Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Chicago Shrinking

No, we don't mean Shortshanks and the Ballerino. We mean losing people that they can potentially get tax money from:
  • Chicago’s population plunged by more than 200,000 people -- a 6.9 percent decline from 2000, according to the official Census count released Tuesday.

    The drop was significantly more than indicated by previously released census estimates and over the next decade it could cost the city hundreds of millions in federal funds, which are partly distributed on the basis of population counts.

    Chicago’s black population fell the most, nearly 17 percent. Today, blacks make up only 33 percent of the city’s population, down from 36 percent 10 years ago.

  • Hispanic population grew 3.3 percent in the city. But since this is less than the birth rate it is likely that Hispanics also are leaving the city for the suburbs.

    Non-white Hispanics now comprise 32 percent of the population, while Hispanics of all races make up 29 percent

    Population also fell in Cook County -- an 182,000 drop. However, the population of suburban Cook grew slightly by 18,000, indicating Chicago’s drop was the major factor in the county’s loss of population.

We'll bet that 200,000 population decline doubles in the next decade. Chicago reached a tipping point a few years back and the view looks all downhill from what we can see. Anyone who can afford to move out, will move out. Anyone who can't afford to move out, will move out anyway to live with friends or relatives. Chicago and Cook County are too expensive to live in for the average family. And as Illinois continues to become a more and more business un-friendly environment, the jobs that make it possible to scrape by will dry up.

Hey? Maybe someone ought to look into reducing the number of aldercreatures again. With less population, there isn't any need for 50 of these leeches sucking up tax money. If only there was someone who could circulate a petition or draft an ordinance to shrink the size of the City Council.

Labels:

50 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"If only there was someone who could circulate a petition or draft an ordinance to shrink the size of the City Council."

In lieu of that, how about implementing term limits, at the VERY least, for the position of mayor?

The time for dictatorship has passed.

2/16/2011 12:23:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SCC ,

You're reading my mind.

No need to have 50 alderman. So a 6.9 percent decrease in the population = a 6.9 percent decrease in Aldercreatures.

Just like in congress!

What is that about a cut of 3.5 leeches?

There's no better time than right now. We are over budget and the taxpayers are already stressed.

Head 'em up and move 'em out -- Rawhide!!

2/16/2011 12:59:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cut the City Council!!

2/16/2011 01:00:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

do you blaime them??

2/16/2011 01:34:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When 51% of the voting public is on welfare, of one sort or another, comunisum will arrive.
When the last taxpayer is drained, the roots of capitalism will take hold.
The only problem is that most of us will be dead by then.
Everything moves in cycles.
We are fucked !

2/16/2011 02:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Potter is a patient creature.

2/16/2011 03:44:00 AM  
Anonymous 025 DST 1st Watch said...

If only there was someone who could circulate a petition or draft an ordinance to shrink the size of the City Council.

SCC what are you waiting for? Let us all push for this.

2/16/2011 05:55:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

"If only there was someone who could circulate a petition or draft an ordinance to shrink the size of the City Council."


2/16/2011 12:23:00 AM


Right. No one over 5 foot 3 inches and 150 pounds.

Rahm needs to look down on someone.

2/16/2011 06:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There are 25 Police Districts, so therefore there should be 25 Aldercreatures.

2/16/2011 06:35:00 AM  
Blogger leomemorial said...

I'm saving little by little so I can leave this nightmare. Coming back here with a solid and strong business mgmt background to a non corporate state ruined my resume with temp jobs including a stint with the city -revenue dept (which explained why this city does not embrace business).

Did you also know that Chicago let alone Illinois is not even in the top #10 states for the best place to film (tax break, etc). Detroit even made it in at #5.

I cannot wait to get the hell out of here... this city is very much ruined by Daley and the like.

2/16/2011 06:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No Politician Can Justify Replacing the over 1,000 officers in light of this census. Rahm and Chico are telling political lies when they say they will put 2,000 new officers on the street. The Census documents a 7% population loss which means we will need less police, and crime will decline especially since many of those who left went when the Projects were demolished. We will all look back on the time when CPD was over 12,000 officers as the Glory Days!

2/16/2011 07:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Run away....

2/16/2011 07:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would guess the decline in black Chicagoans is due solely to the projects coming down,

25 Districts - 25 Aldermen! That should be a taxpayer rally cry. in fact, put them in the Districts in the old CAPS office. There you can have one Officer assigned as a liaison to the Alderman. Big money saved right there on office space and CAPS.

Does it bother anyone else that a society that claims to be color blind spends so much time and money counting the population by race? How about not dividing the people?

2/16/2011 07:42:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Crime goes down when there are less criminals around. Period, end of story. Has nothing to do with J-Fled, Crime Analysis Unit, TRU, MSF, etc. Less criminals around means less crimes being committed means a lower crime rate. Crime is way, way up in the south/southwest suburbs where many CHA residents were relocated. Crime goes up when there are more criminals.

2/16/2011 07:42:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Could this be related to drop in crime?

2/16/2011 07:57:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

2.7 million people? Try about 5 million people- do you really believe 30 people living in one apartment all are accounted for?! Give me a break- we have at least 5 million here, half of which are straight from Mexico!

2/16/2011 08:06:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, how many illegals here? How many babies do they have? 2.7 million? Lol- try again!!! State how many really live here so we can get a feel for how much money our leaders are ripping off!

2/16/2011 08:21:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cutting the alderman would be the first step in reducing out of control cost and corruption.

2/16/2011 08:29:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doesn't this cast Jody's statistical self-fellatio in an entirely different light? Comparing current crime stats to a time in the past when there was a vastly greater population renders those "reductions" meaningless at best. At a quick glance it appears the drop in population outpaced the purported drops in crime touted by everyone's favorite large-headed lame duck.

Maybe at the next press conference they can bring in a professor of statistics to explain it all. Jody seems fond of bringing in academic guest speakers to legitimize his smoke and mirrors. What do you suppose it costs the CPD budget for their services anyway?

2/16/2011 08:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe not in our lifetime but Chi-town will be the most populated city in the country. In the end the greatest resource in the country is a 100 yards east of LSD.

2/16/2011 10:27:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chicago Shrinking
No we don't mean Shortshanks and the Ballerino...

Whew! I'm glad you clarified that remark, SCC.
As it is now neither of them are eligible to get on half the attractions at Disney World.

" It's a small world after all..."

2/16/2011 10:59:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So all your bazoo shouting about flaming cheetos eating ghetto lottery fools is disengenous & flat out false.

2/16/2011 11:04:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I'm not mistaken, years ago Daley, when confronted with the fact that people were leaving the City, more or less said that that was O.K. because then Chicago would be at a more "managable level." Economic genius indeed.

2/16/2011 11:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

200,000 fewer legal, tax paying people but there is no doubt the single family home with 4 illegal families living in it keeps on growing. Less people to pay the bills but always more freeloaders crossing the boarder and making their home in chicago. I cant wait to retire to AZ!

OT - whoever is posting that there will be promotional classes the first half of 2011 is wrong. JFLED is a lame-duck SUPT and no one is backing his "request" for classes to be made prior to the end of march. A reliable source (as reliable as can be in this department) at the academy says, for numerous reasons, they wont be ready to handle pre-service training until the fall......sorry

2/16/2011 11:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If this keeps up then Chicago will fall under 1 million people, rendering the residency law irrelevant.

2/16/2011 11:31:00 AM  
Anonymous the Virginian said...

I have a bit of perspective on this, and some of my friends and family here won't like it but here goes...

Chicago has seen an improvement by breaking up large concentrations of poor people and starting to gentrify from the inside (downtown) out. Long term these are extremely positive trends.

But Chicago bankrupted itself in tolerating and dealing with the concentrations of poor people the last 50 or more years. Think of it this way: Chicago subsidized poor people to be poor with housing, food, services, mental and medical care, you name it. Chicago also employed vast numbers of public workers to provide those services. Money was flowing in every direction.

A lot of that money was nothing more than promises, or at best debt. Its tax money not yet collected. That includes vast numbers of unfunded pensions.

A lot of the money went to waste and corruption too. Some went to subsidizing creaky dying old companies to move headquarters to Chicago (e.g., Boeing).

Nothing went to producing an environment that fosters new or expanding businesses. Chicago has nothing in common with areas like Silicon Valley of the past, or Austin, Texas or northern Virginia. And that is why people are still moving to Texas and the DC area.

There really aren't any good answers for some of the problems in Chicago. The money has already been spent or promised. The future is either collecting it, or defaulting. Sort of like Cook County, Illinois and our country overall.

Good luck to all of you.

2/16/2011 11:45:00 AM  
Anonymous Law and Order said...

Soon the non-producing leeches will outnumber the producers, to the point where Atlas will Shrug-- the producers will bug out and leave nobody to support the leeches. Chicago, Cook County and Illinois are very close to that now. Ayn Rand wrote about it in the '50s.

2/16/2011 11:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chicago voters talk the talk but do
not walk the walk. When election
time rolls around they don't rise
up and vote for change. They vote
for the same old politicians who
have never did an honest days work
in their lives and have been feeding off the public trough.
And when they dicide to pack it in
they put their offspring on the
ballot and the cycle starts all
over again. Although the politicians ride roughshod over the
people and devise elaborate schemes
to separate the voters from their
money, it does not seem to bother
the electorate, be it local, county, state, or federal.
When the car, appliance, or whatever does not function anymore
to our satisfaction we get rid of
it and buya a new one but when it
come to the governing bodies, voters rollover and play dead.
Whatever you let people do to you
and get away with it and you don't
put a stop to it, then they are
supposed to do it, ditto for the
political climate. And if you had a
chance to change things for the
better and failed to do do, keep
your mouth shut when the politicians do obscene things to
you both moneywise and otherwise.
Because you've got nothing coming.

2/16/2011 12:00:00 PM  
Anonymous big-dewey said...

the suburbs woke up one morning and found their neighborhood full of section 8s.

2/16/2011 12:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This will play big time in the residency factor. How could they let go of the prisoners while the people who have a choice don't want to live here. Here's an idea, make the city a safe, economical place people actually want to live.

2/16/2011 12:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Non-white Hispanics now comprise 32 percent of the population, while Hispanics of all races make up 29 percent..."

So does that mean that "Hispanics" overall make up 61 percent of Chicago's population -- or do these two groups overlap?

Hell, who knows?

This is deliberate. "Hispanic" sources state that the federal government coined the category "Hispanic" in the first place. The "white Hispanic, non-white Hispanic, Hispanics of all races" mishmosh serves to make any real discussion of crime figures, demographics, etc. simply impossible.

The very large number of people of European ancestry in the U.S. is now mentioned in these studies as an afterthought, relegated to the category of "non-Hispanic white" -- if it is mentioned at all. White people simply do not exist in the Sun-Times piece linked to here.

Given the ongoing immigration flood, I would conclude that the city's population is --

A. Shrinking overall

B. while what is left becomes more and more concentrated "Hispanic," as well as other immigrant groups that tend to be heavy consumers of public monies and services.

Another standard alarming-yet-useless non-story, coyly pulling its skirt over its knees and averting its eyes.

"It's not really nice to talk about some things..."

Hard-hitting journalism.

*

2/16/2011 01:35:00 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Here's a sample of US cities and city council sizes:
City Pop. #Ald Salary Ward/Pop

Chicago 2.8 50 $110K 57,025

NYC 8.4 51 $112K 164,547

LA 3.9 15 $178K 55,458

Houston 2.3 14 $ 56K 161,280

Phil 1.5 17 $117K 91,017

Dallas 1.3 14 $37,5K 92,825

2/16/2011 01:59:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Chicago’s population plunged by more than 200,000 people...it could cost the city hundreds of millions in federal funds, which are partly distributed on the basis of population counts."

Just off the cuff -- 100 million dollars divided among 200,000 people is $500 a head.

You could save that much in a minute by not buying stupid banners to hang on phony "iron" streetlights, hundreds of miles of useless steel fencing, hundreds of miles of useless grooves in alleys, hundreds of miles of useless and dangerous street dividers, hundreds of thousands of speed bumps and islands, backpacks with the mayor's name printed on them for school kids to throw away...

All the new sidewalks and trees and iron gratings on Milwaukee Avenue look great in front of all the empty stores and unsold condominiums. "FOR LEASE." "FOR LEASE." "FOR LEASE."

Is someone missing something?

2/16/2011 02:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Residency will be lifted soon

2/16/2011 03:29:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out!

2/16/2011 03:38:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chicago is shrinking yet the traffic gets worse. I suppose it's all the shit heads from the suburbs commuting in. Could never see making that 1+ hour commute each way just to work at some job I hate...

2/16/2011 03:50:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder if the geniuses that run Illinois are realizing that Illinois ain't California. The same policies, same stupid liberal screeching that someone, somewhere, is having fun or making money and it's just not fair! But, we don't have the great weather California has. If San Diego were in another state, that's where I'd move to get away from here.

Hey dummies, you can't beat the hell out of the taxpayer forever, eventually they just get tired of it and vote with their feet and just move.

2/16/2011 04:00:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So if Chicago is shrinking, and they are going to cut Police and Fire should they also be cutting city council... Fuck me and right back at you FUCK YOU

2/16/2011 04:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chicago -- the new Detroit.

2/16/2011 05:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Taking this a little farther out, Chicago has lost one million people since 1950.

Somehow, with all the three- and four-in-line baby carriages blocking the sidewalks in some neighborhoods, you'd never know it.

Think about it, though -- 1,000,000 people gone since 1950. Blows the mind all kinds of ways.

2/16/2011 06:16:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Someone please tell me again why United Airlines got 30 million dollars of our tax dollars in spite of the fact that 1) There was already a bldg downtown that they work out of
2) No jobs were going to be added and 3) Not one employee from the Elk Grove location even wants to work downtown

2/16/2011 06:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chicago will shrink by 3 more when I retire and get the fuck out with my family.

And I will do everything in my power to never spend one cent of my pension money here.

I and my pension are going to Arizona!

2/16/2011 07:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

6:35 & 7:42 AM:

You still don't get it. Ward boundaries must include virtually identical populations.

Alone, Districts 008, 025 and 016 would respectively rank as the second through fourth most populous cities in Illinois.

It would be impossible to correlate existing CPD district boundaries with ward boundaries.

Also, based on aggregate average per capita representation in the City Councils of New York City and Los Angeles, Chicago would have only about seventeen wards, not 25 or 50.

Unlike CPD districts, WARDS MUST HAVE EQUAL POPULATIONS.

Do you finally understand?

2/16/2011 07:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I feel the squeeze

2/16/2011 10:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No need to have 50 alderman. So a 6.9 percent decrease in the population = a 6.9 percent decrease in Aldercreatures
-Well said

2/16/2011 10:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i would say 200 to 400k illegals hiding in plain sight here.

2/16/2011 11:44:00 PM  
Blogger Rich Rostrom said...

It isn't just Chicago. A lot of the inner belt suburbs have been losing population since 1990 or so.

The driver of this is the decline in household size.

Compared to say 1960, there are far fewer families with 3+ children, and a lot more young singles and empty-nesters, and also retirees. People are wealthier, and can afford more space for themselves.

People who in the past would have been living in boarding houses now have four room condo apartments by themselves. Elderly people who were parents with several children are now widows or widowers, living by themselves in the same houses.

This is somewhat offset by large immigrant families and single immigrants who room together to save rent, but the aggregate effect strongly favors dispersion.

Just A Civilian (who studies demography)

2/16/2011 11:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

Taking this a little farther out, Chicago has lost one million people since 1950.

Somehow, with all the three- and four-in-line baby carriages blocking the sidewalks in some neighborhoods, you'd never know it.

Think about it, though -- 1,000,000 people gone since 1950. Blows the mind all kinds of ways.

2/16/2011 06:16:00 PM


I didn't believe this, until I checked it out. Wow, it is true, one million gone!

2/17/2011 05:32:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just A Civilian (who studies demography)

2/16/2011 11:52:00 PM
You got it. Families are smaller now. Your parents probably had 3 or 4 kids. How many do you have? One? Maybe 2? Many of the factories that used to make things are now living spaces. I can't prove it, but I'd bet that the number of housing units isn't down by very much, but add that to smaller families and you explain the population loss.

The population will continue to drop as middle-income earners leave here for better climates and more favorable tax states. We have shit weather here, we can't tax the working class to death also and not expect the population to diminish.

2/17/2011 07:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You mean there were one million mf'ers in those jets?

2/21/2011 07:37:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer Posts.......................... ..........................Older Posts