or tripled and that means you have to shut down.
“I like what you said Gary, but the 1970s cut off makes sense. That’s when productivity started increasing big time but wages stagnanted.”
After 1970 is when women entered the work force in big numbers, actually.
Also, other items started plunging in cost such as clothing. Prior to 1970 it was a huge chunk of most people’s living expenses. Clothing started to be mass produced with cheaper fabrics by the 1970s.
“They had always offered their employees nice benefits in lieu of higher pay but then had to raise the pay with the new laws.”
Actually, the move that Seattle and SF did to go to $15 minimum wage had little to no impact on small businesses, including restaurants according to the data. Remember, they raised wages several years ago now.
There is actually a worker shortage and landlords have gotten greedy by raising rents. It was a double whammy. Restaurants can’t compete. Kind of like you’re seeing all over Logan Square right now. Restaurant margins are historically razor thin as it is. They’re under too much pressure now.
“I have no doubt that if rich people became poorer, without poor people becoming any better off, that all the people wringing their hands over this issue would be happier.”
It doesn’t really have anything to do with the rich versus the poor. Those living in poverty keep falling.
The key is the middle class. It has been shrinking. What no one wants to talk about is that high housing costs has made it virtually impossible to be middle class. And then add on healthcare costs. Many people can’t imagine making $50,000 a year and actually being able to buy a $100,000 house. It’s possible in some second tier cities but not in the largest cities anymore. That’s what has changed. If only the Fed didn’t keep interest rates artificially low, we may not have such a severe affordability problem. The Fed has allowed housing prices to re-inflate.
“Totally not true. The data is readily available. Please don’t make me look for it. Each higher income bracket pays a higher effective rate until you get to like the top 0.1% or something.”
Income taxes are designed to tax income. The truly rich don’t have high income. They have assets.
This is why Mitt Romney paid only 12% on his $100 million. I never saw Rauner’s tax rate but it wasn’t 36% was it? Doubt it.
So, yeah, they pay much less. Those who get screwed are the upper middle class who mostly DO pay the high tax rates.
Warren Buffett has said that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. But that’s because his “income” is much lower than his assets. The tax code is skewed towards income. Elizabeth Warren, for instance, wants to tax ASSETS. A much different discussion. That’s why her “plan” is able to collect so much revenue.
But why bring assets into this? When people talk about tax rate they mean as a % of income. That’s what Buffet is talking about and his is lower because of favorable capital gains treatment. How are you calculating tax rate when you say the rich pay a lower rate? What are you putting in the denominator?
“No, I just think the consequences of employers not playing their employees a living wage are more serious.”
And I think the consequences of screwing with the market are far more serious. Would you rather have 10 MM people making $12/ hour or 12 MM people making $10/ hour? (figuratively speaking – I’m not suggesting that is the exact math)
“That does seem complicated. I guess we should do nothing!”
Or at least be able to define what it is you want to happen. If your battle cry is “living wage” you need to be able to explain what a living wage is. Nobody can.
“I do care if someone is working full time (or more than full time with multiple jobs) and they still qualify for SNAP. That really should not be the case.”
Why not? How do you determine what should and shouldn’t be? I shouldn’t die before I’m 200.
“Sounds like maybe they weren’t very good at running a restaurant.”
Wrong conclusion. They weren’t very good at running a restaurant in an environment where the government arbitrarily decides what wages should be.
“Actually, the move that Seattle and SF did to go to $15 minimum wage had little to no impact on small businesses, including restaurants according to the data. ”
There are a ton of articles out there like this: https://www.epionline.org/oped/the-minimum-wage-eats-restaurants/
“Too much simply means too much.”
Well, I have no idea what too much inequality of income/ wealth is. I think it’s an irrelevant measure. It doesn’t matter. All that matters is equality of opportunity.
“Why’d I pick 1970, you ask? I already said so, but I’ll say again–it was just before stuff started to change a lot, and at the end of a 25 year run of (almost) all boats being lifted. …You want to say 75 or 65 (when CEO to working stiff comp was 20 to 1, as opposed to 250+ to 1 today) or 55, whatever.”
Generally speaking the average person is much better off than they were in the 70s. And the ratio of CEO pay to the average worker is another meaningless statistic. There is no right number. It’s about as relevant as the ratio of cell phone usage to tea consumption. What is relevant is whether or not compensation committees are sufficiently independent.
Let me put it another way. If someone discovers the cure for all cancers and becomes a billionaire wealth and income equality gets “worse” but the world is better off, not worse off. It’s just a dumb metric to focus on.
“In the early 1930s FDR stated that companies that refused or couldn’t pay a living/decent (I forget which) should not be in business.
Ya really wanna tell us here and now that FDR was wrong? ”
Yeah, FDR was wrong – and not just about this. His statement does not even make sense. So you have 50 unemployed people and someone with a business idea that will employ those 50 people at a wage that someone thinks is not decent – even though they can’t explain to you how they determined what decent is. And you want to tell me that that company should not be in business?
“What is relevant is whether or not compensation committees are sufficiently independent.”
None of them are.
“So you have 50 unemployed people and someone with a business idea that will employ those 50 people at a wage that someone thinks is not decent”
I have a great idea for a cotton plantation…
“I have no idea what too much inequality of income/ wealth is.”
So, because you don’t grasp it, that makes it not a problem.
Are you really taking the position that you are smart enough that anything you don’t grok (in the macroeconomic realm–I realize we’re not broaching, eg, theoretical physics) can’t be relevant?
“Why not? How do you determine what should and shouldn’t be?”
You’re doing the same thing, Gary. How do you determine what should and shouldn’t be? I know you’ll claim “logic” but how do you determine the first principle?
“All that matters is equality of opportunity.”
thanks gary, glad to see someone else with some brain cells regarding this matter… equality of outcome is never EVER going to happen as every human is unique
then again that won’t stop power hungry socialists from spreading that message and trying
Why is it only CEO comp people worry about when it comes to wealth inequality?
Why should an A list actor get $20 million a film while an extra gets a few hundred bucks! Talk about unfair! Let’s institute some sort of actor pay ratio.
How about sports? Why should Lebron make $50 million when some guy riding the bench is making league minimum?
Why should a top BigLaw rainmaker make millions while slave associates are the ones putting in all the work?
“Why is it only CEO comp people worry about when it comes to wealth inequality?
Why should an A list actor get $20 million a film while an extra gets a few hundred bucks! Talk about unfair! Let’s institute some sort of actor pay ratio.
How about sports? Why should Lebron make $50 million when some guy riding the bench is making league minimum?
Why should a top BigLaw rainmaker make millions while slave associates are the ones putting in all the work?”
I agree with you, I have no issues with this. Kahail Mack deserves every penny of his contract. Even Taylor Swift, despite her annoyingness, deserves her money. as does every other working stuff.
My issue with income and wealth inequality is guys like Fat Slob in Springfield. The guy is allegedly worth $3.2 Billion with a B. But no one knows – just like Trump, he doesn’t release all his tax returns – only tax summaries, none of which include his offshore wealth, undisclosed to us plebs, not paying any income tax at all on it, and certainly not 4.95% of it to Illinois. You get enough of these guys together in a conference in Davos and suddenly their wealth exceeds the market cap of the entire S&P 500. Wealth concentration affects economic growth because there isn’t enough money going around. And then our tax laws encourage it to go into trusts offshore (like Fat Slob). There’s a reason why in old literature the evil dragons always hoarded wealth. Wealth hoarding is not a good thing as us plebs are forced to fight over pennies, most of it extended to us on credit, while the Fat Slob has literally Billions hoarded away like a fat little squirrel preparing for winter.
Why should an A list actor get $20 million a film while an extra gets a few hundred bucks! Talk about unfair! Let’s institute some sort of actor pay ratio.
How about sports? Why should Lebron make $50 million when some guy riding the bench is making league minimum?
Why should a top BigLaw rainmaker make millions while slave associates are the ones putting in all the work?
Why indeed? Welcome to the revolution! (it WILL be televised).
“All that matters is equality of opportunity.”
But we don’t have this. Those with wealth give their children advantages that others don’t get. Just look at the nepotism in the White House or in Hollywood.
And it starts with who is admitted into elite colleges. In Britain, the Labour party is running on shutting down Eton as being undemocratic.
“Yeah, FDR was wrong – and not just about this.”
Didn’t FDR push through the minimum wage? I know he got rid of child labor.
Wasn’t it also during his administration that the 40-hour work week was regulated?
It’s really amazing to me how much big business controls our politics now. No one even blinked an eye that we cut corporate taxes for entities that are, in some cases, worth a trillion dollars and are controlled by billionaires.
“That’s what Buffet is talking about and his is lower because of favorable capital gains treatment.”
Yes- he makes almost NO income. That’s why I said you have to look at assets. He pays the lower capital gains tax on his assets.
His secretary doesn’t have those assets. She probably mostly has income. So she is paying a much higher rate.
Wasn’t Buffett’s rate like 22% or 18% or something? He has talked about what it is.
The rich aren’t rich because of “income.” At least Warren and Sanders have figured that out. You want to raise money, tax the assets. Tax those stock options.
Additionally, the older rich guys KNOW the government is going to take the money. It’s only a matter of time. That’s why Buffett has his big “donate it” project going on.
If they donate it to their foundation, at least THEY are deciding where the money is going, and not the government. And it gets the government off their back.
For instance, when Sam Walton’s widow died Arkansas was due to get $1 billion in inheritance tax on her estate. Why not just donate all of your money to a foundation instead? Then YOU decide (from the grave). Not the state of Arkansas.
I feel like this time period is very akin to the rich building their mansions in Newport, Rhode Island in the 1910s and 1920s. Shortly thereafter the income tax came into being.
Over the winter in Chicago, we had about 100 people living in a homeless encampment when that Polar Vortex was about to hit.
An anonymous donor came forward and had rented a local hotel for a couple of nights to get them off the street.
I thought it must have been someone like Ken Griffin, the Citadel founder, who is a billionaire.
But no.
It was a middle class real estate agent, who felt like she had to do something to help, and put it all on her credit card. After she came forward, they did a Go Fund Me and people donated enough money to pay off the bill and add on like 2 more days for the homeless in the hotel.
This was about 2 weeks after the press reported that Ken Griffin had paid $238 million for a penthouse in NYC.
That’s why Warren and Sanders’ proposals are popular. The backlash against the extreme wealth is growing.
“You want to raise money, tax the assets. Tax those stock options.”
by law I don’t think they can do that, forcing the sale of assets to pay taxes sounds like a horrible slippery slope to fall down
I wonder if it will fall under the same sort of rules like where IRA’s are protected under certain laws because taking money from them will create a tax liability/penalty
It just sounds like wishful thinking, and its probably not going to happen
Sabrina, but do you know of all the charitable giving that folks like Griffin are involved in? I’d imagine they do quite a bit anonymously or through other proxies. Just because they don’t splash their name on every dime they give out doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
Wealthy give a ton of money away. Go to any university, opera, museum, animal shelter, homeless shelter, park, etc and you will see all the various benefactors that make those things possible.
The problem is we have do gooders who think just because whatever their little pet project isn’t being funded that the wealthy are being greedy or don’t care. The reality though is that there is always somebody or some organization in need of money for something. Forcible taking money is never the answer.
All that matters is equality of opportunity.
But we don’t have that. Not even close:
blic.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/legacyathlete.pdf
There will NEVER be equal opportunity and it is a pipe dream to think otherwise. Somebody will always have an advantage of some sort.
All you can do is play the cards you are dealt. Sure, we can do things to open opportunities for those who might be disadvantaged in some way, but it is a never ending battle and at some point, you just have to accept that some people are not going to be born on third base.
Sometimes you have to just accept that you might have to work a little harder than someone else to get the same results.
Life isn’t fair and never will be.
“Sure, we can do things to open opportunities for those who might be disadvantaged in some way”
But if we do that, then it’s a slippery slope to total equality. It’s just logical. QED!!
“got rid of child labor”
Commie. Why shouldn’t we let someone employ those 50 unemployed 8 year olds?? Their hands are a perfect size for lubricating those conveyors.
““got rid of child labor”
Commie. Why shouldn’t we let someone employ those 50 unemployed 8 year olds?? Their hands are a perfect size for lubricating those conveyors.”
How many persian rugs do you own, anon(tfo), do you eat Basmati rice? Do you have an iphone that has tantalum, or do you eat mexican chili peppers?
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-goods-print
Madeline,
Harvard is a joke. All those ivy’s are. George W. Bush was an ivy league grad, isn’t Trump U Penn?
The difference in opportunistic for 99.9% starts at home. It’s parents who follow up with home, choose to live in a good school district, stress education and good grades, show up to kids school events, read to thier children every night, help them with their awful common core homework, and so on. Everything else, from testing, to internships, to whatever is minor. A kid who gets no help at home is at a major disadvantage.
“Everything else, from testing, to internships, to whatever is minor.”
In a perfect world? Sure. But that’s not what we live in.
Future career earnings are influenced simply by where you can get internships.
“Sabrina, but do you know of all the charitable giving that folks like Griffin are involved in?”
I’m sure he does Russ. I know he and his ex-wife were big supporters of art at the Art Institute.
Great!
But the fact of the matter is that when this kind of inequality last happened it wasn’t enough that they “gave to charities.” The government stepped in.
Oh, and the Rockefellers knew this all too well. All of the Rockefeller sons donated what, today, would be billions of dollars. University of Chicago was paid for by the Rockefellers as well as about half of Princeton University’s buildings. Because otherwise, it would have likely been taken. Even as that is, the Rockefeller Family trust is still paying out nice payouts to hundreds of heirs 100 years later. The last I saw, the trust had like $15 billion. Probably higher now as that was years ago.
It’s fantastic when rich people “give” but they all don’t.
The government can be much more efficient at spending money for the needs of society. For instance, we’re not going to get new bridges from the rich. But the government will do it.
We will, however, get the MacArthur Genius Grants from the MacArthur Foundation. Founded here in Chicago in 1970. Has given away $7 billion so far.
“by law I don’t think they can do that, forcing the sale of assets to pay taxes sounds like a horrible slippery slope to fall down”
Airbnb employees are paying taxes on their options already. That’s why they are pushing for the IPO. Some of them have huge tax bills and no way to pay it.
But you can always tax the stock when it converts over. That’s easy to do. Tax the asset.
“I have a great idea for a cotton plantation…”
What wage did you have in mind? If unemployed people are willing to work for the wage you are offering then obviously they consider it to be better than being unemployed.
“So, because you don’t grasp it, that makes it not a problem.
Are you really taking the position that you are smart enough that anything you don’t grok (in the macroeconomic realm–I realize we’re not broaching, eg, theoretical physics) can’t be relevant?”
I don’t believe things that appear to be illogical. Also, if someone else claims to be have some intellectually superior understanding of a subject despite being unable to articulate their framework then they have no credibility with me.
” How do you determine what should and shouldn’t be?”
I go with the supposition that the natural order should be left alone unless someone can make the case that disrupting the natural order will improve things.
re: equality of opportunity – “But we don’t have this.”
So let’s focus on that instead of the outcome. Why would you ever try to manipulate an outcome without addressing root causes?
Let’s start with the ALDC admissions at colleges.
“[Buffet] pays the lower capital gains tax on his assets.”
No, he pays it on his capital gains. Focusing on assets makes no sense.
“The government can be much more efficient at spending money for the needs of society.”
Seriously? I trust Bill Gates and Warren Buffet more than the federal government to do the right thing with their money. Those guys understand ROI. The feds don’t. Where’s our infrastructure? Where’s the upgrade to the ATC system? Can they close military bases that don’t make sense? Where’s centralized medical records? All the feds care about is getting re-elected.
“Wealth hoarding is not a good thing”
Finance 101/ Econ 101: wealth is not hoarded unless you literally put cash in a vault somewhere and nobody does this. It’s invested or spent – i.e. someone else gets to use it in the case where it’s invested.
Now if you want to focus on inequality then, in addition to focusing on opportunity inequality, you can focus on spending inequality. When wealth is consumed society is worse off. Tax consumption, not income or assets. A sales tax or VAT. Exempt food, healthcare, and some level of housing (e.g. a sales tax on purchases in excess of $2 MM or something)
“Seriously? I trust Bill Gates and Warren Buffet more than the federal government to do the right thing with their money. Those guys understand ROI. The feds don’t.”
————————————-
Gary, what was the ROI on ARPANET research back in the 1960s (military precursor to the internet)? We went to the moon because of a goal, not an investment plan. Eisenhower built the interstate highway system for defense, not commerce, considerations.
Lastly, is it Central Park in New York that gives the surrounding buildings their value? Or the surrounding buildings that give Central Park its value?
Gary L posted “…. I trust Bill Gates and Warren Buffet more than the federal government to do the right thing with their money. Those guys understand ROI…)
Hats off to 2 people doing the right thing w/their money imo:
“…billionaires Stewart and Lynda Resnick are set to announce on Thursday the second-largest donation ever to an American university: $750 million to the California Institute of Technology for environmental study, much of it focused on technological solutions to combat climate change….”
“the natural order”
WHOSE “natural” order?? Sounds like it’s yours, rather than something actually “natural”. How do you determine what is “natural order”??
There have been many, many concepts of “natural order” even just in our nation’s history, and they have mostly ended up being used as an argument for mayhem of one sort or another.
So, for some reason, I cannot post a comment if I include a semicolon.
Odd!
I don’t trust Gates, who has doubled down on common core education, and has made America dumber as a result – an entire generation of children is worse off because of his misguided efforts to fundamentally change education.
But I trust Bernie and Pocahontas even less than I trust Gates. Liz and Bernie are using Gates’ money to buy their way into elected office – quite literally – by proposing that it be confiscated (via taxes) and spent on other things they deem more important. And lord knows I don’t trust them to spend it either. The end result will be that little of it will leave the DC area. There’s a reason why the wealthiest counties in America are mostly outside of DC.
And yes gary, for all practical purposes, the money is hoarded. It might not be in a cave covered by a dragon, but it’s stored in things financial instruments, art, valuables, that the elite class exchanges among itself. In economies around the world throughout history and antiquity, the plebs traded in silver and other metals while the elites dealt in gold. And on a practical, on .01% selling his Picasso or Versailles to another .01% is trading in gold while the rest of us plebs are using our copper pennies (or worse, a capitol one card) to buy food at the grocery store.
“using Gates’ money to buy their way into elected office”
Every federal politician is using someone else’s money to buy their way into office–ain’t none of them proposing slashing spending to have a balanced budget, and stop spending our grandkids’ money. Every dollar of deficit spending is a dollar of future taxes. Sometime, it makes sense. it does not make sense every single year.
“The end result will be that little of it will leave the DC area.”
You mean like the billions of dollars that somehow ended up in Los Angeles and Chicago to both build and repair their subway systems? LA is adding a whole new line that goes to the airport.
Here in Chicago, we’re getting a bunch of new stations and the flyover near Wrigley.
Thanks Obama!
“Let’s start with the ALDC admissions at colleges.”
If you start telling Harvard that they can’t admit legacies, next you’ll tell businesses that they cannot hire anyone related to a current or former employee.
Re: Arpanet, the moon, and the interstate highway system.
None of the long term benefits of these things were anticipated. Sometimes the government gets it right by accident. I think the Internet would have come along sooner or later by itself. The same for the technology used to go to the moon. In fact, at the time, the space program was pretty controversial because a lot of people thought it was a waste. We pursued it because of some vague belief that the Russians would rule space.
Only the government could have built the interstate system and that’s an appropriate role for them.
As for Central Park…I’m not seeing the relevance.
“WHOSE “natural” order?? Sounds like it’s yours, rather than something actually “natural”. How do you determine what is “natural order”??”
I define the natural order as the way things evolve on their own without government interference.
“for all practical purposes, the money is hoarded. It might not be in a cave covered by a dragon, but it’s stored in things financial instruments, art, valuables, that the elite class exchanges among itself.”
Nope. Not hoarding. Financial instruments are the best example. Someone issues a bond, bought by a rich person, and the issuer gets to use the money. It’s circulated. If a painter paints a painting and sells it for $10K then the painter gets to use the $10K. If the value of the painting subsequently goes up to $1 MM then the original purchaser, who sells it for $1 MM, now has $1 MM to use. The money does not go out of circulation.
“If you start telling Harvard that they can’t admit legacies, next you’ll tell businesses that they cannot hire anyone related to a current or former employee.”
Don’t you want equality of opportunity?
They should be allowed to admit legacies but they shouldn’t be giving them preferential treatment. Same with hiring practices.
“I define the natural order as the way things evolve on their own without government interference.”
So, a state that has not existed in millenia.
“Don’t you want equality of opportunity?”
Aren’t you advocating for your advantages that were cemented by centuries of “government interference” prior to your birth?
“they shouldn’t be giving them preferential treatment. Same with hiring practices.”
So, basically no more family businesses. Gotta hire the most qualified person.
“How many persian rugs do you own, anon(tfo), do you eat Basmati rice? Do you have an iphone that has tantalum, or do you eat mexican chili peppers?”
You are waltzing right past my point, which is that Gary’s view is that having any law preventing any person from being employed at any wage is “wrong”, and that then includes any laws about child labor.
Is your view that we in the USA should have the same labor laws as Pakistan? Should we allow indentured servitude? Voluntary (but legally enforceable) slavery? Those are all ways to give “jobs” to the unemployed.
Gary is arguing a libertarian perspective, of which I subscribe to some of. the natural order works well in a laboratory but not so much in the real world where fraud, exploitation and other unfair labor practice occurs. I’m sure Gary doesn’t want child labor, or forced labor, unfair market or any other abhorrent labor practice that our society no longer finds acceptance. But Gary also doesn’t want crony capitalism, where the government picks the winners and losers, usually for reasons unrelated to market competitiveness. Google, as awful as those dopes are, is a really good search engine, and is better than the rest that ever came before. The problem is the unfair market practices employed by Google, of which there are many (trademark infringement, copyright violations, arbitrary ad denials, and so on). People counter this that government always picks the winners and losers through regulation, but this is not true; regulation for everyone keeps the playing field equal, instead of the government picking winners (clout heavy government construction contracts anyone?, bank bailouts, airline bailouts, government regs favoring big business, the new marijuana market in Illinois, affirmative action set aside contracts) and losers.
“So, a state that has not existed in millenia.”
1) It does exist in different circumstances and at different points in time. Whenever disruptive technology emerges you have it until regulation creeps in. Or when the power of government is disrupted.
2) Whether or not it exists in a pure form is irrelevant. You asked for a definition and I provided it. It’s the baseline.
“Aren’t you advocating for your advantages that were cemented by centuries of “government interference” prior to your birth?”
No. If you believe that I have then show me where I stated that.
“So, basically no more family businesses. Gotta hire the most qualified person.”
How did you get there? Besides, family businesses are a totally different situation. They are even exempt from child labor laws – with regard to the children of the owners.
I define the natural order as the way things evolve on their own without government interference.
Why is government considered an unnatural element but markets aren’t?
“Madeline on September 28th, 2019 at 12:55 pm
I define the natural order as the way things evolve on their own without government interference.
Why is government considered an unnatural element but markets aren’t?”
Are aware that Rep. Sandoval’s office was just raided by the FBI & IRS, along with the villages of McCook, Lyons and Summit? The ‘crony capitalism’ of corrupt government official to steer business to one company over another is a totally unnatural element.
In most cases (absent government influence or unfair market practices) the best product for the best price is what happens in a market economy. Until a better product at a better price comes along.
You don’t like Verizon, go to Sprint or T-mobile,
You don’t like Bluff City Materials supplying the asphalt to pave the streets of your town? TOO BAD, State Sen. Sandoval is lining his pockets with their bribes, the state has no choice!
“In most cases (absent government influence or unfair market practices) the best product for the best price is what happens in a market economy. Until a better product at a better price comes along.
You don’t like Verizon, go to Sprint or T-mobile, ”
——————————-
Bad example. The government has to auction off spectrum or else no one could use it. A point Gary might want to consider. I guess he stands for the proposition that we should not have cellphones because the natural order of thing wouldn’t allow it.
In any event, bribery for spectrum licenses has been a problem worldwide, and in the USA, lobbying/bribes to open spectrum or move spectrum uses has been a problem.
BTW, in the natural order of things, the way God intended, Bucktown stops at Armitage.
“Why is government considered an unnatural element but markets aren’t?””
Because markets require almost no effort to form. They’ve existed before governments. They spring up in chaos where no governments exist – e.g. prisons, war torn regions, after natural disasters. It’s in our DNA – I’ll do this for you/ give you this if you do this for me/ give me that. There is no friction. Sure, rules eventually emerge but the goals of those rules is to make the market function better. Everyone has the power of their wallet.
Governments on the other hand are structured and rule based. People have to get together and hammer out rules. A few have power. The goal of the rules is to stop something from happening rather than facilitate it usually. They introduce friction into the system.
“I guess he stands for the proposition that we should not have cellphones because the natural order of thing wouldn’t allow it.”
No, we should because they naturally evolved – just like the boundaries of Bucktown did.
Gary sez, appropo of cellphones: “No, we should [have cellphones] because they naturally evolved”
—————————–
Nice try, Gary, but the whole point of cellphones is that they could not have evolved unless government regulated the market. Someone had to say “you get this piece of the radio spectrum, he gets that piece, and Z over there gets the other piece. You are wrong. Natural market evolution unfettered by government regulation would not have have given us cellphones.
And there’s nothing natural about real estate shills either. Wishful thinking and lying for a sale is not something a market can cope with.
“Because markets require almost no effort to form. They’ve existed before governments. They spring up in chaos where no governments exist – e.g. prisons, war torn regions, after natural disasters. ”
——————————-
Gary, lemme ask you a few questions:
1. would you rather live in a place with a functional, working, government, or in a prison (which by the way , is the result of government)?
2. would you rather live in a place with a functional, working, government, or in a war zone?
3. would you rather live in a place with a functional, working, government, or in a place where a natural disaster occurred without a functional, working, government, to help it recover (or better yet, prevent/mitigate the damage in the first place.
I always liked the old bumper sticker: If you think education’s expensive, try ignorance.
“Nice try, Gary, but the whole point of cellphones is that they could not have evolved unless government regulated the market. Someone had to say “you get this piece of the radio spectrum, he gets that piece, and Z over there gets the other piece. You are wrong. Natural market evolution unfettered by government regulation would not have have given us cellphones.”
Actually johnc, my example is just fine. Don’t like one carrier, then pick the other. Your reason that the cell phone market wouldn’t exist but for government is totally wrong. The government controlling the spectrum and the licenses is the reason why cell phone plans in the US are more expensive than almost anywhere else in the world. It’s government interference in the market that causes the price distortion in the US; and because of the regulation, we all pay for; but within this government regulated market, there is still a functioning cell phone market with plenty of carrier churn all the time. That’s why there are so many cell phone commercials. because of competition. I don’t understand your point in your comments, are you some kind of Maoist?
“would you rather live in ___ or ____”
We’re not forced to make that choice. My only point is that markets form no matter what. People don’t need a government to start trading goods and services.
“The government controlling the spectrum and the licenses is the reason why cell phone plans in the US are more expensive than almost anywhere else in the world. It’s government interference in the market that causes the price distortion in the US; and because of the regulation, we all pay for; but within this government regulated market, there is still a functioning cell phone market with plenty of carrier churn all the time. That’s why there are so many cell phone commercials. because of competition. I don’t understand your point in your comments, are you some kind of Maoist?”
————————————
Nice try, homedelete, but I absolutely defy you to show us a cellphone market without government allocation of spectrum. The competition you refer to — the European market — is managed by national (READ GOVERNMENT –boundaries.So the government’s insist on home competitors and guess what? — prices go down.
So government interference? — lower prices in cellphone service. Leaving side how one country could expropriate another country’s radio spectrum.
Headline analysis need not apply.
“We’re not forced to make that choice. My only point is that markets form no matter what. People don’t need a government to start trading goods and services.”
————————————-
Stop whining, Gary, You are absolutely forced to make that choice if you want to provide interstate highways (darnnit, that’s a gummit project!!!) or cellphone service (radio spectrum is a public good).
If you want to agree that giving up your a** for a can of tuna fish and protection is a free market, then I’ll give you prisons. Something you want to tell us?
Why do you assume that a private party couldn’t build a road?
“They are even exempt from child labor laws”
Cargill is exempt from labor laws?
” I’m sure Gary doesn’t want child labor, or forced labor, unfair market or any other abhorrent labor practice that our society no longer finds acceptance.”
He specifically argued that if there is someone who wants to employ 50 unemployed people, it is wrong to prevent them from doing so by requiring minimum standards. He may not *want* those things, but they wouldn’t bother him.
Mainly because he believes that the negatives wouldn’t affect him, which is him arguing for the centuries of advantages built into his current situation.
His argument, HD, is another side of the 8-dimensional coin from the looney left arguments that you (mainly rightly, if thru a bit of a fish-eye lens) have so much disdain for.
” I’ll do this for you/ give you this if you do this for me/ give me that.”
or: You’ll do this for me, or else I will do that to you.
I always love the anarcho-syndicalist gestalt underlying “pure” libertarianism. Both sides really seem to believe that it is the existence of government that corrupts the fundamental goodness of human nature.
“Cargill is exempt from labor laws?”
More precisely they are exempt from the laws with regard to the children of the owners.
My only point is that markets form no matter what. People don’t need a government to start trading goods and services.
You know what else forms no matter what? Government. Why are markets somehow more pure?
“More precisely they are exempt from the laws with regard to the children of the owners.”
As are universities with respect to legacy admits.
Same damn thing, as it relates to equality of opportunity.
“Same damn thing, as it relates to equality of opportunity.”
They apparently are not exempt from government regulation because the government is all over their asses with regard to affirmative action. Perhaps the government is OK with legacy admits but they shouldn’t be if they are concerned about the root causes of income/ wealth inequality. Colleges are the key to social mobility. Whether or not the kids of owners of a business work there when they are 12 doesn’t impact this issue.
“You know what else forms no matter what? Government. Why are markets somehow more pure?”
Governments don’t form without a lot of effort. People have to sit down and hammer out rules and in the process the vast majority of the population is left out of the process. Leaders my emerge naturally but that’s about it. On the other hand everyone gets a vote in the market every second of every day. That is infinitely more pure.
“Both sides really seem to believe that it is the existence of government that corrupts the fundamental goodness of human nature.”
I don’t think in terms of goodness or fairness. I think in terms of friction vs. freedom.
“He specifically argued that if there is someone who wants to employ 50 unemployed people, it is wrong to prevent them from doing so by requiring minimum standards. He may not *want* those things, but they wouldn’t bother him.
Mainly because he believes that the negatives wouldn’t affect him, which is him arguing for the centuries of advantages built into his current situation.”
You’re concocting a straw man argument and making all sorts of unfounded assumptions about my motivation. First of all, unemployed people are not going to willingly agree to work as slaves or indentured servants (although we can argue about what constitutes an indentured servant – e.g. someone who runs up a huge credit card bill can be thought of as an indentured servant).
And I have no idea what “centuries of advantages” you think are “built into my current situation” nor how such presumed advantages are relevant to this discussion.
“Perhaps the government is OK with legacy [employees] but they shouldn’t be if they are concerned about the root causes of income/ wealth inequality.”
So, you’re arguing against family businesses, too.
Business should be *required* to hire the best person for the job, without regard to familial relationships.
“Perhaps the government is OK with legacy [wealth] but they shouldn’t be if they are concerned about the root causes of income/ wealth inequality.”
And an argument for high (punitive, even) inheritance taxes, as well.
“And an argument for high (punitive, even) inheritance taxes, as well.”
Good luck with that. Billionaires like the morbidly obese slob in Springfield find a way to send their money offshore or put it into family trusts to get around the inheritance tax. Family trusts exist for this very purpose. The only people who get screwed with the inheritance tax are the small family business owners and family farmers who end up paying so much of the tax.
Yes, homedelete, all those family farmers who are worth $10 million and actually meet the threshold for the estate tax.
Also, I’d guess that 99% of family businesses aren’t big enough to qualify for the estate tax.
Your argument made sense 25 years ago when the cut-off was low at $500,000. That’s been rectified. It now affects only the richest of rich, who, like you say, typically find ways to avoid it anyway.
“So, you’re arguing against family businesses, too.”
Not at all. We’re talking about employing family members. Not anywhere near as significant in driving opportunity equality as major universities. How many kids are employed in family businesses each year vs. legacies admitted into colleges? And what is the advantage conferred by family business employment vs. admittance to a college. False equivalence.
I’m fine with inheritance taxes but think 50% should be the limit.
I’m also not aware of how rich people can avoid inheritance taxes using trusts. The vast majority of the money put away this way ends up going to charitable causes.
Southbound:
“This is the least tax-friendly state in America — and California doesn’t even crack the top 10”
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-is-the-least-tax-friendly-state-in-america-and-california-doesnt-even-crack-the-top-10-2019-10-02
Look at the #1 state – Indiana. I guess you were right. Indiana is so tax unfriendly compared to IL.
Oh wait, wait, hold on……it doesn’t say Indiana at all, it says Illinois. I’m getting old, my vision must be blurring staring at these computer screens all day. I must have confused the two because they both start with the letter I.
see look at that map, if you’re looking for tax relief you have to leave the Midwest and rust belt
“I’m fine with inheritance taxes but think 50% should be the limit.”
———————————
You’re not taking into account he stepped up basis for the heirs upon death. They’re not paying capital gains and other taxes that would be paid otherwise.
That’s why estate taxes rise so steeply so fast. The government is recouping taxes and fees (including forward taxes that would have been paid by heirs on sale) that the stepped up basis wipes out.
And notwithstanding all the bleating, family farms and firms don’t get sold for taxes. They get sold because one child can’t afford to buy the others out. THat’s where my lottery winnings went.
“False equivalence.”
I don’t know where the end of your equality of opportunity lies. If you have a problem with one sort of favoritism, it’s only logical that you are opposed to all forms of favoritism.
Or does your “logic” only apply when you are making asinine conclusions about income inequality?
“I don’t know where the end of your equality of opportunity lies. If you have a problem with one sort of favoritism, it’s only logical that you are opposed to all forms of favoritism.”
No that is NOT logical. I’m opposed to policies with a root cause effect that hinder social mobility.
“Or does your “logic” only apply when you are making asinine conclusions about income inequality?”
You calling my conclusions asinine doesn’t make them so.
” You’re not taking into account he stepped up basis for the heirs upon death. They’re not paying capital gains and other taxes that would be paid otherwise.”
Not a fan of double taxation.
“Not a fan of double taxation.”
———————–
Neither am I, but it’s not double taxation. Two different entities. One’s your estate, the other is your heir. Look at it this way: You earn money (income), you pay taxes on it. Then you spend the money and I earn it (income) from you. Are you telling us that you think that my income (your expenditure) should be tax free because it was taxed to you already?
Simply because you and your heir are related doesn’t mean that society should give your heir a free ride. When would it end?
“I’m opposed to policies with a root cause effect that hinder social mobility.”
So, you’re opposed to financial inheritances. That some people inherit wealth and others do not absolutely hinders social mobility. (I won’t cite to Piketty, as he would fall into your “must be arguing for absolute income equality” “logic”). See, eg, https://trustest.jotwell.com/the-impact-of-race-and-inherited-wealth-on-social-mobility/
You made a ridiculous slippery slope conclusion about how a concern about the current degree of income inequality MUST mean that the goal of those raising it is absolute income equality. I’m not “calling it” asinine, it is objectively asinine (NB: Just like my presentation that you arguing against legacy admits MUST MEAN that you object to all other “legacy” preferences, like familial hiring and inheritance. I’m aware that it doesn’t necessarily follow, nevermind asserting that it is the logical conclusion). Applying the slipperiest of slopes only to that one thing with which you disagree, and insisting it is “logical” is asinine.
I agree that large inheritances are troubling and that’s why I support significant, but not punitive, inheritance taxes. But they are troubling because they can leave power concentrated in the hands of a few families forever. Do they hinder social mobility? They don’t have to – if the rules are set up correctly – like the basis for admitting people to colleges.
I don’t understand what you are advocating for. So you don’t care that the deck might be stacked at the front end. You just want to unstack it at the back end. That’s an asinine position.
My point about the income inequality narrative is that it’s this nebulous complaint focused on the fact that income/ wealth is unequally distributed. What is the goal exactly of the people engaging in that narrative? All I hear is “it’s unequal let’s redistribute it”. There is no endpoint discussed. No finite goal. They are already sliding down the slippery slope and there are countless examples in history of countries that have gone down that slippery slope and it NEVER ends well.
In principle, death taxes are pretty bad – why work so hard in life if your legacy just gets punitively taxed by the government? No one is going to willingly allow that money to be confiscated by the state. They engage in tax avoidance schemes and hide the money.
However, in practice, I truly wish inheritance taxes worked, because the fat slob in Springfield never worked a day in his life and uses his daddy’s money to make friends and influence people, and named his own law school after himself. He inherited the money he donated, and most of it likely sat offshore, not paying taxes on any of it, and then he gave the donation and received another tax donation. as one journalist described this situation, the donation is nothing more than transferring found money from one party to another, and isn’t really even a ‘gift’.
“In principle, death taxes are pretty bad – why work so hard in life if your legacy just gets punitively taxed by the government? ”
————————–
Because then your heirs will sell the asset and another young striver (like you were once) will have his opportunity to make a pile and give much of it to his kids.
Prevents ossification of society and of opportunity. Nothing “pretty bad” about that, even in principal.
“Because then your heirs will sell the asset and another young striver (like you were once) will have his opportunity to make a pile and give much of it to his kids.”
You make this claim without evidence, based on nothing more than your personal belief. This is dogma, not evidence based. If so, why did you vote for JB who is the poster child of a guy who inherited all his money and bought political power with it?
” If so, why did you vote for JB who is the poster child of a guy who inherited all his money and bought political power with it?”
——————————
What are you babbling about? Who said I voted for JB?
As for encouraging sales of assets to pay estate taxes, that’s been widely known for literally generations.
And keep in mind that estate taxes can help keep taxes on current income and sales lower than they would otherwise have to be.
“As for encouraging sales of assets to pay estate taxes, that’s been widely known for literally generations.”
What you call an estate tax, others call a death tax. You die and the government forces families to sell their assets for forced government confiscation. Money that doesn’t keep other taxes low – just more money to feed the machine, unions, special interests. Do you really want AOC spending your money? I’ve seen JB spend my money – $45,000,000,000 of it; and it seems, at least, one guy on the ‘transportation’ committee was taking bribes to steer that money to his favorite constituents. And you want to keep feeding this beast.
Do your kids really need more than $12 MM of your money (+ another $12 MM from your spouse) to live a comfortable life? I know people who are concerned about giving their kids even that much because of what it might do to them. Granted, it depends on what/ who your kids are. But let them earn their own money beyond that.
If you don’t want the government spending the rest then set up a charitable foundation to fund more worthwhile causes.
“If you don’t want the government spending the rest then set up a charitable foundation to fund more worthwhile causes.”
Who gets to decide what is a worthwhile cause? the Koch brothers? Pocahontas? Why are arbitrary $12,000,000?
The fact of the matter is the inheritance is the default position and equitable solution, as it has been throughout all of history, and anything else is a death tax.
I’m not clear on what you want. Do you want the government to decide what happens to money upon death or do you want the person who created the wealth to make that decision?
We could always debate the exemption amount. Seems to me that a kid getting $5 MM tax free would be a pretty good deal for the kid. The problem with letting a family pass along $1 B in perpetuity without taxes is that it just encourage the family to live out eternity as parasites. I think everyone needs to contribute something.
Inheriting money tax free has not been the default position. Estate taxes apparently go back 3000 years. You can call it a death tax if you want to but it doesn’t really change the merits of it.
“In principle, death taxes are pretty bad – why work so hard in life if your legacy just gets punitively taxed by the government?”
The US hasn’t had “death taxes” in a decade or more. And before that, the truly rich figured out ways to get around it (lawyers!).
For instance, the Rockefellers haven’t genuinely made any money in about 100 years now yet the Rockefeller Trust is still paying out thousands of dollars each year to the descendants as there is over $10 billion in that trust.
The Kennedys didn’t invest as well and weren’t nearly as rich originally, but they sold the Merchandise Mart for enough to fund the family trust for another 50 years. Each of the grandkids is also still getting a couple hundred thousand a year from their own trust. It’s not enough to have a private jet and looks puny compared to Internet billionaires or even YouTube stars, but it means the grandkids don’t really have to work and can afford an upper middle class life.
Even Bill Gates concedes that he really shouldn’t have all the billions he has. He’s been trying to give it away for 20 years now. It’s really difficult to run a foundation with billions in the endowment. There are only so many “good” organizations and causes.
You might not want the government to have it, but it’s the government that mostly funds medical research (through the public universities) and they’re the ones building airports, high speed rail, new bridges and tech advances like wifi.
Out of the billionaires, only Richard Branson has really seen the need to build infrastructure like rail but he doesn’t have the money to do it right like the government should be doing it.
According to this piece the government provides a significant contribution to medical research but not the majority of the funding. https://www.researchamerica.org/sites/default/files/2016US_Invest_R&D_report.pdf
My issue with the government is that most of what they spend money on is consumption. No ROI. Very little infrastructure. https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go
“My issue with the government …”
Is that I don’t like the goofs – of any political party – deciding how to spend money. It always ends up with some corrupt politician taking bribes…. i.e. Biden allowing his son to be appointed to a ‘no show’ position on the board of a Ukrainian natural gas company for $50,000 a month in exchange for financial support. OR allegedly, IL Rep Sandoval taking petty bribes to steer $45,000,000,000 of infrastructure to his preferred companies.
” “My issue with the government …”
Is that I don’t like the goofs – of any political party – deciding how to spend money. It always ends up with some corrupt politician ….”
but it’s ok for hd’s ‘connected’ law firm to receive those gov’t legal assignments hd’s bragged abt here? Don’t partners & others (incl. hd?) make sizable ‘campaign contributions’ to show ‘appreciation’ to their ‘clouters’ hd? Did hd’s dad ‘allow’ his son to go to work at that possibly corrupt law firm ?
“but it’s ok for hd’s ‘connected’ law firm to receive those gov’t legal assignments hd’s bragged abt here? Don’t partners & others (incl. hd?) make sizable ‘campaign contributions’ to show ‘appreciation’ to their ‘clouters’ hd? Did hd’s dad ‘allow’ his son to go to work at that possibly corrupt law firm ?”
Please stop southbound, you’re just an a$$hole. My father did manual labor his entire life and beat up his body and mind from inhaling fumes and has dementia right now. He forgets the names of his grandchilden when he sees them. So you’re just being a real jerk.
As for the ‘connected’ firm, there’s lots of ways of being ‘connected’ including having frat brothers in high places. To suggest that I or anyone I worked for gave any campaign donations to anyone in exchange for government is completely wrong, in fact, keeping out of politics is better for business all together. All my campaign donations have been at the national level under $200 to republicans only so that they don’t get reported. Please try to keep things more civil southbound, not sure why you’re such an a$$hole.
“Please try to keep things more civil southbound, not sure why you’re such an a$$hole..” whines the poster who posted:
“You’re an awful, bigoted racist white supremacist southbound. … Post all you want from here forward, I’m never responding to your insane white supremacist comments again.”
I believe hd’s firm is ‘connected’ but believe little else of what hd posted. (yeah they were frat bros w/Burke or Madigan, that’s the ticket! And no one contributed – right). hd is holier than anyone I’ve known!
Why are every one of hd’s posts accompanied by his 2 up votes – that much of a snowflake?
Gary, without the federal government the major research universities wouldn’t exist.
I’m not sure of that. I’d like to see the numbers and can’t readily find them. A quick search indicates it’s not easy to prove or disprove. Probably varies greatly by university. But I didn’t say the government shouldn’t exist. Just that most of the government’s spending is not focused on stuff with an ROI – like research. And the biggest chunk of the government’s funding goes to defense. Not saying that defense isn’t important but it doesn’t have the kind of ROI that medical research does.
what do you think gary, is this accurate or just sensationalism?
https://www.loopnorth.com/news/home1008.htm
I think the author had a story they wanted to tell and found the information to support it. As i said in my monthly update we’ve been averaging a 7% decline in sales this year. September was only down 1/2%, though IAR will claim it’s a little worse. Even 7% is not exactly crickets. And I wouldn’t use anecdotal open house information to draw a conclusion.
Now, following up on Sabrina’s comment somewhere I looked at condo inventory by price point and there is indeed a glut of higher priced condos but that could be because of all the new construction at the higher price points: http://www.chicagonow.com/getting-real/2019/10/glut-of-higher-priced-condos-townhomes-developing-in-chicago/
Gary posted “I think the author had a story they wanted to tell and found the information to support it…..”
Per the quoted source in article (presumably owner of the OT 3 flat) : “How can I pass on a $6,000-plus rent increase to cover this,” the owner asks. “Rents would have to nearly double.”
So assuming owner occupies one of the 3 units, currently the other 2 apts rent for $250/mo each?
That sounds like a story to me – will he sell the property for that offensive estimated FMV?
“So assuming owner occupies one of the 3 units, currently the other 2 apts rent for $250/mo each?”
*Nearly* double.
I suspect he meant that the increase he was already planning would have to nearly double–so a $550/month increase, rather than merely $300/month.
It’s really more likely that all three of the units are rented, and then you’re talking about a $175/month/unit increase in rent. Not peanuts, but not remotely nearly “nearly double”.
“anon (tfo) on October 16th, 2019 at 4:05 pm
“So assuming owner occupies one of the 3 units, currently the other 2 apts rent for $250/mo each?”
*Nearly* double.
I suspect he meant that the increase he was already planning would have to nearly double–so a $550/month increase, rather than merely $300/month.
It’s really more likely that all three of the units are rented, and then you’re talking about a $175/month/unit increase in rent. Not peanuts, but not remotely nearly “nearly double”.”
Stupid journalists can’t even quote their source accurately; and then in the proofing stage, don’t even recognize that they misquoted their source. It’s not like me posting on cribchatter here just blazing ahead without doublechecking my facts before posting. They are *journalists* for goodness sake.
“Now, following up on Sabrina’s comment somewhere I looked at condo inventory by price point and there is indeed a glut of higher priced condos but that could be because of all the new construction at the higher price points”
Yes, they’re building hundreds of expensive condos. It’s got to be a couple of years worth of inventory now. And when the recession comes, it will be even worse.
The bigger concern is that some of these developers can’t pay back the loans and then we get defaults.
From the article: ““I’ve never seen the city home market this slow, even during the Great Recession of 2008,” observed another veteran North Side broker.”
Absurd.
Come on!
It’s not even close. Just look at the old posts on this site from that time period. Home sales fell off a cliff.
The article is correct that the upper end market is dead in most places. There’s too much on the market in the luxury level. The West Loop is seeing some new construction closings but otherwise, the units are piling up in a lot of the usual buildings. It could take you YEARS to sell now unless you are aggressive with pricing.
But even at the $750,000 to $1 million range. With the increase in property taxes, a lot of buyers are getting priced out even with the low mortgage rates.
And if you think you’re going to sell after you just bought 2 or 3 years ago and make ANY money, at literally ANY price point, good luck. The appreciation just isn’t there and the selling fees/costs are just too high. You have to stay in a property longer than 2 years. Otherwise you should be renting.
“With the increase in property taxes”
Wait until values start dropping, but taxes still go up. That will be the real tell on the effect of the tax rates.
ps: been happening in a lot of burbs for the past 10 years. You know, the burbs that are in real trouble.
I still get redfin alerts about my old homes and one said flat y/y the other said down 4% y/y
not sure how accurate that is but its not lookin good considering mortgage rates have dropped like 25% in that same time frame
down 4% is way too fine a distinction, imo.
I mean an across the board 10%+ pullback and, more importantly, reductions in assessed values. The first time there is a re-assessment with most people seeing AV reductions (even just a little) and then a tax bill that is still higher than the previous year will be a real eye opener.
“It could take you YEARS to sell now unless you are aggressive with pricing. ”
OK. That’s an exaggeration. Look at my data above. There is about a one year supply of condos above $1 MM. Also, I just did an analysis of new construction and it’s not bad at all. Granted, not all new condos are in the MLS so the data is understated, but inventories of new construction are not bad. And the sales of new construction condos is trending UP: http://www.chicagonow.com/getting-real/2019/10/chicago-new-construction-real-estate-market-review/
“There is about a one year supply of condos above $1 MM.”
You’re going to look at inventory in mid-October and tell me that’s the market?
Come on Gary. This is the lowest inventory of the year. Lots of people who couldn’t sell will yank their listings and try again in the spring. And there are literally hundreds of condos over $1 million that aren’t listed on the MLS. Are all the Tribune condos on there? 1000M? Vista?
Of course they aren’t.
Add on a bunch of other midrise buildings where they are ALL priced over $1 million and it’s a ton of units. Maybe it’s not as bad as the luxury market in Lake Forest where it’s years of inventory, but it’s in the danger zone.
The builders of Chicago Place which will add on another 70+ million dollar condos better hope some are absorbed in the next 2 years as they get closer to completion.
“You’re going to look at inventory in mid-October and tell me that’s the market? ”
I was looking at the end of September and it wasn’t that much lower than the summer.