-- 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
Fiscal realities always run into socialist dreams. The only way to temporarily solve this problem, as many lessons of the past have shown, is that private property must be taken by force.
Oh I get it; you mean like that well known socialist, Donald Trump, who its said has ordered his staff to start doing on our southern border so his wall will be a fait accompli by the time of the next presidential election? How wonderful!
Yay!! James learned that Orange Man is bad in CPS . What else have you learned from CPS that is relevant to the Finances of the State of IL? The way you talk you are for sure a taker and should be very afraid of your scam pension that is a mirage. The 1%ers you want to steal from are all leaving …..so YOU for once will be left holding the bag. Pay your fair share James
James, please tell me how the example you cited fits into “socialist”. Were you trying to think of “fascist” to impose his will and shut up his opposition by force? (I don’t think your example is good for fascist either. He was elected with this as a very vocal promise to the people who voted him in…..so it isn’t his will…..he is representing his constituents as he was elected to do. ). I’m waiting to hear how your example fits into “socialist” behavior.
You’re all taking my comments way, way too seriously. First, if unbridled I tend to say thing “tongue in cheek,” meant as a humorous, if only partially factual, take on something said or read. That’s basically what I was attempting here without successful appreciation it appears. But, there is a kernel of skepticism I intended to convey as well. The commenter to whom I was responding seemed to value the idea that in his view socialists (presumably Democrats, I guess) love the concept of eminent domain, the government’s right to assume ownership of private “property” (which has a very all-inclusive… Read more »
“My point there was that Trump is a Republican—neither a Democrat or a socialist—and still believes in eminent domain and steam-rolling individual owner’s rights when his goals and whims dictate”
You’re conflating national security – which is a primary function of government – with ‘socialism’. Your example is a major stretch especially when you throw in the emminent domain thing.
I didn’t get that your post was tongue-in-cheek, or sarcastic; it had all the hallmarks of a crazy person with TDS ranting about Trump. And I make outlandish posts all the time; I can usually recognize them.
Life is full of ink blot tests. We all see the same things, but our different interpretations on each one is based our own internal predilections rather than total objectivity. “You say bananas; I say ban-ah-has.” You’re entitled to do so as am I. Let’s call the whole thing off.
Go back on your meds.
Why is everyone ripping on James, perhaps we should look at some examples of where socialism has been successful. Oh, wait, never mind.
But… but…they weren’t practicing TRUE SOCIALISM!