Same source says 71 buildings set on fire. Does not mention if any were completely burned. Criteria for damage seems to be any damage at all. Saying the city wa

Same source says 71 buildings set on fire. Does not mention if any were completely burned. Criteria for damage seems to be any damage at all. Saying the city was "sacked" might be more accurate, but even then that is wrong. There are tens of thousands if not hundreds if thousands of buildings in Chicago, 71 (less than 0.01%) having had any fire does not seem to really qualify as "the city was burned down" Further, the damage seemingly was concentrated in poor neighborhoods. Hence, citation should be provided that fear post George Floyd backlash is a major reason for tech workers to leave Chicago. From the same reference: " They missed signals that the killing of Floyd, captured on video and played millions of times by horrified Americans, could touch off looting. And to this day, they face resentment that the city prioritized the protection of downtown at the expense of residential neighborhoods inhabited mostly by people of color." On the other hand, the reference does say the backlash and riots caused more damage than following MLK Jr's assassination does provide reasonable context to the scale of the event. Yet, with higher numbers of businesses, it might be there is more stuff to be damaged that lead to a larger figure of monetary damage (but that is still to say that both back-lashes were seemingly at least on par)