-- 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
For this type of plan, what lies ahead is bad government making sure the guarantee includes more people with each getting increasingly higher amounts of basic income. Politicians behind this are the guarantee and those who fear losing their seat will bumble into supporting this. These politicians can’t keep winning elections with only 5,000 people getting $500 per month. The plan’s success, for those proud of it, was announced at passage. The article indicates BGI was approved without much by way of specifics. So, there isn’t a disclosed link between the guaranteed income plan and solving for anybody’s low-income predicament. They also don’t describe… Read more »
So, Chicago taxpayers. Do you feel like suckers yet? Don’t miss work tomorrow. There is a poor unfortunate out there relying on you!
When they run out of funding as the eligible individuals increase there will no doubt be a push for a State tax to provide the funds.
Will this be given as a lump sum or as some kind if debit card? I predict it will be the latter. Socialists hate cash and they hate crypto because neither of those can be centrally controlled. Will unvaxxed not get their 450k? I’ll bet not. The vax ultimately is about central control, leading to control of personal wealth as well. Step 1 force vax, step 2 issue vax id cards, step 3 abolish cash, step 4 appropriate crypto algorithms for the government, step 5 control how much money/wealth every individual is “allowed” to possess or spend. This is the… Read more »
We are in desperate need of people who can think beyond their next Tweet. Unintended consequences can be predicted with a little common sense which are leaders lack. This is but a small component to destroy the United States from the inside. Since WW 2 we’ve been rich, successful and invincible. Most countries are jealous of our success and would love to see the US fail. Since an outright attempt to destroy us via attack would be suicide. Let’s go down another path. The country is loaded with useful idiots craving attention; we’ll let them wreck the United States! Wreck… Read more »
No, we have people who can think – we just need to stop sitting on the sidelines and speak truth to corruption and the rot that infects most of our politicians… The struggle is the fortitude it takes to step away from today’s freebies for tomorrow’s earnings. Withdrawal is tough, really tough.
Have fun hardworking chicago residents! Your property taxes are going up as well!
I guess this is what you want? Have fun! LOL
Why work your fast-food or retail job, as a POC working-class mom? The welfare-related incentives are too attractive for these ladies to stay in work-force.
and just think they could of had a free lifetime membership to Weight Watchers or Jenny Craig, sarcasm.
This is purely inflationary . No increase in supply, yet new purchasing power in demand.
Money for nothing.
But, isn’t it only a step or two morally worse than the progeny of the super wealthy who leave estates so large the heirs need never have to work? We accept the latter as a matter of long standing legal rights but are totally reviled by the former?
Guaranteed basic income can only be given by coercing some citizens to provide a living for others. Inheritances do not involve coercion, the money was voluntarily given by the bequestor. The two situations are not morally comparable.
So, sloth is morally okay in some cases but not others? Maybe so and maybe not.
A) I break into a store and take $100.
B) I find a $100 bill on the sidewalk.
In neither case did I work for the money. Are they morally equivalent?
You got me there, but if I knew what you were going to do in the 2nd case I might be able to have an opinion. Tell me what you think about the answer to your question.
James, GBI can only be given by forcing some people (through taxes) to support others. The comparative “sloth” between 2 parties who both obtain funds without working for them is not the issue. It is the use of force to obtain the money in the case of GBI that is the moral issue. The fact that there are people who inherited what many perceive as “unearned income” is irrelevant, and so is the amount of the inheritance.
Governments only work by taxing people. Any program funded by government can be considered stealing from taxpayers by those who don’t like it. The whole idea of government involves financial redistributions resulting in winners and losers among the individual taxpayers. It has ever been thusly. So, what else is new under the sun?
The whole idea of government is most definitely not to redistribute funds between winners and losers. It has not ever been thusly.
Please study American history. There is a reason that Amendment 16 to the Constitution was ratified in 1913. It allowed the income tax, and thus redistribution began. It required a Constitutional amendment because the income tax (and redistribution) were correctly understood to be unconstitutional. But the progressives of that time were oh so much smarter than the founders….
I didn’t mean to convey that’s one of the primary reason governments have been formed. That’s entirely your spin, reading tea leaves of your own invention. Still, you are clearly in agreement that’s one of its consequences.
You might have a point there…Pritzker hasn’t worked a day in his life living royally off of his inherentence. I wonder why when he blabs about economic inequality he doesn’t practice what he is preaching and give all of his wealth away instead of expecting the middle class to give up what they worked for?
The saying in politics is that the politicians are middle men between the donors’ money and the media commercials. Fatty is so rich that he completely cut out the donors, and he ran the most expensive gov.’s campaign in the history of the US using his own money. He handed out tens of millions to Illinois media outfits more than any other candidate in history. The IL media rewards him nicely as there is never a negative story written about him, and all reporting is glowing praise. the media accepts the fiction that ‘he alone keeps us safe’ because if… Read more »
Well, there are jobs that require work and others that really prequire back-breaking, sweat-drenching WORK with many, many more of the former in today’s more advanced American society. I wouldn’t want to rank them as to their level of importance. Suffice it to say we as a society should encourage meaningful efforts to help Amerca and the world’s people generally while also discouraging lack of involvement towards those ends. Policies encouraging some useful “work” among those who are able are a good idea,
The wealthy sometimes create foundations that become leftist over time.
For example, Edsel and Henry Ford created the Ford Foundation.
That’s chicken feed! This falls under the heading. I can’t make this stuff up. Is anyone in the Biden administration required to take a mental status exam?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-administration-could-pay-illegal-201909101.html