Good for him. Large trucks & SUVs should stay out of dense urban areas, anyways.

/ Unless there's a commercial need for them, of course.

There's only one way to deal with rebels from Aldaran,,,

Forbidden Doughnut: Good for him. Large trucks & SUVs should stay out of dense urban areas, anyways.

I don't think they should stay out necessarily, but they occupy more space and wear the roads more, thus should pay more to use the city's roads.

You wanna take advantage of the city's amenities? Live there. Or pay up.

slc11082: Whats the point of that dumb sticker. When I lived in the city they said I had to get one but I nenver did and nobody ever said anything. How would they know if you didn't have a sticker?

By looking at your windshield and giving you a ticket if you don't have one?

In Chicago you absolutely will get a ticket if you don't have a sticker (multiple tickets, actually, every time they see you without one) or if it's improperly displayed. My best friend recently bought a car and on the way from the dealership to a currency exchange to buy her sticker a cop almost gave her a ticket but relented - grudgingly - when she explained that she had literally just bought the car minutes earlier.

Easy revenue for the city.

metztli: slc11082: Whats the point of that dumb sticker. When I lived in the city they said I had to get one but I nenver did and nobody ever said anything. How would they know if you didn't have a sticker?

By looking at your windshield and giving you a ticket if you don't have one?

In Chicago you absolutely will get a ticket if you don't have a sticker (multiple tickets, actually, every time they see you without one) or if it's improperly displayed. My best friend recently bought a car and on the way from the dealership to a currency exchange to buy her sticker a cop almost gave her a ticket but relented - grudgingly - when she explained that she had literally just bought the car minutes earlier.

Easy revenue for the city.

I hate Chicago Nazis.

How dare they trample on my RIGHT to drive?

So the former enforcer for Fartbongo the Socialist is attacking Chicago unions and raising revenue through regressive taxes. Truly history's greatest socialist monster.

Modguy: How dare they trample on my RIGHT to drive?

Not sure if serious, but if it was a right, you wouldn't need to be licensed in order to do it.

Definitely not serious. The first thing I learned in Drivers Ed is that "driving is not a right, it's a privilege."

TheMadChaosopher: AND they're beginning costly new licenses for dogs and cats.

AND they're putting speed cameras to work along with the stop light cameras.

AND they're going to start writing $100 tickets for not shoveling your snow fast enough.

AND they're nearly doubling the I-Pass toll rates.

ad i hear that they're going to implement an I-Pass just for Downtown. a separate box to charge everyone $5-$7 just for driving into the Loop. The same system they have in London.

Yes, a modern-day city of almost ten million people and its day to day operations actually cost money to run them.

What a shocking turn of events.

whidbey: TheMadChaosopher: AND they're beginning costly new licenses for dogs and cats.

AND they're putting speed cameras to work along with the stop light cameras.

AND they're going to start writing $100 tickets for not shoveling your snow fast enough.

AND they're nearly doubling the I-Pass toll rates.

ad i hear that they're going to implement an I-Pass just for Downtown. a separate box to charge everyone $5-$7 just for driving into the Loop. The same system they have in London.

Yes, a modern-day city of almost ten million people and its day to day operations actually cost money to run them.

What a shocking turn of events.

Yes, how horrible. Poor Chaosopher, taxed to death when all he wants to do is be a pot-smoking free rider.

Forbidden Doughnut: Good for him. Large trucks & SUVs should stay out of dense urban areas, anyways.

/ Unless there's a commercial need for them, of course.

Large trucks and SUVs also rip up roads a lot more. Many smaller bridges are not built for regular traffic of vehicles over two tons. There used to be signs on side streets alerting drivers that vehicles over two tons were prohibited. Why? Because larger vehicles are harder on roads. Most SUVs and light trucks fall into the two to two-and-a-half ton range. Really big ones exceed three tons.

Another issue in the city is parking. Most of the neighborhood parking in Chicago is street parking. One of those behemoths takes up a lot more than one vehicle's worth of parking. And, if the behemoth in questions parks at a corner or near an alley-way, it creates another type of hazard because it completely blocks the sight lines for any oncoming traffic.

It's ridiculous that the rest of us have been subsiding those behemoths and the idiots who think a tank is an appropriate town car.

Okay, I don't live in the area... What the hell is a "city sticker"?

I live in Dallas, where all the roads are designed for "large vehicles".

TheMadChaosopher: ad i hear that they're going to implement an I-Pass just for Downtown. a separate box to charge everyone $5-$7 just for driving into the Loop. The same system they have in London.

So they're setting it up to be like the Skyway? Too bad Chicago doesn't have good public transportation. Oh, wait!! They have excellent public transportation - especially around the Loop.

TheMadChaosopher: as the city and state governments keep squeezing, everyone who CAN move will, and in another 10-20 years Chicago will be Detroit. no wealthy people, no upper middle class, no businesses.

one big ghetto.

Pardon me if I react to such an unlikely statement with a healthy skepticism.

wildcardjack: Okay, I don't live in the area... What the hell is a "city sticker"?

I live in Dallas, where all the roads are designed for "large vehicles".

Illinois allows home-rule cities and villages to charge a vehicle registration fee; upon payment of this fee, most municipalities provide a sticker to be placed on the far edge of the passenger's side of the windshield.

The "large vehicle" discussion seems to be about charging fees on a scale that's based on GVW.

TheMadChaosopher: Pardon me if I react to such an unlikely statement with a healthy skepticism.

visit Detroit some time.

or St. Louis.

What? You don't have any actual facts to present, so you thought you'd appeal to some scenario based on fear?

I'm shocked.

Also, I seriously doubt you're going to prove that Detroit became a third-world city because of the things you mentioned earlier. Seems to me it was one big greedy car company who wanted to make even more money while giving their workers the bird, and no, it's not just me....

TheMadChaosopher: whidbey: TheMadChaosopher: AND they're beginning costly new licenses for dogs and cats.

AND they're putting speed cameras to work along with the stop light cameras.

AND they're going to start writing $100 tickets for not shoveling your snow fast enough.

AND they're nearly doubling the I-Pass toll rates.

ad i hear that they're going to implement an I-Pass just for Downtown. a separate box to charge everyone $5-$7 just for driving into the Loop. The same system they have in London.

Yes, a modern-day city of almost ten million people and its day to day operations actually cost money to run them.

What a shocking turn of events.

no, it isn't shocking at all, we're becoming Detroit.

i moved out of the city 5 years ago, and i just may move right over the border to Indiana in another few years. I know my boss has been seriously considering moving our company to Indiana, he talks about it all the time.

as the city and state governments keep squeezing, everyone who CAN move will, and in another 10-20 years Chicago will be Detroit. no wealthy people, no upper middle class, no businesses.

one big ghetto.

oh well, at least the Loop is still nice.

You know, I've lived in both cities, so I know exactly how full of shiat you are. What is really amazing is how much shiat you have stuffed into your tiny, tiny package.

Detroit did not fall apart because of toll ways downtown. Detroit fell apart because of race issues. This started to happen even before manufacturing slowed down. Oh, there was also the issue of the mayor and governor not investing in the city - just letting it fall to pieces. People made decisions to just let neighborhoods go to pot because they didn't care for the people who lived in them.

You know, you really should think of moving. You don't deserve to live near a vibrant, active city. Move somewhere where the roads are free because no one wants to go there.

DeaH: You know, you really should think of moving. You don't deserve to live near a vibrant, active city. Move somewhere where the roads are free because no one wants to go there

Like Indiana.

I Googled "city sticker" and I'm still not entirely sure what its deal is. It's just a sticker you have to buy and put on your car to drive around Chicago? Like a 24-7 parking permit? Does any other city have this? I've never heard of it and certainly never experienced it.

/Pacific Northwest dweller

TheMadChaosopher: whidbey: TheMadChaosopher: as the city and state governments keep squeezing, everyone who CAN move will, and in another 10-20 years Chicago will be Detroit. no wealthy people, no upper middle class, no businesses.

one big ghetto.

Pardon me if I react to such an unlikely statement with a healthy skepticism.

visit Detroit some time.

or St. Louis.

It's not the taxes that scared people away from those cities...it's something else.

DeaH: Detroit did not fall apart because of toll ways downtown. Detroit fell apart because of race issues. This started to happen even before manufacturing slowed down. Oh, there was also the issue of the mayor and governor not investing in the city - just letting it fall to pieces. People made decisions to just let neighborhoods go to pot because they didn't care for the people who lived in them.

St. Louis is the same way. Although no one here wants to admit it.

FerneJohn: I Googled "city sticker" and I'm still not entirely sure what its deal is. It's just a sticker you have to buy and put on your car to drive around Chicago? Like a 24-7 parking permit? Does any other city have this? I've never heard of it and certainly never experienced it.

/Pacific Northwest dweller

The sticker is kind of a "living in Chicago and owning a car" license. If you purchase a car and the car is registered to Chicago (the title), you have to have one. That's my understanding at least. When I lived in Chicago, I had to have one, but my parents (who lived in the suburbs) didn't need one.

Can't speak to whether other cities have them.

TheMadChaosopher: whidbey: DeaH: You know, you really should think of moving. You don't deserve to live near a vibrant, active city. Move somewhere where the roads are free because no one wants to go there

Like Indiana.

yeah, lots of upper middle class families are fleeing Chicago and many are going to Indiana.

so are lots of successful small businesses.

I doubt it.

And personally, I wouldn't live there if you paid me.

peterquince: FerneJohn: I Googled "city sticker" and I'm still not entirely sure what its deal is. It's just a sticker you have to buy and put on your car to drive around Chicago? Like a 24-7 parking permit? Does any other city have this? I've never heard of it and certainly never experienced it.

/Pacific Northwest dweller

The sticker is kind of a "living in Chicago and owning a car" license. If you purchase a car and the car is registered to Chicago (the title), you have to have one. That's my understanding at least. When I lived in Chicago, I had to have one, but my parents (who lived in the suburbs) didn't need one.

Can't speak to whether other cities have them.

Hoboken, NJ does. If you live there you have one. If you visit you can get a temp. Otherwise they tow you when you park. Of course, at their size they have different space issues than Chicago.

TheMadChaosopher: whidbey: DeaH: You know, you really should think of moving. You don't deserve to live near a vibrant, active city. Move somewhere where the roads are free because no one wants to go there

Like Indiana.

yeah, lots of upper middle class families are fleeing Chicago and many are going to Indiana.

so are lots of successful small businesses.

This is the first I've heard of people fleeing Chicago and going to Indiana. The suburbs maybe. But not Indiana. The commuter towns just over the boarder are shiat-holes. Yeah, it's cheaper to live there, but you get what you pay for. This is why rent is expensive in Chicago - lots of people want to live there. Same as New York. Same as LA. Same as DC.

FerneJohn: I Googled "city sticker" and I'm still not entirely sure what its deal is. It's just a sticker you have to buy and put on your car to drive around Chicago? Like a 24-7 parking permit? Does any other city have this? I've never heard of it and certainly never experienced it.

/Pacific Northwest dweller

In many states, when a driver pays for plates, all the city and local fees are included in one, larger fee. Often, drivers in different parts of the same state will have differing totals for their license plate renewals because each municipality will have a different fee schedule. That's not the way it works in Illinois.

When a driver pays for a plate, that just covers the state fees. Everyone in Illinois pays the same exact fee for his or her license plate. Each municipality then charges and collects its own fees. Proof of payment is a city sticker. Generally, these stickers are placed on the windshield of the car. Cars found to be parked without a valid city sticker can be ticketed in the exact same way that a car without an up-to-date license plate can be ticketed.

I don't know for sure why the fees are separated this way. I always suspected that it had to do with the fact that the Democratic Party tends to run Cook County and its environs (where 40% of the total Illinois population lives) and the rest of the state is run by the Republican Party. The Secretary of State, often a Republican, is responsible for roads and licensing. Both parties guard their turf jealously.

DeaH: TheMadChaosopher: whidbey: TheMadChaosopher: AND they're beginning costly new licenses for dogs and cats.

AND they're putting speed cameras to work along with the stop light cameras.

AND they're going to start writing $100 tickets for not shoveling your snow fast enough.

AND they're nearly doubling the I-Pass toll rates.

ad i hear that they're going to implement an I-Pass just for Downtown. a separate box to charge everyone $5-$7 just for driving into the Loop. The same system they have in London.

Yes, a modern-day city of almost ten million people and its day to day operations actually cost money to run them.

What a shocking turn of events.

no, it isn't shocking at all, we're becoming Detroit.

i moved out of the city 5 years ago, and i just may move right over the border to Indiana in another few years. I know my boss has been seriously considering moving our company to Indiana, he talks about it all the time.

as the city and state governments keep squeezing, everyone who CAN move will, and in another 10-20 years Chicago will be Detroit. no wealthy people, no upper middle class, no businesses.

one big ghetto.

oh well, at least the Loop is still nice.

You know, I've lived in both cities, so I know exactly how full of shiat you are. What is really amazing is how much shiat you have stuffed into your tiny, tiny package.

Detroit did not fall apart because of toll ways downtown. Detroit fell apart because of race issues. This started to happen even before manufacturing slowed down. Oh, there was also the issue of the mayor and governor not investing in the city - just letting it fall to pieces. People made decisions to just let neighborhoods go to pot because they didn't care for the people who lived in them.

You know, you really should think of moving. You don't deserve to live near a vibrant, active city. Move somewhere where the roads are free because no one wants to go there.

I'll try to cram what should be a grad-level course about Detroit into a few paragraphs; apologies for the TL;DR:

One area where Chicago and Detroit differ historically is in land use. Much of the land in what is now Chicago had been annexed into the city by 1890; in Detroit, it was a much more intricate process that wasn't complete until the 1920s. The nature of the land grants in Detroit meant that many smaller tracts were involved, especially near the river; there was no question of seizing that land for parks or industry, as happened in Chicago. Then in the 1920s, as the city's fortunes -- and hubris -- were peaking, the decision was made to create New Center, a secondary business and cultural destination that was just far enough from downtown to suck business away rather than generate its own.

Then you have the reality that the dominant industry was already -- by the 1920s -- beyond the reach of city taxes. Although some big auto plants such as Packard's were in Detroit, just as many were outside the city, meaning that Ford and Dodge (to take two well-known examples) weren't paying taxes to Detroit, but to Dearborn, Highland Park and Hamtramck instead. Also remember that the auto industry was fairly decentralized from the beginning; Ford and GM located assembly plants around the country, because it was easier and cheaper to ship parts to the west and south for final assembly than to ship finished cars.

The power structure at both the state and municipal level were heavily invested in Detroit as late as the early 1960s, but as more plants (including suppliers, who provided a lot of the auto-related jobs in the city) were built in the suburbs -- to say nothing of other states -- and existing plants in the city were shut down, causing the tax base took its first hit. The next hit came as a result of blockbusting, which took on a life of its own after the 1967 riots. Then in the early 1970s, voters elected a mayor whose motto in life was "If it makes Whitey mad, do it." Racism really doesn't enter into the discussion until the late 1960s, but in the next 20 years, people made up for lost time.

Between 1967 and 1987, folks in the rest of the state pretty much turned their backs on Detroit, unless they were going to a Tigers game or the auto show, thanks to a mix of economics and racism. But the auto industry was never as heavily invested in Detroit as people like to think it was. Detroit's big problem was that it believed its own PR until it was too late.

FerneJohn: I Googled "city sticker" and I'm still not entirely sure what its deal is. It's just a sticker you have to buy and put on your car to drive around Chicago? Like a 24-7 parking permit? Does any other city have this? I've never heard of it and certainly never experienced it.

/Pacific Northwest dweller

I have a "city sticker"....in Corvallis, OR of all places...

/ live near campus
// I'd get a fine if I parked in my neighborhood without it
/// way too many students with cars around here
//// not a student

LibertyHiller: DeaH: TheMadChaosopher: whidbey: TheMadChaosopher: AND they're beginning costly new licenses for dogs and cats.

AND they're putting speed cameras to work along with the stop light cameras.

AND they're going to start writing $100 tickets for not shoveling your snow fast enough.

AND they're nearly doubling the I-Pass toll rates.

ad i hear that they're going to implement an I-Pass just for Downtown. a separate box to charge everyone $5-$7 just for driving into the Loop. The same system they have in London.

Yes, a modern-day city of almost ten million people and its day to day operations actually cost money to run them.

What a shocking turn of events.

no, it isn't shocking at all, we're becoming Detroit.

i moved out of the city 5 years ago, and i just may move right over the border to Indiana in another few years. I know my boss has been seriously considering moving our company to Indiana, he talks about it all the time.

as the city and state governments keep squeezing, everyone who CAN move will, and in another 10-20 years Chicago will be Detroit. no wealthy people, no upper middle class, no businesses.

one big ghetto.

oh well, at least the Loop is still nice.

You know, I've lived in both cities, so I know exactly how full of shiat you are. What is really amazing is how much shiat you have stuffed into your tiny, tiny package.

Detroit did not fall apart because of toll ways downtown. Detroit fell apart because of race issues. This started to happen even before manufacturing slowed down. Oh, there was also the issue of the mayor and governor not investing in the city - just letting it fall to pieces. People made decisions to just let neighborhoods go to pot because they didn't care for the people who lived in them.

You know, you really should think of moving. You don't deserve to live near a vibrant, active city. Move somewhere where the roads are free because no one wants to go there.

I'll try to cram what should be a grad-level course about Detroit into a few paragraphs; apologies for the TL;DR:

One area where Chicago and Detroit differ historically is in land use. Much of the land in what is now Chicago had been annexed into the city by 1890; in Detroit, it was a much more intricate process that wasn't complete until the 1920s. The nature of the land grants in Detroit meant that many smaller tracts were involved, especially near the river; there was no question of seizing that land for parks or industry, as happened in Chicago. Then in the 1920s, as the city's fortunes -- and hubris -- were peaking, the decision was made to create New Center, a secondary business and cultural destination that was just far enough from downtown to suck business away rather than generate its own.

Then you have the reality that the dominant industry was already -- by the 1920s -- beyond the reach of city taxes. Although some big auto plants such as Packard's were in Detroit, just as many were outside the city, meaning that Ford and Dodge (to take two well-known examples) weren't paying taxes to Detroit, but to Dearborn, Highland Park and Hamtramck instead. Also remember that the auto industry was fairly decentralized from the beginning; Ford and GM located assembly plants around the country, because it was easier and cheaper to ship parts to the west and south for final assembly than to ship finished cars.

The power structure at both the state and municipal level were heavily invested in Detroit as late as the early 1960s, but as more plants (including suppliers, who provided a lot of the auto-related jobs in the city) were built in the suburbs -- to say nothing of other states -- and existing plants in the city were shut down, causing the tax base took its first hit. The next hit came as a result of blockbusting, which took on a life of its own after the 1967 riots. Then in the early 1970s, voters elected a mayor whose motto in life was "If it makes Whitey mad, do it." Racism really doesn't enter into the discussion until the late 1960s, but in the next 20 years, people made up for lost time.

Between 1967 and 1987, folks i ...

My parents had moved away by the mid-1960s, but I was in Detroit for one of the big riots. I was staying with my grandparents who lived on Ashland. My parents weren't allowed into the city to get me. For me, it wasn't particularly scarey because I wasn't that aware of it. I was just staying an extra week with Grandma and Grandpa. Up to that point, Detroit still had a lot to offer. Excellent stores, great theater, and stuff that only seemed to exist in city neighborhoods. There were Good Humor men who rode bicycles with refrigerators. There were trucks that would go down the street with fresh produce, sort of a mobile farmers' market.

I appreciate the information you provided, and I can certainly see why big auto having no real investment in the city created an unstable environment. But I still think the real domino, the one that caused the total fall of the city, was racial. People decided to throw the city away, never thinking how that might affect the rest of the area. I see it happening in other areas of the Midwest. It's not happening in Chicago because the city makes damned sure that people want to live there.

TheMadChaosopher: i'm one of the dwindling number of people left living in Illinois and working in Chicago who actually CONTRIBUTE to society, and it looks like I just may join the growing number of us who are moving to Indiana so we can keep our Chicago clients and money without having the state and city leech us at every turn.

have you ever been to Detroit?

it isn't pretty.

Oh look at me, no one cares but me, I contribute but no one else does blah blah blah blah blah.

Get lost and good riddance.

LibertyHiller: apologies for the TL;DR:

Very interesting read. Too bad the person for whom it's actually intended won't get anything out of it.

It HAS to be high taxes that make cities dry up. It just HAS to.

*bangs head against the padded cell*

whidbey: LibertyHiller: apologies for the TL;DR:

Very interesting read.

Thanks.

Too bad the person for whom it's actually intended won't get anything out of it.

It HAS to be high taxes that make cities dry up. It just HAS to.

*bangs head against the padded cell*

People forget that civilization costs money.

DeaH:

My parents had moved away by the mid-1960s, but I was in Detroit for one of the big riots. I was staying with my grandparents who lived on Ashland. My parents weren't allowed into the city to get me. For me, it wasn't particularly scarey because I wasn't that aware of it. I was just staying an extra week with Grandma and Grandpa. Up to that point, Detroit still had a lot to offer. Excellent stores, great theater, and stuff that only seemed to exist in city neighborhoods. There were Good Humor men who rode bicycles with refrigerators. There were trucks that would go down the street with fresh produce, sort of a mobile farmers' market.

In other words, you were a stone's throw from Grosse Pointe Park. Yes, your grandparents' neighborhood was nice at the time; I haven't been that way for years, so I have no idea what the neighborhood looks like today. But blaming taxes is picking the wrong battle.

I appreciate the information you provided, and I can certainly see why big auto having no real investment in the city created an unstable environment. But I still think the real domino, the one that caused the total fall of the city, was racial. People decided to throw the city away, never thinking how that might affect the rest of the area. I see it happening in other areas of the Midwest. It's not happening in Chicago because the city makes damned sure that people want to live there.

I was in Chicago in the early and mid-'80s, and the racial shiat was just as bad there as it was in Detroit. What was different was that Chicago was richer, with a more diverse economy, and enough infrastructure and corporate inertia to keep people coming into downtown; it also had a political establishment that might have had to share power during Washington's term, but never really lost it. It turned out that all of these really matter.

slc11082: I'm gonna call a spade a spade and say the biggest problem with Chicago and Detroit are the minorities and to be more precise the Roody-Poos.

Are you always racist?

slc11082: I'm gonna call a spade a spade and say the biggest problem with Chicago and Detroit are the minorities and to be more precise the Roody-Poos.

I have no idea what a Roody-Poo is, so I hope you are just a 3rd rate troll. The problem is not minorities. The problem is people who think they want to live in a city, but they don't want a melting pot, and they don't want to pay for services.

LibertyHiller: DeaH:

My parents had moved away by the mid-1960s, but I was in Detroit for one of the big riots. I was staying with my grandparents who lived on Ashland. My parents weren't allowed into the city to get me. For me, it wasn't particularly scarey because I wasn't that aware of it. I was just staying an extra week with Grandma and Grandpa. Up to that point, Detroit still had a lot to offer. Excellent stores, great theater, and stuff that only seemed to exist in city neighborhoods. There were Good Humor men who rode bicycles with refrigerators. There were trucks that would go down the street with fresh produce, sort of a mobile farmers' market.

In other words, you were a stone's throw from Grosse Pointe Park. Yes, your grandparents' neighborhood was nice at the time; I haven't been that way for years, so I have no idea what the neighborhood looks like today. But blaming taxes is picking the wrong battle.

I appreciate the information you provided, and I can certainly see why big auto having no real investment in the city created an unstable environment. But I still think the real domino, the one that caused the total fall of the city, was racial. People decided to throw the city away, never thinking how that might affect the rest of the area. I see it happening in other areas of the Midwest. It's not happening in Chicago because the city makes damned sure that people want to live there.

I was in Chicago in the early and mid-'80s, and the racial shiat was just as bad there as it was in Detroit. What was different was that Chicago was richer, with a more diverse economy, and enough infrastructure and corporate inertia to keep people coming into downtown; it also had a political establishment that might have had to share power during Washington's term, but never really lost it. It turned out that all of these really matter.

I didn't blame taxes. I was responding to someone who discussed Detroit's tax structure from the 1920s forward. My point was that Detroit was destroyed by racial issues. I did agree, however, that not having a good base made it easier to go downhill. I think it relates to the idea that you bring up - Chicago was richer. I also agree that Chicago's political structure is important. One of the things I noticed when I lived in Chicago is that thing got done. It worked.

DeaH: LibertyHiller: DeaH: I didn't blame taxes. I was responding to someone who discussed Detroit's tax structure from the 1920s forward.

My bad; after a while, I lost track of who complained about taxes.

My point was that Detroit was destroyed by racial issues.

My point is that "racial issues" is far too simplistic an answer. An unbalanced economy and land use patterns that drew people away from the city core created an unstable environment that racial problems pushed over the edge. Blaming race while ignoring factors that don't fit the narrative doesn't do justice to the full story.

I did agree, however, that not having a good base made it easier to go downhill. I think it relates to the idea that you bring up - Chicago was richer. I also agree that Chicago's political structure is important. One of the things I noticed when I lived in Chicago is that thing got done. It worked.

I dunno; some neighborhoods in Chicago get the attention, others (like Rogers Park) are still pretty farked up. I guess it depends on how easily (that is, profitably) they're redeveloped. Chicago may work, but God help you if you're poor, or in a poor neighborhood.

DeaH: The problem is people who think they want to live in a city, but they don't want a melting pot, and they don't want to pay for services.

People like slc11082, in other words...

LibertyHiller: DeaH: LibertyHiller: DeaH: I didn't blame taxes. I was responding to someone who discussed Detroit's tax structure from the 1920s forward.

My bad; after a while, I lost track of who complained about taxes.

My point was that Detroit was destroyed by racial issues.

My point is that "racial issues" is far too simplistic an answer. An unbalanced economy and land use patterns that drew people away from the city core created an unstable environment that racial problems pushed over the edge. Blaming race while ignoring factors that don't fit the narrative doesn't do justice to the full story.

I did agree, however, that not having a good base made it easier to go downhill. I think it relates to the idea that you bring up - Chicago was richer. I also agree that Chicago's political structure is important. One of the things I noticed when I lived in Chicago is that thing got done. It worked.

I dunno; some neighborhoods in Chicago get the attention, others (like Rogers Park) are still pretty farked up. I guess it depends on how easily (that is, profitably) they're redeveloped. Chicago may work, but God help you if you're poor, or in a poor neighborhood.

I lived in Rogers Park. Funny thing about it. There are a few really dicey areas. I wouldn't want to wonder around Morris or the Howard jump alone and after dark. Other than that, I always felt pretty safe there. Of course, I moved in the mid 2000s, so things may have changed, but I liked it. I had a beautiful apartment just blocks from a lovely beach. There were interesting shops and restaurants. There are just a few streets to avoid.

whidbey: TheMadChaosopher: whidbey: DeaH: You know, you really should think of moving. You don't deserve to live near a vibrant, active city. Move somewhere where the roads are free because no one wants to go there

Like Indiana.

yeah, lots of upper middle class families are fleeing Chicago and many are going to Indiana.

so are lots of successful small businesses.

I doubt it.

And personally, I wouldn't live there if you paid me.

Eh, it is mostly folks from south burbs like Lansing moving to Dyer and Sville and other boring tonws with bad planning and not enough roads. Illinois may have problems but i hated indiana. the hs my sisters went to and serves like 3 towns. everything is a chain and the public transport is almost nonexhistant. I could not move back to chicago fast enough. Indiana has lime almost no taxes or regulations and nw indiana is basically one huge superfund sight. Dunes are the only goox part, but the state Almost wanted to destroy it all turn it into glass or whatever.

City stickers? Really? What is wrong with you people?

I ride the CTA everywhere -- so does my wife. It's perfectly fine and saves us thousands of dollars a year and a lot of stress associated with parking and congestion (on a bus, the driver deals with the stress, and a train bypasses the traffic).

All of the stickers are going up because people didn't want to pay extra for the heavy cars that wreak havoc on the roads.

And a few things to clear up: I haven't seen any proposal for cat licenses, only for enforcing the dog license law that almost nobody obeys. There is no serious talk of using London-style transponders for congestion pricing, though I think it's a good idea; the serious proposal is to add a fee to parking that will be used principally for CTA improvements (basically to make up for the bus fare you ducked by choosing the rather extravagant luxury, for 90% of the people who do it and have no need of the car during the day, of taking a private car into downtown).

Tony Danza Macabra: Dunes are the only good part, but the state [of Indiana] Almost wanted to destroy it all turn it into glass or whatever.

Sheeeeeit....