Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow, I can't think of a better way to spend bonds then for retirees who have retired.
I can't imagine how the interest rates are going to be on that debt.
The one thing that I find interesting is Illinois in general is a relatively affluent state with well-above average incomes.
It ranks 15th in the country on per-capita personal incomes and has some of the highest amounts of agricultural revenue per-capita and large companies per-capita in the country.
Odd, how such an affluent state that could be totally solvent may have to go so far as to bond 107 billion dollars just for retirees.
I am sure that many of those retirees are in Arizona and Florida with their much lower property taxes stimulating the economy down there.
I am sure many states will be considering the same thing in the next decade. It's just that Illinois is just a couple of years ahead several other big, liberal states.
This is borrowing money to pay off debt--obviously not a good idea.
This is all a function of public sector unions, which are very strong in Illinois. I am very pro-union, but for the private sector only. A public sector union is in essence a kickback scheme--labor unions negotiating contracts with representatives of the politicos whom the union has often helped to elect.
I believe this could be addressed at the federal level by the GOP congress and trump by legislating a kind of revised NLRA (union legislation passed in 1935 under FDR). This would be a perfect project for Paul Ryan, especially considering that he is from Wisconsin (they passed public sector union reforms under Gov. Walker).
Over-promise then fail to deliver due to lack of funds.............THAT is why defined-benefits are going the way of the steam-locomotive.
I have a defined benefit pension (private sector union) and it is in good shape. The stock market boom has helped. The problem is not necessarily defined benefit--it's public sector unionism.
This is borrowing money to pay off debt--obviously not a good idea.
This is all a function of public sector unions, which are very strong in Illinois. I am very pro-union, but for the private sector only. A public sector union is in essence a kickback scheme--labor unions negotiating contracts with representatives of the politicos whom the union has often helped to elect.
I am awed to hear a pro-union member state the obvious ! Well, said. I've long supported the trade unions because they train their members and you can trust them. (Not the union bosses so much) but public sector unions are nothing more than vote getting pay-offs. They should be stopped immediately and the people put on 401K's and the like.
Wow, I can't think of a better way to spend bonds then for retirees who have retired.
I can't imagine how the interest rates are going to be on that debt.
The one thing that I find interesting is Illinois in general is a relatively affluent state with well-above average incomes.
It ranks 15th in the country on per-capita personal incomes and has some of the highest amounts of agricultural revenue per-capita and large companies per-capita in the country.
Odd, how such an affluent state that could be totally solvent may have to go so far as to bond 107 billion dollars just for retirees.
I am sure that many of those retirees are in Arizona and Florida with their much lower property taxes stimulating the economy down there.
I am sure many states will be considering the same thing in the next decade. It's just that Illinois is just a couple of years ahead several other big, liberal states.
They are essentially in a Catch 22...they need to raise taxes to pay for their obligations but if they raise them too much too fast, people and business will leave ala Detroit. Illinois has the highest % of residents that want to leave of any state, if they do, could get really ugly. Chicago still has a lot of corporations and wealth but if those corps start leaving, yikes.
They are essentially in a Catch 22...they need to raise taxes to pay for their obligations but if they raise them too much too fast, people and business will leave ala Detroit. Illinois has the highest % of residents that want to leave of any state, if they do, could get really ugly. Chicago still has a lot of corporations and wealth but if those corps start leaving, yikes.
Over the course of a year between July 2016 and 2017, Illinois suffered a net loss of 33,703 people, more than any of the seven other states that lost population during that time. As a result, the Keystone State now has a 3,500 population lead on the Prairie State:
Chicago lost about 17% of its black population between 2000 and 2010.
They need to phase out the pension program. It simply isn't sustainable. And this idea works better, overall, for those who are relying on pensions for their retirement too. If you start now or within the past 10 or so years, then it will be far more expended by the time you're ready to retire, but you will have paid, somewhat, into it, all of those years.
Also, Illinois needs to slash a bunch of offices in the state government. And I keep hearing complaints about too many units of local government too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
