-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
“Whenever there are individuals asking, what are we doing for Black people? Well, they don’t have to look any further,” Mayor Brandon Johnson said at the news conference, where he did not take questions. This key plank of Johnson’s progressive agenda just one step from facing a citywide referendum vote next March.
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
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
These Aldermen act like they are crackheads. This is what your brain looks like when you are ‘woke’
‘“Whenever there are individuals asking, what are we doing for Black people? Well, they don’t have to look any further,” Mayor Brandon Johnson said ‘
The tax will allegedly be used to combat homelessness, but will the funds be used for all the homeless people of Chicago? Based on Johnson’s comments, it seems that he either believes that only black people are homeless, or he will only help the black homeless Chicagoans.
And a raccoon coat on top of that Eat the Rich shirt. Priceless.
And not quite mega rich, but the aldercriders just got raises to $145k plus benefits we could only dream about (even if they’re TIER II for most). The vast majority of city workers are making above $100k & who knows what in total with combine benefits.
Maybe you should run for office instead of being jealous of what others are paid. Some of you must have retired decades ago to act like 100k per year is excessive. I know college grads that joined the workforce last fall that started at 80k. America is the land of opportunity. Just imagine what you could accomplish if you spent all your effort around whining into actually accomplishing something.
Yeah, +$100k + benefits = upper-middle class/ upper-income, not rich in my book, in a city where I believe house hold income is around $75k w no benefits…unfortunately, doing equity hustle press events w your “eat the rich” t-shirt in a raccoon fur coat is the path to the upper-income “land of opportunity” for so many in city gov.
I guess I was a chump in your book but for better or worse, I spent a career trying to believe the compensation for the goods & services I produced had value in a competitive economy.
I don’t condone the “eat the rich” rally cry the same way I don’t begrudge someone for making a living that’s greater than the average household income. I guess I don’t believe my success or failure is the result of someone else succeeding. I don’t see how complaining about people making 6 figures is any different than “eat the rich” rhetoric.
It’s important to know your value. It sounds like you got what you deserved.
Good reply. Obviously making $ isn’t everything. When you write–“I guess I don’t believe my success or failure is the result of someone else succeeding.”, does that mean you don’t believe your compensation is/was based on a “competitive economy”? I was hired, fired, promoted, demoted, got in screaming matches with fellow employees, tried to run my own company, worked at companies that made fortunes and others that went under but I always tried to find value in my work relative to the community I live in. I can’t say I succeeded or failed. I only tried—did you ever experience any… Read more »
Not at all. We are paid based on what we demand and negotiate based on the perceived value we provide. Someone succeeding doesn’t shrink the economic pie and does not cause me to fail. If I fail, I own that outcome.
Everything but work for a company that went under.
Good reply. Your compensated (succeed) as “we” (your public sec union?) “based on the perceived value we provide”. But fail on your own based on a perceived value, or by what measure of value? Are you saying the failures of, not to be diminished, public sector unions to deliver value are not the responsibility of public sec unions members?
Who says public sector union members aren’t delivering value? Their employer is happy with the services these members are providing and if not they are free to negotiate different terms at the next contract. As an example, 97% of CPS teachers are meeting or exceeding expectations by their employer. Clearly they are happy with the services provided with the exception of a small minority. Also, when I wrote “we”, I was referring to you and me as well as everyone else in society. It wasn’t a reference to public sector union members only. You are also making assumptions as to… Read more »
Exactly! Big difference, as opposed to being tucked into the warm teat of government…big difference.
The problem is an alderman is a part-time job with full-time salary and pension. Each alderman gets a staff that has actual full-time employees to address the day-to-day operations of the ward.
Alderman salary should be based on the median income of city residents ($65,000), which is coincidentally one-half of what they’re paid today…for a part-time job.
This seems to be a common thread on this site. Everyone here wants to determine what others should be paid. It reminds of the people on the left that think no one should be a billionaire. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but jobs are paid based on many different factors. Who would want to do the job of an alderman for 65k per year? To me that wouldn’t be worth the headache.
The same people who do it (or want to) today. The same people who make $85K to be a county commissioner or a state representative. Options are limited for most of these elected officials already and getting your own fiefdom and platform has a value far beyond salary.
Trust me…cut that salary to $85K to match the county/state level, they would all squawk, but at least nine out of ten would continue in the role and run again.
Fair enough. The flip side of that is “double their salary and some voters would squawk but not enough to vote those people out of office”. Frankly I’m surprised their salary isn’t higher.
If you paid Chicago aldermen at the same rate LA council members are paid, based on the number of people each council members represent, aldermen would make $49K/yr.
If you tripled the size of their wards, maybe you can justify their current salaries. Ward superintendent should probably make more than alderman.
Justify to who? You? Others on this board? lol
They don’t need to justify anything because the voters don’t care.
Remember that alderman salary is for a part-time job. I guess the Chicago taxpayer has a high threshold of pain.
Actually, Rossana declined the raise this year, but only because she accepted the much larger 10% raise the year prior.
It has been my experience that the rich folks move away from the hungry folks. They might provide a snack, but not a feast.
The alder human has no sense of irony. She is wearing the “Eat the Rick “ T-shirt underneath her full length fur coat. Communists like money too.
Exactly Dan Communists love Taking everyone else’s money
Eat the rich? Well, I’m rich so woman in front knows what to do.
Reallly, that’s your out-of-control-overgrown-teenager’s idea of how to post a comment on a forum? Show it to your wife or parents, buddy. They would be be so proud!
This is going to pass. It is inevitable.