CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Am I the only one here who isn't exactly feeling sorry for an obviously-wealthy individual complaining about people in the Southport corridor who are actually perhaps homeless or addicts? Southport is ridiculously wealthy, but it's still in the freaking middle of the city. Of course there will be some people who aren't wealthy!

I'm sorry, but this pretty much infuriates me. Complaining about property taxes when you obviously made enough to pay them, complaining about CPS schools when many of them are, in fact excellent (of course there are horrible ones, as can be said for literally every large school system in this country!), etc... etc... Instead of blaming Chicago for your decision to move, just say you decided to move somewhere that suited your current tastes better.

Speaking as someone who's lived in MANY places throughout the years, Chicago still has an amazing value for the money. Yes, 2020 needs to be done away with (the entire country has faced serious issues, and not just health and crime-related!), but up until then, Chicago's renaissance has been nothing short of extremely impressive.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Why would you or anyone feel sorry for me? That one is a real head scratcher. You're getting upset over nothing, perhaps it is the hard times?

Obviously, it's significantly easier to overlook the hassles of the city as a single, childless renter in the city (not sure if any of those apply to you) but the issues get magnified when children and taxes become huge considerations.

Even with that said, it's impossible to overlook that Chicago and my neighborhood specifically have gone the wrong direction over the last few years.

Over the last few years i've put up with:
-Double in property taxes, with Alderman Tunney telling homeowners to anticipate at LEAST an additional 15% property tax hike over next 3 years. the thing is, the problem still isn't solved, there is a massive hole in the city finances.

-1 home break-in; 3 garage break-ins; Mother in Law car getting window's smashed

-5 different shootings within a 3 block radius of my house within 3 years

-multiple car jackings in the neighborhood

-CPS strike where a significant amount of classroom time was missed, and never made up.

-Blaine Elementary School asking for $10,000 per family to offset the budget deficit

-Dealing with homeless people sleeping in Juniper Park (children's playground) literally every night/morning. In addition, finding needles and drug use in the park.

And back to CPS, the High Schools are awful on average. I sure as shit am not sending my kids to Lakeview high school.

I've noticed a slow downward trajectory in my neighborhood over the past several years, all of those items combined, especially the Taxes/Corruption and Shootings made it a no go for me. If that gets your panties in a bunch, that is your problem, not mine.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I mostly agree with your post, but his point about property taxes is justified. Being a renter I don't think you are being fair.

He said that his property taxes doubled in a few years. It shouldn't matter how "wealthy" you perceive him to be, that is pure class warfare and you're ascribing to him lower morality, in effect, by saying this. Truth is, he is far from alone in complaining about this major issue in Chicago right now. Home owners, property owners--you name it--in Chicago are really getting hammered by that.

Or, to put it another way, imagine that your rent doubled in a few years all because your landlord was a corrupt fuck who spent all his money on buying hookers for his buddies. You get the drift. Now, consider that it's far harder to sell a property than it is to simply move out of an apartment at the end of your lease and rent a cheaper place.

It's not as if renters don't pay property taxes, TUP. Hell, you own buildings, you're a landlord. Are you telling me your tenants aren't paying property taxes as part of their overall rent?

Look, I agree that property tax increases can be very onerous, and I'm not one to defend large increases in a short period of time. I'm simply saying that Chicago's property tax rates are generally quite a bit lower than the suburbs. Yes, they're high, namely because property values are high. But again, it's not like renters aren't also paying them, it's just not a line-item in their rent invoice, that's all.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Look, I agree that property tax increases can be very onerous, and I'm not one to defend large increases in a short period of time. I'm simply saying that Chicago's property tax rates are generally quite a bit lower than the suburbs.

^ But that's exactly what you did when you angrily went after IiC:

Originally Posted by glowrock

I'm sorry, but this pretty much infuriates me. Complaining about property taxes when you obviously made enough to pay them,

His point was exactly that in a few years his property taxes doubled. Doubled. From $25k to $50. Any homeowner has a right to be upset that their property taxes increased by $25k in a short time--especially knowing full well that property values are not increasing in concordance. In fact, we have a lot of data showing that home values in Chicago have been pretty flat for years.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ But that's exactly what you did when you angrily went after IiC:



His point was exactly that in a few years his property taxes doubled. Doubled. From $25k to $50. Any homeowner has a right to be upset that their property taxes increased by $25k in a short time--especially knowing full well that property values are not increasing in concordance. In fact, we have a lot of data showing that home values in Chicago have been pretty flat for years.

And it's not just happening to me - this is a house that is similar to mine (both on 37.5 foot lots, same general area), I know for a fact they haven't sold their house because of the tax bill (I know their agent); our house had some advantages over this one, and we sold ours pretty close to ask.

Look at the Tax history on this house, our bill is slightly higher, the jump is just insane. They must have had the bill reduced, looking at '19 adjustment, but it's still insane.

https://www.realtor.com/realestatean...3_M86368-94881

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

And it's not just happening to me - this is a house that is similar to mine (both on 37.5 foot lots, same general area), I know for a fact they haven't sold their house because of the tax bill (I know their agent); our house had some advantages over this one, and we sold ours pretty close to ask.

Look at the Tax history on this house, our bill is slightly higher, the jump is just insane. They must have had the bill reduced, looking at '19 adjustment, but it's still insane.

https://www.realtor.com/realestatean...3_M86368-94881

With a house valued at more than $2.5 million, I don't think 2% is unreasonable for property tax, honestly. Yes, $50k is a huge expense every year, but someone who owns a home worth $2.5 million can seemingly handle that price without a problem. These are not properties owned by "average" people, they're properties owned by the wealthy. Perhaps I'd make an exception for someone who's owned the property for decades, back when values were much, much lower. But still, my heart doesn't exactly ache for someone who complains about a $50k tax bill on such a valuable property.

A property of this value would be taxed at a certainly HIGHER rate in many major metro areas throughout the country. Hell, it would be taxed higher just outside of Chicago itself!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by glowrock

With a house valued at more than $2.5 million, I don't think 2% is unreasonable for property tax, honestly. Yes, $50k is a huge expense every year, but someone who owns a home worth $2.5 million can seemingly handle that price without a problem. These are not properties owned by "average" people, they're properties owned by the wealthy. Perhaps I'd make an exception for someone who's owned the property for decades, back when values were much, much lower. But still, my heart doesn't exactly ache for someone who complains about a $50k tax bill on such a valuable property.

A property of this value would be taxed at a certainly HIGHER rate in many major metro areas throughout the country. Hell, it would be taxed higher just outside of Chicago itself!

Aaron (Glowrock)

Again, nobody is looking for your sympathy, why is that so hard to understand?

Also, is that the precedence you want to set: If you can afford to pay a obnoxious Tax Hike to a corrupt city, then who cares?

This is all anecdotal, but I know several families in my neighborhood who have left the city due to property taxes, all but one of those homes was bought by older, childless couples. Not exactly good for CPS.
I decided I had enough of the corruption and over-taxing....so I left.

I still own close to a dozen rental properties in the city, so obviously I still have skin in the game, but my units are targeted towards 20-something, childless people, and lower income individuals; who seem to be the only types of people the city is interested in keeping around.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by glowrock

With a house valued at more than $2.5 million, I don't think 2% is unreasonable for property tax, honestly. Yes, $50k is a huge expense every year, but someone who owns a home worth $2.5 million can seemingly handle that price without a problem. These are not properties owned by "average" people, they're properties owned by the wealthy. Perhaps I'd make an exception for someone who's owned the property for decades, back when values were much, much lower. But still, my heart doesn't exactly ache for someone who complains about a $50k tax bill on such a valuable property.

A property of this value would be taxed at a certainly HIGHER rate in many major metro areas throughout the country. Hell, it would be taxed higher just outside of Chicago itself!

Aaron (Glowrock)

I think you might be missing IIC's point here. I can see where you are coming from as a renter. However, once you begin leveraging your money, building wealth, owning property, etc, one of the key components of that process is growing your investment and reducing costs. If you own an investment, it's stagnant in value, but the cost to hold onto that is growing with time, you have an incentive to get rid of it and move on. That's exactly what IIC is explaining here. And I suspect your next statement might be "Well, it's a home, you shouldn't treat it like an investment if you live there". While that is a very acceptable position, the fact is most people build wealth over time by investing into real estate. And since we live in a society where taxes/values vary, folks have the freedom to pick up and move to where they will get more return if they have the means. This is exactly what you are seeing happen in Chicago.

I love Chicago, and if I was 10 years younger when I was renting, I'd probably live in the city and rent too. However, now that I own property, I have zero plans to invest in Chicago given everything that has occurred with local Gov't and what's going on right now with current violence, etc. It sucks, and I hope I am wrong, but many folks aren't optimistic about Chicago right now.

That could all change if the local gov't gets their shit together, reforms things, etc, but in the short term, it ain't looking good.

[the urban politician]

^ The other aspect of this discussion is stability and predictability.

If we knew that property taxes were going to increase incrementally but with a sense that things were under control (pension obligations, etc) then I think most people would stick it out and be willing to ride along.

Chicago is in the unique situation of having a fiscal situation that basically headed towards financial collapse, and no amount of taxing will save it. So it doesn't surprise me that homeowners are bailing.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by Investing In Chicago

We made the decision to leave Chicago last June, and have been building a house in Wayzata, Minnesota, on Lake Minnetonka (where my wife is from and where her family lives).

I'm just not interested in pulling the city out of it's financial mess by insane property tax hikes (my property taxes have gone from $25K to ~$50K over the last handful of years); i'm also not interested in sending my children to CPS, which is a disaster, IMO. Also, the novelty of "the city" has worn off for me, and honestly, I want nothing to do with the idiots/drug addicts/homeless that we experience daily even in the relatively affluent Southport Corridor area of Chicago.

Beyond all of that, we decided we want to raise our children outside the city and on a lake, where they can boat every night in the summer and skate every night in the winter. We will also have dozens of restaurants/shops to walk to, so it's sort of the best of both worlds for us.

You have been complaining on here for years. You've been planning to move to exurban Minneapolis for what seems like forever. You complain about costs in Chicago, but then compare it unfavorably to New York, which would cost you 6x as much.

I don't know you at all except from your whiny, cynical posts here. But nothing seems more natural to me that a person who writes like you is moving to a the edge of a thriving city--where you can benefit from the industry and cultural productivity--but spend your taxes in community where nearly all of the use is in isolating yourself from the people in that city who pay and work to make it great. A parasite. I, for one, won't miss you. Chicago is enriched by your departure. Goodbye.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

You have been complaining on here for years. You've been planning to move to exurban Minneapolis for what seems like forever. You complain about costs in Chicago, but then compare it unfavorably to New York, which would cost you 6x as much.

I don't know you at all except from your whiny, cynical posts here. But nothing seems more natural to me that a person who writes like you is moving to a the edge of a thriving city--where you can benefit from the industry and cultural productivity--but spend your taxes in community where nearly all of the use is in isolating yourself from the people in that city who pay and work to make it great. A parasite. I, for one, won't miss you. Chicago is enriched by your departure. Goodbye.

I disagree entirely with this mean-spirited post. Investing in Chicago, it is a loss for Chicago that you are leaving. You seem like a decent person and you invested a lot of your hard earned money in a city you never came from, and for that you deserve kudos.

I'm sure you will be missed. You are the opposite of a parasite, and you likely contribute orders of magnitude more to Chicago's tax base than people like OrdoSeclorum ever will. Chicago would be enriched if more people like him traded places with you.

[bnk]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I disagree entirely with this mean-spirited post. Investing in Chicago, it is a loss for Chicago that you are leaving. You seem like a decent person and you invested a lot of your hard earned money in a city you never came from, and for that you deserve kudos.

I'm sure you will be missed. You are the opposite of a parasite, and you likely contribute orders of magnitude more to Chicago's tax base than people like OrdoSeclorum ever will. Chicago would be enriched if more people like him traded places with you.

I totally agree with TUP here. A parasite? That's a weird disappointing viewpoint. He is defiantly contributing more to the tax base than all of the looters combined.

[Investing In Chicago]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

You have been complaining on here for years. You've been planning to move to exurban Minneapolis for what seems like forever. You complain about costs in Chicago, but then compare it unfavorably to New York, which would cost you 6x as much.

I don't know you at all except from your whiny, cynical posts here. But nothing seems more natural to me that a person who writes like you is moving to a the edge of a thriving city--where you can benefit from the industry and cultural productivity--but spend your taxes in community where nearly all of the use is in isolating yourself from the people in that city who pay and work to make it great. A parasite. I, for one, won't miss you. Chicago is enriched by your departure. Goodbye.

You getting upset about me calling out unsustainable property tax increases says more about you and your loser mentality than anything about me. I'm fine, nobody needs to miss me. I didn't even need to buy another house, I get to live rent free in your head.

[sentinel]

Illinois would be SOOO much better off by cutting in half the amount of government units/entities. We have 2,000 MORE that the next highest, which is Pennsylvania, and almost the same exact population count. That. Is. Absurd.

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/rele.../cb12-161.html

I've been talking about the need for government consolidation in Illinois for years, so much fucking overlap (and unnecessary and unwarranted double-dipping)...that is the biggest cancer in this state.

[BorisMolotov]

^ But mah Mosquito Abatement Districts!

[Bonsai Tree]

What we really need is a metropolitan government kinda like what they have a lot of in Europe. London is a great example of this. If we could have a metropolitan government that would solve a shit ton of our problems. The issue is of course- 1. How do you take powers away from the counties 2. How do you take power away from municipal governments. We already have plenty of special districts (as was stated previously) and those could easily be moved under the new metropolitan government (RTA, CMAP, MWRD all under one roof). I'd also propose moving property taxing bodies into this government and not at the county level, along with control of large regional roads and arteries. Essentially creating a government for all of Chicagoland. Imagine how much more interconnected our region could be, how we could increase standardization, promote transit, and have realistic urban growth. One can only dream I guess. . . The only realistic way this happens is if the Feds create it for us just like they did our other regional districts. Maybe some day. . .

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by twister244

I think you might be missing IIC's point here. I can see where you are coming from as a renter. However, once you begin leveraging your money, building wealth, owning property, etc, one of the key components of that process is growing your investment and reducing costs. If you own an investment, it's stagnant in value, but the cost to hold onto that is growing with time, you have an incentive to get rid of it and move on. That's exactly what IIC is explaining here. And I suspect your next statement might be "Well, it's a home, you shouldn't treat it like an investment if you live there". While that is a very acceptable position, the fact is most people build wealth over time by investing into real estate. And since we live in a society where taxes/values vary, folks have the freedom to pick up and move to where they will get more return if they have the means. This is exactly what you are seeing happen in Chicago.

I love Chicago, and if I was 10 years younger when I was renting, I'd probably live in the city and rent too. However, now that I own property, I have zero plans to invest in Chicago given everything that has occurred with local Gov't and what's going on right now with current violence, etc. It sucks, and I hope I am wrong, but many folks aren't optimistic about Chicago right now.

That could all change if the local gov't gets their shit together, reforms things, etc, but in the short term, it ain't looking good.

Oh, thanks so much for the condescending comments. Since I'm a renter, I obviously don't comprehend the concept of property taxes and how wealth-building and management and leveraging occurs.

God, sometimes I realize how much I truly DESPISE this forum, sometimes.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

I disagree entirely with this mean-spirited post. Investing in Chicago, it is a loss for Chicago that you are leaving. You seem like a decent person and you invested a lot of your hard earned money in a city you never came from, and for that you deserve kudos.

I'm sure you will be missed. You are the opposite of a parasite, and you likely contribute orders of magnitude more to Chicago's tax base than people like OrdoSeclorum ever will. Chicago would be enriched if more people like him traded places with you.

Investing in Chicago and I have similar jobs and similar tax situations. I could live anywhere and I choose Chicago because, on balance, it’s the best.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by bnk

I totally agree with TUP here. A parasite? That's a weird disappointing viewpoint. He is defiantly contributing more to the tax base than all of the looters combined.

Damn the looters to hell. Neither here nor there.

People who live on the edge of a city to take advantage of its assets and benefit from its networks but specifically try to avoid contributing to its tax base, they are a drag. They weaken the schools and make the state spread its resources thin. And then they use zoning laws and the taxes they do pay, to isolate themselves from everyone else, with minimum lot sizes and neighborhood associations and restrictive zoning. Parasite isn’t hyperbolic or a metaphor for this behavior, it’s a literal definition.

[ChiMIchael]

I don't think it's fair to attack IIC. I can understand his departure with a bad taste in his mouth can evoke some emotion, but he has a right to do what's best for him.

The real question can Chicago recover from this or will it define the city's legacy for years to come.

[skysoar]

Originally Posted by ChiMIchael

I don't think it's fair to attack IIC. I can understand his departure with a bad taste in his mouth can evoke some emotion, but he has a right to do what's best for him.

The real question can Chicago recover from this or will it define the city's legacy for years to come.

Of course Chicago will recover, in the age of covid-19 i would not draw any conclusion to any great cities future. All large cities are going through great adversities now but its not time to announce their demise.