-- 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
Just only yesterday I was reading here about the shortage of funding for the Chicago pension funds. Now, a day later, we see that another new funding-freebie program is in the works to spend millions. Unless Chicago has been blessed with some new tax windfall can we assume that this spending program is being funded by the pension funds again? So often I read of people, including myself, angry at the cost of the pensions but never anger at the politicians that choose to fund other programs with funds that should be going to the pensions that would lessen their… Read more »
Finally, at least one more Wirepoints commenter gets the ongoing root source of the problem!!!! The rest seem deaf, dumb and blind to it.
Remind me again- what is CTU’s position on sanctuary cities and immigration?
I don’t and know and don’t care to know.
While accusing the rest of us of being deaf, dumb, and blind.
Even though some random issue may interest you it may not interest me. Consequently I don’t bloviate about such things, and that’s where I’m different than others whom I obliquely mentioned. I know what I know and generally don’t care to give uninformed and heated points of view on other things where gut feelings would tend to rule my point of view. There may be a few times when I fail at that, but I’m trying to give you my general response mode.
James, my point is that CTU cannot keep advocating for policies like this, and then complain that the pension payments are not being met. Do they not understand that sanctuary costs money? The taxpayers are accused of not paying enough. But we pay, and then CTU and other unions push for the funds to be used on their pet projects. As I’ve said before, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. If you don’t want pension funds to be short, don’t keep pushing for all the pie-in-the-sky feel good policies that in the end chew up funds needed… Read more »
I don’t disagree with your point of view on that topic, and some love to tilt at every windmill in view. I’m not prone to do so. I don’t take saving mankind from stupidity as a workable goal. We all have to adjust to the prevailing winds or otherwise die trying. It’s much healthier mentally most times to do the former. So, you won’t generally find me complaining about CTU and their idea of social nirvana. That’s for their tribe to decide.
OMG I just realize I started this under the Griffin thread by mistake my bad and anyway…I am not certain what the CTU has to win these days on the pension issue because new hires are covered by the Tier 2 system that, in my mind, is pretty unfair to them as they make large contributions to the Tier 1 system but do not share in the benefits. This was a gift to the Tier 1 types at the expense of the Tier 2 types thanks to Michael Madigan…as it so always was, Michael Madigan did it.
You must not have been reading my posts or you would know my opinion of the pension issue. I remember in my much younger days voting against James Edgar of the famous “Edgar Ramp” fame. I have been aware of the pension problem for a long time and it just keeps getting worse.
Hallelujah, bro.!
I guess my comments must be chopped liver. I have mentioned repeatedly that once the money left my hands that was earmarked to pensions that money was diverted somewhere else like political pet projects or raises/health care or whatever the pols had mind. I have used the words misappropriation and mismanagement numerous times. When the Edgar ramp kicked the can down the road or other pension “Holidays” were enacted did the taxpayers pay less on their property taxes as a result. No! We kept paying more during those years due to ever increasing property taxes. So where did our money… Read more »
Freddy, you are right. But the money didn’t go to the Cayman Islands. It went into the pockets of public unions and their supporters.
Maybe they also have accounts there. Anything is possible.
I’m a little confused as to why you’ve directed this posting to me in that I’ve agreed with your basic premise a few times with the last time being only a day or two ago. So, I am in your corner much of the time on this issue since I find you both polite and generally on target with your comments rather than spewing random vitriolic screeds as so many others are inclined to do. You want to solve problems rather than simply screech into the void simply to feel better. I like that and hope others will take a… Read more »
Sorry not you. When I put my eye drops in from my ongoing problems vision gets a little blurry. I wanted to post my comment in general that there are many ways to where the money goes after we pay. It is not going to a lockbox type of account to make sure the money is there. Where is the lockbox money going to repair roads via all the increases in taxes? Many local communities have had referendums about increasing sales taxes to fix roads even though $45B is promised to fix the roads over time. South Beloit passed it… Read more »
Thank you.
I agree Riverbender. You have been consistent in your statements. You’re one of the few on here that recognize that these pensions will be paid and if we really want to get fiscally healthy we need to quit spending money in other non-necessary areas and start funneling that money towards the pension funds. Unfortunately, that opinion is in the very small minority. The left doesn’t want to give up their feel good spending and the right doesn’t want to give up hopes of promising tax cuts even though that is so far out of fiscal reality. The state was bringing… Read more »
I almost gave an upvote for this comment.
Will you join me in a pledge to ask union activists, every time they advocate for another pie-in-the-sky program:
“Are you willing to take these funds out of your pension? No, because your pension is untouchable? Then why do you have the audacity to demand non-union members forego some of their possible retirement savings to pay for your ideas?”
We have been putting up with this for 50+ years. Time to put a stop to it. Put some skin in your game, or stop talking.
Unions can’t agree to “take funds” from pensions. Unions can’t negotiate away an individuals right. The pensioner has a right to be paid what is owed and no amount of negotiating will change that. Those currently receiving pensions aren’t even union members. While I don’t agree with all the additional spending, nothing stops the CTU or any other union for that matter to ask for another “pie-in-the-sky program”. In fact, the CTU has been very transparent that they want higher taxes to pay for all these additional programs. While you and I may not want higher taxes, people are well… Read more »
Fair enough. I understand that unions cannot or will not negotiate pensions. But they can and should understand the implications of their demands- that spending is not unlimited and choices must be made. The pension guarantee means they do not need to acknowledge all of those limitations. Their pensions can never be imperiled by runaway spending. As you have consistently pointed out, that is a well that can never run dry. Those of us who are not public union members are extremely aware that our retirement resources can certainly run dry given a high enough tax level. The pension guarantee… Read more »
“The pension guarantee means they do not need to acknowledge all of those limitations.” I don’t believe unions care or think that much about the guarantee. They are paid to support existing members. The best way they can do that is to negotiate the best wages and benefits for the upcoming contract. There are always other things where money can be spent or taxes could be cut. It’s not their job to worry about where the money comes from as that’s the job of the person sitting on the other side of the table. If management needs to raise taxes… Read more »
PPF, there is a consistent theme that runs through your comments. It’s the idea that unions are entitled to take as much as they can get, and it’s up to us a voters to stop them.
I find this idea disturbing. It’s like saying you are entitled to take whatever you can get from my house, because my lock wasn’t strong enough to keep you out. A shoplifter is not at fault; the store management should have locked things up better.
Am I misunderstanding your position? It certainly sounds like that’s what you’re saying.
No you are misunderstanding my position. I have never advocated for people to break the law and you know it. My position is that we must follow the law as they are the rules in which we all agreed to live with. Unions negotiating is not only allowed but it’s enshrined in our constitution. It is the law of the land. Stealing from your home or shoplifting is illegal. People are free to negotiate their best contract possible that serves their best interest. They don’t need to worry about the financial issues of the other party unless they believe it… Read more »
A good reply. I agree, laws are important. Democracy in action.
Of course, this is why our founders did not set up a democracy, but a republic. And why even FDR was against public unions.
When I negotiate a price on a house, I do not enlist my neighbors to help me force the buyer to pay me more. This is the difference between public “negotiations” and the private sector.
Public unions may ransack my house, as long as my neighbors hold the door open for them. This is currently the law. Am I oversimplifying? Maybe. Occam’s Razor.
“When I negotiate a price on a house, I do not enlist my neighbors to help me force the buyer to pay me more” Not sure I follow your train of thought. No one is “forcing” you to pay more. Is this your way of stating that collective bargaining is unfair because it allows union members to come together and negotiate as one? That’s fine if it’s your belief but as I’ve stated before, the rules of our society are decided by all of us not just you. Even with unions no one is forcing a deal upon anyone. Both… Read more »
Slavery was the law of the land at one time in the recent past too!
Old Zippy had to beg and get Tony Taxwinkle to try and get 70 million to
fund the illegals because Pritzker wanted it. 70 million is pocket change for Mr.
Griffin, how does that crow pie taste idiots.
Hey, Governor — Griffin’s the kind of guy we don’t want in Chicago right? You have screwed up so many things, now I guess it is your chance to start destroying the not for profits in Illinois.
The not-for-profits in Chicago don’t want his money anyways because it’s dirty conservative money.
Remember when everyone said good riddance?
Yep, do those people think Gotion will step up to the plate philanthropically.
Yep. Lightfoot and JB both said it in a shoutout…..