CHICAGO | General Discussions

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ORD2010

Now I don't know all the information on this topic so please correct me if I am wrong, most of this is my own observation as a single man in his late 20's.
.

^ No offense, you seem very nice and genuine, but therein kinda lies the problem. We hear these perspectives from "late 20s" or "30 something" whipper snappers all day every day and it's the same clueless perspective. I know that most of that demographic is ignorant about running a business. I was one once.

Many have their neat little software-tech-whatever consulting job which somehow is now happening from home, and pay rent, and all is well. Never fear, the "educated bright elite are all still coming to the city in droves" and everybody who complains, well, "don't let the door hit you on the way out" as you go to backwards Trumpist Florida.

It's the old and tired routine, but it's completely off. It's not telling anything close to the complexity of the real story.

I'm not saying that I have the answers, but post-COVID Chicago needs a new formula. Because at least for some proportion of the population, work from home is here to stay--and "work from home" can mean suburbs, or maybe it can mean Missouri.

These small businesses are mostly owned by people who aren't 33 years old, they are older and more cynical, but that doesn't make them all 'mean Trumpist assholes' or whatever they are falsely being characterized as. They are a huge part of Chicago's tax base that are not as mobile as the "work from home" types who can do their job from anywhere. This year has been enormously painful for them, perhaps destructive, and they deserve better than some asshole with the whole "enjoy Florida, you won't be missed!" nonsense.

[ORD2010]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ No offense, you seem very nice and genuine, but therein kinda lies the problem. We hear these perspectives from "late 20s" or "30 something" whipper snappers all day every day and it's the same clueless perspective. I know that most of that demographic is ignorant about running a business. I was one once.

Many have their neat little software-tech-whatever consulting job which somehow is now happening from home, and pay rent, and all is well. Never fear, the "educated bright elite are all still coming to the city in droves" and everybody who complains, well, "don't let the door hit you on the way out" as you go to backwards Trumpist Florida.

It's the old and tired routine, but it's completely off. It's not telling anything close to the complexity of the real story.

I'm not saying that I have the answers, but post-COVID Chicago needs a new formula. Because at least for some proportion of the population, work from home is here to stay--and "work from home" can mean suburbs, or maybe it can mean Missouri.

These small businesses are mostly owned by people who aren't 33 years old, they are older and more cynical, but that doesn't make them all 'mean Trumpist assholes' or whatever they are falsely being characterized as. They are a huge part of Chicago's tax base that are not as mobile as the "work from home" types who can do their job from anywhere. This year has been enormously painful for them, perhaps destructive, and they deserve better than some asshole with the whole "enjoy Florida, you won't be missed!" nonsense.

Now I didn't bring politics into this, and unlike the original post I don't think this is a blue vs red issue all that much, almost every major city in the country even if a red state, is a blue area, Miami to Chicago is still a blue to blue move. I do a fair amount of research, do not work in tech, and have people in industries dedicated to studying population movements and investment opportunities. Now I wouldn't call the perspective of anyone below 30 incorrect, as no matter how great economics are, the new generations move to places due to different factors, especially post pandemic, than past generations, as it always has.

I also don't think the 'enjoy florida!' attitude came because he was moving to Florida, but because of the tone and attitude he delivered it with, a very 'Chicago is garbage and liberals and their tech are killing it and why would I stay there when I can go lay on a beach' and thats the tone that pisses most people off, me included, cause they don't realize the city they get the privilege to call home, again the grass is always greener, but you don't need to rub it in and the piss on the lawn you used to live in.

If we are being completely honest? most people under 30 do not feel like there is an environment to open a brick and mortar business in, heck most of us don't even plan on there being a social security/pension fund for us by the time we can retire. We are a very cynical generation currently and much more rely on virtual businesses since it does not require the same amount of the money. The future of all these cities depends on attracting those under 30 and maintain their current population. Chicago needs to to support its current small businesses but also appeal more to the yuppies especially with wfh to stay, which to me is well, the offering a major city has that places like Nashville, Miami, and Austin don't have yet at least.

Your perspective is important, both of ours make up the city and are important for the future, but we can't pretend each side is wrong and that only we know what is correct.

[Rizzo]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ No offense, you seem very nice and genuine, but therein kinda lies the problem. We hear these perspectives from "late 20s" or "30 something" whipper snappers all day every day and it's the same clueless perspective. I know that most of that demographic is ignorant about running a business. I was one once.

Many have their neat little software-tech-whatever consulting job which somehow is now happening from home, and pay rent, and all is well. Never fear, the "educated bright elite are all still coming to the city in droves" and everybody who complains, well, "don't let the door hit you on the way out" as you go to backwards Trumpist Florida.

It's the old and tired routine, but it's completely off. It's not telling anything close to the complexity of the real story.

I'm not saying that I have the answers, but post-COVID Chicago needs a new formula. Because at least for some proportion of the population, work from home is here to stay--and "work from home" can mean suburbs, or maybe it can mean Missouri.

These small businesses are mostly owned by people who aren't 33 years old, they are older and more cynical, but that doesn't make them all 'mean Trumpist assholes' or whatever they are falsely being characterized as. They are a huge part of Chicago's tax base that are not as mobile as the "work from home" types who can do their job from anywhere. This year has been enormously painful for them, perhaps destructive, and they deserve better than some asshole with the whole "enjoy Florida, you won't be missed!" nonsense.

The greater investment you put in Chicago, the more you realize the rising cost of owning or running a business. Not complaining personally, just aware. If you're a homeowner, it could be rising property taxes that are of concern. If you own a business, the rising cost and complexity of permits and registrations.

We probably have some runway left to reform and transition before abrupt, structural changes must be made to address the budget crisis, but it's a runway mostly traveled so the remaining options aren't desirable. It doesn't help much that people are stuck at home due to the pandemic and can't enjoy a city that's worth paying for. It's what keeps Chicago an attractive draw, at least in the midwest.

That said, costs will eventually follow the masses to whatever places become popular. Real Estate prices will rise, infrastructure will be stressed, and residents will demand more services and amenities, and all of this will be the foundation for legacy costs.

Quite the conversation to emerge from the subject of furniture stores. To that I'll say there's plenty of options out there. Reminds me of what became of independent electronics stores.

[Chi-Sky21]

.

[Busy Bee]

Plus you get to have a bonafide space alien as your senator.

[ChiMIchael]

I had a cousin that's made many attempts to leave Chicago for Florida but winds up coming back. It seems like Florida's QOL isn't that great. But if I receive a decent job offer in FL, I would definitely take it.

Some of you can answer this better than me, but when was the last time Chicago achieve any major investments or resources booms? I think that addresses many of the city's problems.

[the urban politician]

^ Why do you say “partisans”?

If a business owner for 20 years is frustrated at the city, what part about him considering moving makes him “partisan”?

[jtown,man]

My class got the chance to have a Calumet City official come and speak with us. The FIRST thing she brought up in her presentation was that it was great that they were a "home rule" city, meaning they can do things other cities can't. Her only example? Having a sales tax that is 2% higher than the states.

Huh? Then she went on to talk about their number one goal as a city is to increase tax revenue and keep their retail sector up and going.

She doesn't realize Indiana is literally across the border from them. Residents can easily move or shop there and save tons. The city keeps raising its property taxes to keep the government's income increasing every year despite a population that decreases every year.

How does that make sense? Why is the city's revenue keep climbing while its population is going down? They keep increasing taxes, which then leads to more people leaving, which leads to them to keep raising taxes. Why do they need so much revenue? Because they are running the city as if they had the same population as 20 years ago, despite losing 25% of their population.

It all reeks of a scheme to keep the idiots in their jobs and to keep the machine running.


This is the issue in this area, it's not small. It's not laughable. It is serious and is killing the region. At least in areas with high property values and low property taxes you can cash out when you sell. Not here, you can buy a modest home and sell it for barely any more than you paid and sink enough money in taxes every year equivalent to paying rent in Dallas.

It's not sustainable. How is it that government revenue needs to be X amount higher her per person than in many other large cities? Do we REALLY get that much better services? Data would prove that false.

It's the same thing with the CPS. Their budget gets larger every year (even factoring in inflation) yet every year they lose students. Why don't people call them out on this BS?

[IrishIllini]

Property taxes in Texas (esp. Austin, Dallas, and Houston) are high. The average rate for 2021 is higher than Illinois.

Tennessee is the real steal, and it's much closer. Low property taxes and no income tax.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

Property taxes in Texas (esp. Austin, Dallas, and Houston) are high. The average rate for 2021 is higher than Illinois.

^ I'm not doubting you, but do you have the data to back this?

I'm talking specifically about Chicagoland (Not Illinois) property taxes versus some of the major Texas metros

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ I'm not doubting you, but do you have the data to back this?

I'm talking specifically about Chicagoland (Not Illinois) property taxes versus some of the major Texas metros

http://www.tax-rates.org/taxtables/p...y-tax-by-state

Doesn't make sense to not compare state-wide rates unless you have specific communities in mind w/ similar socioeconomic profiles. Naperville vs. Plano, TX

https://www.redfin.com/IL/Naperville.../home/23390515
2019 Tax Bill: $7,921

https://www.redfin.com/TX/Plano/712-.../home/32075554
2019 Tax Bill: $8,350

Naperville house is older (1980) than the Plano house (1993). Plano house has more curb appeal, but interior needs updating - Naperville house has been recently renovated. Median income is about $10k higher in Naperville. You'd pay ~$5k in state income taxes in IL and $0 in TX, but that still puts the median Naperville resident ahead w/o accounting for other taxes. At a 35,000ft level, it looks like a wash at the end of the day. TX also has underfunded public pensions (though not as bad), corruption, and other BS we talk about here.

It's unfortunate that the speaker from Cal City doesn't understand that people could avoid their sales tax by shopping out of state or in other communities with lower rates (does Cal City even have much retail?), but I'd wager most border-town municipal leaders understand how that is a delicate situation. Much of southern Cook Co. is the victim of white flight and the subsequent disinvestment that wrecked neighborhoods on the southside a generation earlier. In 1990, Cal City was 70% white. By 2000 it was less than 40% white and it has only fallen further since. Same story as Englewood, Washington Park, etc.

To be clear, I'm not saying black people aren't capable of developing vibrant and sustainable communities, but historically, black homeowners have become the majority because white homeowners no longer valued the community (deindustrialization, rising legacy costs, greener pastures a few highway exits further out, etc.).

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

http://www.tax-rates.org/taxtables/p...y-tax-by-state

Doesn't make sense to not compare state-wide rates unless you have specific communities in mind w/ similar socioeconomic profiles. Naperville vs. Plano, TX

https://www.redfin.com/IL/Naperville.../home/23390515
2019 Tax Bill: $7,921

https://www.redfin.com/TX/Plano/712-.../home/32075554
2019 Tax Bill: $8,350

^ Uhhh, ok so you literally cherry picked 2 homes instead of providing much more comprehensive data.

But did you look at the square footage of both homes? The Illinois home: about 2000 sf. The TX home: 3700 sf.

So the TX home has almost double the improved square footage yet a nearly identical tax bill.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by IrishIllini

Property taxes in Texas (esp. Austin, Dallas, and Houston) are high. The average rate for 2021 is higher than Illinois.

Tennessee is the real steal, and it's much closer. Low property taxes and no income tax.

True about Texas.

But no income tax. So, keep your income going up and don't move to a very expensive place!

But yes, Tennessee is getting it right!

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

True about Texas.

But no income tax. So, keep your income going up and don't move to a very expensive place!

But yes, Tennessee is getting it right!

Quoting my own post from two months ago regarding the myth of Texas taxes being so great.

Originally Posted by sentinel

Interesting, but then I remember a number of things:

- The Tribune editorial board is anything but impartial, so as soon as I see anything from them, it raises a red flag in my mind

- Texas may not have state income taxes, but federal income taxes still apply

- Texas has to offset that revenue loss some how, so Texans pay higher sales and property taxes than most other states.

- Texas also receives additional tax revenue from oill and natural gas production, essentially like a smaller version of Saudi Arabia, which helps offset need for income taxes. Illinois doesn't have that luxury.

- If you live along the gulf coast like 9-10 million Texans do, chances are you'll also have to pay higher home insurance rates, as well as hurricane insurance. Houston metro and Galveston have been hit with at least three 100 or 500 year storms/flooding just within the past 5 years, and thanks to no zoning laws, so there's a good chance that new 4,000 sq ft house you bought for $250,000 is built in a floodplain and will be partially inundated within another 5 years time. 150,000 homes were damaged due to flooding from Hurricane Harvey in 2017.

- Texans also pay higher general goods sales taxes and higher vehicle taxes

- Texas ranks 39th out of all 50 states + DC in total education spending per student, which is shocking (but perhaps not surprising the highly conservative political landscape there), considering it's one of the wealthiest states in the union.

- Texas is also a net positive state with regards to federal funding distribution, meaning they take more money than they contribute; Illinois is the opposite, because it's bled dry to make states like Texas thrive because the average household income is higher in Illinois than in Texas. Texas is a 'getter' state, essentially getting handouts from other, 'giver' states.

- Texas is triple the size of Illinois, with the added benefit of 4 large metropolitan/urbanized areas that helps balance out their lack of state income taxes. Illinois has one. I've said it before, but Illinois' biggest problem is too many small government entities, as well as a stupidly written state constitutional amendment regarding pension liabilities.

Of course only one side of the story will be told by a parochial paper like the Tribune.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Quoting my own post from two months ago regarding the myth of Texas taxes being so great.

And frankly, I feel that your response leaves a lot to be desired.

First of all, I reject this notion that the Tribune is some sort of fringe, highly opinionated newspaper. That's BS, you may not agree with them but it's Chicago's flagship newspaper for 150 damn years, dude, they know Chicago. They've got Clarence Page, Dahleen Glanton, and yes, John Kass as contributors. That's what a newspaper does--different viewpoints.

Secondly, I don't give 2 shits if Texas has oil and gas. They have their financial house in order, period. Illinois has industry too. Lots of it. Lots of wealth generators. But we've pissed it away in shitty decision making. Perhaps that's why we sold off our parking meters and have considered selling off other public assets to pay the bills.

The higher TX insurance rates have nothing to do with wasteful Government spending. TX can't help being located on the gulf coast.

Also, TX having 4 metropolitan areas versus Illinois having Chicagoland still has little to do with wasteful spending. Government lives within its means.

Point being, the issue isn't necessarily the higher taxes per se, the issue is the fact that the taxes are higher (and only going up) due to irresponsibility, corruption, and backroom dealing. Illinois owns this.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

True about Texas.

But no income tax. So, keep your income going up and don't move to a very expensive place!

But yes, Tennessee is getting it right!

Tennessee also has an atrociously high state sales tax, really terrible overall infrastructure, and a major city which has an overall crime and murder rate far above Chicago (Memphis). It also, outside of Nashville, really, is quite poor and rural (excepting Memphis and Nashville). One advantage it has is massive federal funding in terms of both Oak Ridge National Laboratory as well as of course legacy TVA projects and their continual funding.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Bonsai Tree]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Tennessee also has an atrociously high state sales tax, really terrible overall infrastructure, and a major city which has an overall crime and murder rate far above Chicago (Memphis). It also, outside of Nashville, really, is quite poor and rural (excepting Memphis and Nashville). One advantage it has is massive federal funding in terms of both Oak Ridge National Laboratory as well as of course legacy TVA projects and their continual funding.

Aaron (Glowrock)

I totally agree with you. Family friends just moved to outside Nashville from the northwest suburbs and they were shocked to see how many people were total hillbillies even in the suburbs of Nashville. Tennessee is the south through and through. It has terrible schools, high crime in many parts, and rampant rural poverty. It's doing very little right. Nashville is doing a good job, but the rest of the state? Everyone here claiming that we should put Tennessee on a pedestal needs to get off their high horse.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Tennessee also has an atrociously high state sales tax, really terrible overall infrastructure, and a major city which has an overall crime and murder rate far above Chicago (Memphis). It also, outside of Nashville, really, is quite poor and rural (excepting Memphis and Nashville). One advantage it has is massive federal funding in terms of both Oak Ridge National Laboratory as well as of course legacy TVA projects and their continual funding.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Everybody I know who has spent time at Oak Ridge (to use their awesome facilities) hates the damn place

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Tennessee also has an atrociously high state sales tax, really terrible overall infrastructure, and a major city which has an overall crime and murder rate far above Chicago (Memphis). It also, outside of Nashville, really, is quite poor and rural (excepting Memphis and Nashville). One advantage it has is massive federal funding in terms of both Oak Ridge National Laboratory as well as of course legacy TVA projects and their continual funding.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Sales tax in Memphis, for example, is 1% less than in Chicago, so the point isn't a good one.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

My class got the chance to have a Calumet City official come and speak with us. The FIRST thing she brought up in her presentation was that it was great that they were a "home rule" city, meaning they can do things other cities can't. Her only example? Having a sales tax that is 2% higher than the states.

Huh? Then she went on to talk about their number one goal as a city is to increase tax revenue and keep their retail sector up and going.

She doesn't realize Indiana is literally across the border from them. Residents can easily move or shop there and save tons. The city keeps raising its property taxes to keep the government's income increasing every year despite a population that decreases every year.

How does that make sense? Why is the city's revenue keep climbing while its population is going down? They keep increasing taxes, which then leads to more people leaving, which leads to them to keep raising taxes. Why do they need so much revenue? Because they are running the city as if they had the same population as 20 years ago, despite losing 25% of their population.

It all reeks of a scheme to keep the idiots in their jobs and to keep the machine running.

This is funny and not surprising. There are a subset of suburbs including Cal City that hit the jackpot in the annexation wars and freeway/arterial building eras in the 1950s-1960s, and grew up around having abnormally large tax bases both from retail sales and the resulting property tax from the valuable commercial real estate. So sure, Cal City may be losing out to Munster and Merrillville, but it's still reeling in disproportionately high tax revenue because it has the River Oaks area around Torrence and I-80.

It's just funny that this outlook has been so deeply internalized within city government. There's also an interesting political battle going on in Cal City right now between the "old guard" and upstarts trying to muscle in, with racial overtones.

Each town has its own quirky history. And the the towns that don't have those lucrative commercial districts have different political dynamics because the money being raised and spent is coming mostly out of homeowners, and as the property taxes go way up, property values stagnate or decline - a problem that has hit many of the south suburbs, which continued high spending and debt accumulation despite weaker and weaker tax bases, and the high tax rates further discourage any commercial development that could soften the blow, particularly when Indiana and Will County are so close.

FWIW, most of the villages along the old Norfolk and Western (now Metra Southwest Service) like Oak Lawn, Worth, Palos, Orland Park, etc. are much more oriented around leaner government, keeping lower taxes, and being "business friendly", rather than milking commercial activity to fund a large patronage gravy train, and have rather different political dynamics.