-- 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
How about a guide for repatriation back to their own countries? The Main Stream media is subversive and treasonous!
This is a prime example of why the SunTimes is basically fiscally non functional. They send out emails almost every single day begging for donations. Their newsroom doesn’t really exist any more. The lefty “reporters” and “editorial staff” make a mockery of the word “newspaper”, and use the publication instead as a cheat sheet for their hard left, pro -union, Democrat talking points on just about every topic imaginable. Good luck with kissing the rear ends of the illegals, Suntimes. You will be lucky to be in existence in any form a year from now.
Really funny article full of lefty buzzwords written from inside the lefty resistance bubble.
As Scott Adams would say, it’s the Dem theater kids putting on another performative show, because they have nothing factual or substantive to present.
I welcome their escape from reality because stunts such as this make it impossible for the Dems to recover and become a viable party again.
Good riddance to their evil ways! They’ve inflicted too much misery on this country and have produced too many real victims. The good people of this country have had enough.
No distinction whatsoever mentioned between legal and illegal immigrants. Unforgivable.
And note that the article starts by blaming Texas for busing 51K illegals to Chicago, yet the article goes on to say 828K illegals are in Chicago.
Of course, I’m sure we all want the criminal illegals deported. I’m also sure there are plenty of decent, hardworking and law abiding immigrants here too. I want them deported too.
Hear hear. We want our country back? First thing we gotta do is rid ourselves of them. *All* of them.
Amen to this. Legal, illegal, I don’t really care what kind of immigrant someone is. We didn’t want them then, and we don’t need them now.
– Bill
No need to sugarcoat it, Mr. Glennon, and no need for niceties. Legal, illegal, temporary, protected, provisional – they’re all immigrants, and they all need to go. There are no “good ones.”
Like, say, my colleague Ted’s mom who came here legally from Ecuador? Or his dad who escaped communist Poland by jumping off a merchant ship and making his way here, legally? You are on the wrong website.
I take a hard line position similar to JD Vance, except that I’ll make an exception for the approximately 1 in 10 immigrants that votes Republicans. Some eastern europeans, Cubans, and only recently, hispanics for Trump. But the other 90% that votes Democrat every other election, they all need to leave. The flood of immigrants since 1965 has changed the country in profound ways, many of them for the worse. We had a very, very tough time sorting through the black/white racial dynamic. Then Sen. Kennedy in his infinite wisdom decided to opened up the flood gates to the world… Read more »
Vance doesn’t want to deport legal immigrants and if you think deportation of citizens should be based on how people vote you are nuts.
We start first with illegals and then work our way backwards to 1st and 2nd generation immigrants with green cards, and then if birthright citizenship gets correctly decided, go all the way back to 1965. Crazy you say? Ask somebody in 1965 what they thought of gay marriage. They would have looked at you like a crazy person, just as you are looking at me now….
not gonna lie, mark. based on a lot of the commenters here, not to mention the articles you link to, i’d say ol’ pete has found himself exactly the right website.
I have seen very little support here or anywhere else for deporting legal immigrants. Those who do support that are a small minority.
Immigrants here legally are very hard working people especially ones of Hispanic origin, and yes I know many and they are caring and wonderful people. It’s the illegals that give everyone a bad rap.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4885895-mass-deportation-immigration-poll/
54 percent of Americans back mass deportation of immigrants: Poll
“hard working”? Who cares if they’re hard working? Every immigrant let into this country, legal or illegal, is another drain on our resources and another blight on our culture. Deport them all. Build the wall. Close the loopholes and shut the doors while we’re at it.
The author of this comment likely meant this as some kind of insult to the right-thinking among us but, despite their best attempts at sarcasm, they are correct: immigration, no matter the form, cause, reason, timing, or legality, is to the detriment of any nation. Period.
Mark, I’d be interested to hear WP’s take on Trump’s move to end birthright citizenship, considering it would have profound impact on one of this site’s founders.
Nobody has suggested doing that retroactively, aside from a commenter here. Personally, I’d like to see it ended or limited (I haven’t thought through whether there are particular circumstances where it should be kept). Legally, whether Trump can do it is a different matter. He definitely has a plausible legal position, despite claims by some to the contrary.
I don’t know all the particulars of one of the site’s founders. But I did read that his parents were here legally. I don’t think they proposal to ending birthright citizenship has to do with legal immigrants. It is more of ending the anchor babies getting citizenship.
“It is more of ending the anchor babies getting citizenship.”
This exactly.
Respectfully speaking, while Trump’s current EO specifies a specific subset to whom birthright no longer applies, Miller and Rubio have stated that the longer-term goal is to end it for all children of all immigrants and create a new class of American-born non-citizen resident. I agree 100% with this plan. Legally here or not, if you are not an American your children are not, either.
Well said and to which I would add while they walk among us, we are not safe. If one of us is in danger, all of us are in danger.
Mass deportations. Now.
I would also support retroactive revocation of birthright citizenship.