CHICAGO | General Discussions

[Notyrview]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

tell that to the CPS teachers who have to buy school supplies out of their own pockets. but at least the Vista buyers will have a new nice front lawn.

theres existing infrastrucutre already here. it may not be exactly the design Rahm or other people want in order to make it into the travel magazines and NYT, but its functional and really theres nothing wrong with it. these are the types of "nice to have" splurges that should come after the fiscal situation is under control. and im sure you'll all be wailing when the property taxes get jacked again. if we didnt spend another dime on the Loop for the next 30 years id be perfectly fine with it.

You're making appeals of the heart to someone without one. Like if you literally cut open some of these folks and looked inside you'd find a lump of coal. I long for the day when we don't have to fight over resources like this and a more sensible generation raises taxes on corporations and the wealthy, pays teachers what they deserve, and doesn't blame unions for ruining the economy (which is a huge, fat, greedy lie). Until then, more coal and CO2 emissions for everyone!

To put this in perspective the top 5% of earners in America own 72% of the wealth, and yet, here we are, blaming unions for budget shortfalls #maga

[SIGSEGV]

Is there a legal problem with putting a 100% income tax on pensions for people who live out of state?

[rgolch]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

You're making appeals of the heart to someone without one. Like if you literally cut open some of these folks and looked inside you'd find a lump of coal. I long for the day when we don't have to fight over resources like this and a more sensible generation raises taxes on corporations and the wealthy, pays teachers what they deserve, and doesn't blame unions for ruining the economy (which is a huge, fat, greedy lie). Until then, more coal and CO2 emissions for everyone!

To put this in perspective the top 5% of earners in America own 72% of the wealth, and yet, here we are, blaming unions for budget shortfalls #maga

Just so we’re clear; I’ve never voted Republican in my life.

And not sure what you’d call weathly, but I only really think of 0.1%’ers as wealthy. At that level, you can find all the loopholes to skirt taxes. But someone like myself gives up 50% of my income to the state and government. So you think people like me should give more? Top 5% isn’t egregiously wealthy my friend.

And finally. Pay teachers what they deserve? Maybe in rural America. But Chicago public teacher are absolutely paid “what they deserve.” A tenured teacher makes about the same income as a pediatrician. With better retirement and summers off. Sheesh.....

Okay.. we’re off topic. Mods, feel free to delete these comments or move them to another thread.

[AlpacaObsessor]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

You're making appeals of the heart to someone without one. Like if you literally cut open some of these folks and looked inside you'd find a lump of coal. I long for the day when we don't have to fight over resources like this and a more sensible generation raises taxes on corporations and the wealthy, pays teachers what they deserve, and doesn't blame unions for ruining the economy (which is a huge, fat, greedy lie). Until then, more coal and CO2 emissions for everyone!

To put this in perspective the top 5% of earners in America own 72% of the wealth, and yet, here we are, blaming unions for budget shortfalls #maga

One of Chicago's only advantages over the coasts is comparative affordability, take that away by raising taxes and I can't see our economy faring well.

[Near North Resident]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

To put this in perspective the top 5% of earners in America own 72% of the wealth, and yet, here we are, blaming unions for budget shortfalls #maga

so what, the top 5% paid over 60% of all federal taxes (not including local taxes)... your line of thinking is why people are fleeing this state in droves

[Notyrview]

Originally Posted by Near North Resident

so what, the top 5% paid over 60% of all federal taxes (not including local taxes)... your line of thinking is why people are fleeing this state in droves

Yeah so ideally the top 2% pay A TON more, especially the top 1% and corporations. And then we're going to invest it in schools, infrastructure, health care -- all the goodies. The middle class will grow and there will be plenty of money left over for riverwalk improvements. We can't recreate the post-war manufacturing economy, but we surely can enact similar New Deal policies that really lit a fire under it.

[rgolch]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

Yeah so ideally the top 2% pay A TON more, especially the top 1% and corporations. And then we're going to invest it in schools, infrastructure, health care -- all the goodies. The middle class will grow and there will be plenty of money left over for riverwalk improvements. We can't recreate the post-war manufacturing economy, but we surely can enact similar New Deal policies that really lit a fire under it.

Haha... okay, I'm gonna indulge you just so I understand how someone likes you thinks.

Be specific. A TON more? What does that mean? Taxes on household income going from 50% to.... what percentage?

And just out of interest, do you believe in capitalism, meritocracy, and rewarding people with in demand skills, high academic pedigree, and those who risked everything while making good decisions while seeing the fruits of their labor pay off big? Or should everyone more or less he the same?

[pilsenarch]

Originally Posted by rgolch

Haha... okay, I'm gonna indulge you just so I understand how someone likes you thinks.

Be specific. A TON more? What does that mean? Taxes on household income going from 50% to.... what percentage?

And just out of interest, do you believe in capitalism, meritocracy, and rewarding people with in demand skills, high academic pedigree, and those who risked everything while making good decisions while seeing the fruits of their labor pay off big? Or should everyone more or less he the same?

So, I know you claim to be a democrat, but do you remember the top tax rates the last time 'America Was Great'?

[the urban politician]

^ Good idea.

Maybe not 100%, but more like 60-70%

And if the Illinois Supreme Court has a problem with it, just ignore them. They can't do shit

[rgolch]

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

So, I know you claim to be a democrat, but do you remember the top tax rates the last time 'America Was Great'?

You mean the Carter years? I don't remember the exact percentage, but something like 70%. And no, I don't think that's ok. That's ridiculous.

But most of the reason I'm a democrat is I'm very socially progressive. I can't tolerate the gun loving, Jesus obsessed, immigrant hating, "real 'Merica" types who want to recreate 1955 with iPhones and Netflix. And I believe in a social safety net, investment in infrastructure and public transportation, and fair regulations on businesses and industry. God knows they won't police themselves.

But I also very much believe that our society should be a meritocracy. Those who take the initiative and build business, or those who achieve exceptional skills through high levels of education should be rewarded. A chemical engineer with a degree from U of I Champagne is a less common and more valuable skill than some dude who graduated from SIU with a 2.9 GPA and a degree in English, and couldn't figure out what to do so he decided to teach high school. Those two individuals aren't equal in my own personal opinion. And our society rightfully rewards the first individual with higher compensation. There isn't anything wrong with that, and those who are more accomplished shouldn't always have a target on their back.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Don't listen to TUP Via, he's just a typical white guy...

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Notyrview

Yeah so ideally the top 2% pay A TON more, especially the top 1% and corporations. And then we're going to invest it in schools, infrastructure, health care -- all the goodies. The middle class will grow and there will be plenty of money left over for riverwalk improvements. We can't recreate the post-war manufacturing economy, but we surely can enact similar New Deal policies that really lit a fire under it.

Ironically the economy is widely considered to be in the best shape across the board (for workers and companies) since the post war boom supposedly caused by the New Deal policies you tout. Though that boom was also caused by massive capital expansion in the way of a huge economic depression.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Ironically the economy is widely considered to be in the best shape across the board (for workers and companies) since the post war boom

Where does this belief come from? Real wages are flat to down over the past 12 months and laborforce participation is low. GDP growth was good last quarter, but that is expected immediately after a huge tax cut coupled with increased spending.

The late-80s and mid-to-late 90s economy was far stronger.

[10023]

^ You’re confusing the economy with wages. These are different. If companies buy a bunch of robots to more efficiently complete tasks previously done by humans, and automation prevents wage growth, that’s good news for the economy. Wage growth means inflation, which is a risk to the economy.

I don’t think we’ll see labor force participation or wages creep up again until the Baby Boomer generation is fully out of their working years.

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

So, I know you claim to be a democrat, but do you remember the top tax rates the last time 'America Was Great'?

The world has changed now and you can’t tax people like that. They’ll just leave the country. People can now choose where in the world to live.

And schools don’t need more money. They need accountable parents who aren’t idiots, and less violent neighborhoods.

Lastly, people are correct when they say that NOT spending money on downtown, the lakefront parks, beautifying Michigan Ave etc would turn Chicago into another Detroit or Cleveland. Sorry, but most people (especially most people with money) don’t give a shit about South and West Side neighborhoods. Tourists, conventions, shoppers, big business... they care about downtown. And they’re the ones paying taxes.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Don't listen to TUP Via, he's just a typical white guy...

That’s right, I’m way out of touch.

Today, for example, my wife Betty and I are headed to the Senior early bird special with our friends Burt and Dale and their wives Rose and Myrtle, and after that we’re going out for some Saturday night bingo. My favorite night of the week!

Gotta be in bed by 9 though or else my heartburn begins to act up...

[left of center]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

fair enough, i thought you were older. regardless, it dosent change the fact that throwing our money at "nice to haves" in the ritziest areas of the city dosent help us tackle our larger structural fiscal challenges. i wouldnt have as much of an issue if these funds were going to other local neighborhoods that lack parks in the first place...do they not qualify as taxpayers too, or are they not also entitled to these sorts of amenities? how many times over can we polish this exact same corner of the city?

Sprucing up downtown is investing in the economic engine of this city. Those improvements are not just for downtown rich residents (really all of Chicago is able to enjoy the riverwalk, much like a person like myself who isn't from a lakefront neighborhood finds himself by the lake often this time of year), but rather the tourism dollars the city so eagerly seeks. The Riverwalk attracts a very sizable portion of people who come to visit Chicago. Expanding it and making it more of a draw will increase the number of out of towners/staters spending highly taxed money at coffee shops, restaurants and hotels. This is one of those investments that pays for itself many, many times over.

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Is there a legal problem with putting a 100% income tax on pensions for people who live out of state?

Probably. But they should try to implement something like this anyway, although 100% is probably too draconian for any politician to suggest. Something like 40% would work as an effective deterrent for retirees leaving the state, IMHO.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

i wouldnt have as much of an issue if these funds were going to other local neighborhoods that lack parks in the first place...do they not qualify as taxpayers too, or are they not also entitled to these sorts of amenities?

This is a canard people keep throwing out. Where are these parkless neighborhoods? Chicago has an excellent park system, I'm struggling to find a spot in the city that is more than 6 blocks from a large park (10 acre/one square block).

[Notyrview]

Originally Posted by pilsenarch

So, I know you claim to be a democrat, but do you remember the top tax rates the last time 'America Was Great'?

Totally, he’s one of those people whom Bill Clinton made it possible to claim to be a democrat with a mixture of republican fiscal policy, republican “law and order”, i.e. systemic racism, with a half-hearted nod to multiculturalism and saving just a little of the safety net. It’s a joke and it’s why no one voted for more of the same from Hillary.

The bright side of living under Trumpian fascism is that people have woken up from this lie and are mobilized af to expose it and build a more egalitarian society. Let the progressive wave come and drown those who would put greed above charity, selfishness above the American dream. You’re winning now but the arc of history is gonna swallow you whole.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

Where does this belief come from? Real wages are flat to down over the past 12 months and laborforce participation is low. GDP growth was good last quarter, but that is expected immediately after a huge tax cut coupled with increased spending.

The late-80s and mid-to-late 90s economy was far stronger.

The labor force participation was below 60% in the 1950's and 60's until the baby boom hit the workforce and pushed it into the mid 60%'s. Now it's fallen down to 63% or so which is totally reasonable considering millions of baby boomers are retiring.

Originally Posted by 10023

The world has changed now and you can’t tax people like that. They’ll just leave the country. People can now choose where in the world to live.

Also tax rates don't need to be that high anymore, government has gotten significantly more efficient than it once was and those old tax rates aren't even remotely translatable to modern rates anyhow because the way we tax in general has radically changed. People talk about these issues as if they are so simple "taxes were 95% before on the rich" ok genius, what was it that they were taxing 95% of and how do you define it? Were they paying sales tax? Was it all Federal Tax? State Tax? What about VAT?

The song Taxman by the Beatles references "19 for me and 1 for you" which is commentary on the 95% tax rate of the time on the highest earners which hit the Beatles particularly hard because their "income" was actual income and not derived from capital etc. I don't think anyone would say a 95% tax rate on anyone is fair, the Beatles certainly didn't which is why they all decamped for NYC from the UK...

Originally Posted by Notyrview

Totally, he’s one of those people whom Bill Clinton made it possible to claim to be a democrat with a mixture of republican fiscal policy, republican “law and order”, i.e. systemic racism, with a half-hearted nod to multiculturalism and saving just a little of the safety net. It’s a joke and it’s why no one voted for more of the same from Hillary.

The Democrats are now the party of Free trade, I find it hilarious that people continue to cling to the notion that the "Brand Name" of their political party is correct. Hate to break it to you, but the Democrats are picking your pocket just as much as the GOP is today. I know the Democrats say "WE LOVE POOR PEOPLE TM", but actions speak louder than words.

I'm sure you will have some snarky complaints about Trump or something like that, but look no further than Chicago which has been ruled by the Dems for 70 years and left giant swaths of the city behind with nary an attempt to correct that mess.

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ It's a myth perpetrated by the fact that Chicago has a much lower percentage of it's land devoted to park space than many other large metros. Of course that number itself is distorted by the fact that a much larger percentage of Chicago's land area is devoted to infrastructure, industrial, and commercial interests than most cities as well which are uses that don't need park space. Also part of the large portion of Chicago devoted to infrastructure consists of parkways which are technically part of the roadways of the city when you count "infrastructure". Our parkways turn virtually every residential side street into a pseudo park atmosphere and are highly utilized by residents as sort of a giant front yard / commons.

Originally Posted by left of center

Sprucing up downtown is investing in the economic engine of this city. Those improvements are not just for downtown rich residents (really all of Chicago is able to enjoy the riverwalk, much like a person like myself who isn't from a lakefront neighborhood finds himself by the lake often this time of year), but rather the tourism dollars the city so eagerly seeks.

Wait you've never been stopped and asked for a copy of your last two years tax returns and two pieces of mail proving you live downtown when going down to the Riverwalk?

This of course is an attitude that's starting to crop up all over the city as the anti-gents keep spouting their nonsense. For example we just had Somos Logan Square and Logan Square Neighborhood Association demand an analysis of whether the proposed reconstruction of the square will "displace more residents and hurt minorities". Like WTF? In what world should we not repair and improve a major public space that has serious pedestrian safety issues because "it might displace poor people"?? I've got an idea that will really help make Logan Square more affordable, let's clearcut all the bolevards and pave them. That will stop people from wanting to move here! Maybe we can chisel all the historic facades off the buildings too and replace them with 70's lavarock while we are at it, then the rents will really drop!

Nitwits...