-- 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
Hmm.. I live in a city with its own layer of taxes. And then there are the school districts, sometimes overlapping into several cities with their financial needs. Then there’s the townships with road commissioners, park districts, etc. always eagerly awaiting their slice of the pie. Next up, the county. Then come the state and, lastly the feds. IL is a stinky onion of a state with far too many layers.
How many are under 50,000 and those might be the rural ones that need townships all these others in dense population over 100,000 are the ones that don’t need a township that actually covers no real land not in a town.
Would the corresponding workforce be reduced significantly? Probably not, because that would reduce the taxpayers’ huge burden. Or, better yet, reduce the workforce by a few percent; then, you can bloviate on how you have the best interests of the taxpayers at heart.
Without a DOGE-type function in IL, we know better than to get excited about what should be a major spending reduction.
True but if we had a DOGE here how many of those newly laid off would end up on early retirement collecting a pension if they qualify. Tens of thousands new retirees at once would further drain the pension funds. Catch-22 type of problem.
Regardless we need DOGE.
And all the supervisors, board members, secretaries, building costs, etc etc would all go away.
There is REAL savings there it’s no bloviating, which township do you work for?
Not only would they most likely not reduce much in terms of headcount, the new contracts for employees would probably mirror the higher pay of the larger township absorbing them. Sounds good on paper yet I doubt much savings, if any.