-- 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
Isn’t it illegal to use federal funds with specific rules for its use on something like a pension deficit? Wow I would have thought that was illegal, and I’m not even an attorney.
Good point, but doesn’t the same concept apply when its done in reverse where money actuarilly needed to support the various IL employee pension funds is partially diverted to other, more politically expedient purposes? Its beyond strange that those in the private employment sector see it the way you’ve cited, yet fail to see the other side of that same coin. From time to time state-level politicians will remark that funds legally due the pension funds has been provided due to some last-minute authorization, but what’s legally required is almost never even close to what’s actuarially required. Thus, the pension… Read more »
“…employee pension funds partially diverted to other, more politically expedient purposes?” You mean, like employee compensation such as wage increases, health benefits, promotions, job openings, etc?
It’s beyond strange that those in the public employment sector see it the way you’ve cited, yet fail to see the other side of that same coin.
Surely we can agree that adults need to operate government; where, oh where, are they? What’s done in one area of decision making affects what happens in another more often than not, and we need governmental leaders who can see the system as a whole. What we seem to have over and over again are elective governmental office holders who think short-term and really more about their position for the next election than creating a set of governmental policies that generate improvements from a more far-reaching perspective than seems to be the case typically. What we get are band-aid, quick-fix… Read more »