-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
Summary and audio linked here.
Chicago’s political leadership is floating a pension buyout program as evidence it is seriously addressing the city’s thirty-six-billion-dollar unfunded pension liability, but Mark Glennon, founder of the Illinois policy research organization Wirepoints, said that the proposal moves debt from one column to another rather than reducing it, and that the broader fiscal picture facing the city continues to deteriorate across every measurable dimension. Audio here.
Expect no retraction or apology. This what they do.
The state’s existing buyout program for its own pensions is the precedent for Chicago, which should be a warning: Look out for similar exaggerated claims and shoddy analysis.
Full interview and summary linked here.
SIGN UP HERE FOR OUR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
I agree those who live in the suburbs of Chicago would love to leave as well.
I like how the author assumes that the area outside of Chicago would take on a disproportionate amount of the debt for no apparent reason. As to federal representation, losing a slew of congressional representatives who don’t represent you isn’t a loss, while gaining two senators who do is a big win.
The author of this article makes one HUGE error in his premise. He assumes that the 9 counties of the Chicago-Naperville-Elgin region would take the ‘Chicago’ side of the secession. He is wrong about this. I live in the suburbs and I can assure my suburb would have no part of Chicago’s governance. They would most assuredly join the southern half of the state. As would McHenry, Kendall, likely Will and Kane, and probably DuPage too. The ‘Chicago’ part of the Chicago secession would be only Chicago, the northern suburbs, the western suburbs and Southern suburbs of Cook. The NW… Read more »