Illinois’ deficit reduction scheme
by Linda Beale
Illinois’ deficit reduction scheme
crossposted with Ataxingmatter
States have generally suffered during this economic crisis much the way most people have–there’s been less money coming in as sales receipts slowed during the recession, more services needed as many become homeless, insuranceless and generally more vulnerable during the recession, and bills have continued to pile up (including for mundane things like utilities and print jobs and more long-term commitments like pension promises made to state employees to secure competent workers often at lower-than-market wages for those competencies).
States have a number of options for dealing with the demands. They can layoff employees and freeze salary increases, taking the brunt of the recession out of the hide of state services and state employees and at the same time likely making the recession worse as the state is unable to provide the kinds of assistance to its most vulnerable populations that it otherwise would have been able to do. They can utilize accounting gimmicks to delay a few bills and accelerate a few revenue items, making this year look better at the cost of next year. They can use reserve funds that they’ve set aside for a rainy day, though when such funds are used for basic operating expenses, it guarantees that a truly rainy day will come and there will be no funds to meet the unexpected needs. Or they can raise taxes–either sales taxes, which will fall primarily on the most vulnerable, since consumption taxes are a kind of flat, across-the-board tax that is regressive since the poor spend all of their income (and pay taxes on all of it) while the rich spend a small share of their income (and hence pay minimal taxes in proportion to their ability to pay).
Some states have dealt with the problem with the perennial accounting gimmickry. All that does is paper over the problem and pass it along to the next budget year. That’s what Schwartzeneggar did in part in California, meaning that Jerry Brown has a huge budget gap to face that will require a mix of cuts and tax increases. Treating accounting gimmicks as a real solution is sort of like George W. Bush saying that the $1.3 Trillion of tax revenue losses created by his 2001 tax cut bill wouldn’t really ever materialize, because of the “laffer effect” that tax cuts would be so conducive to economic growth that the government would actually get as much revenue as before or even more! Laugable, of course, since any serious economist will tell you that tax cuts do not pay for themselves. Even more laughable now after the experience of the 8 years of the Bush regime when a new tax cut bill passed every year and we had at best an anemic job creation record and no sharing of productivity gains with workers. Tax cuts that just leave more money in the pockets of overly compensated managers and already wealthy shareholders do just about nothing towards creating jobs. Mainly that give more money to people that already have a lot of it, and those people are more likely to put it in emerging economies or some other kind of vehicle that does nothing to support entrepreneurship or create jobs here in the USA.
Some states seem to be dealing with the fiscal crises by cutting workers pay and cutting workers. That is likely merely to make the crisis worse over the long run. It increases unemployment–thrusting a number of former public employees on the dole. It leaves businesses facing less purchasing power–especially in and around the state capitol. It creates an atmosphere of austerity which breeds its own consumer pessimism that feeds negatively into the recession cycle. It leaves state services shorthanded, with a likely result that accidents and crimes will increase (as state parks and large public events are understaffed), and other indicators of a good quality of life will go down (long lines at the department that issues drivers’ licenses, etc.).
So that leaves thinking about tax increases. Even those who think state taxes should increase–especially in ways that make them more progressive (think Michigan–where a very low income tax rate that is constitutionally capped means that the wealthy benefit hugely from the state’s expenditures but pay very little in taxes)–may hesitate to recommend large tax hikes during recessions, in part because of the psychological impact of a tax hike, on top of all the other “bad” economic news. If people have a choice, they might just move to a state that doesn’t have such a tax hike. And since tax increases are most likely to impact people with higher incomes who have a choice, it is possible (though certainly not inevitable) that a tax increase on higher incomes will lead to some exodus from the state of those high income earners who are mobile. But there are reasons that a tax increase might make the most sense out of the various unpleasant options. The fears about exodus are probably exaggerated–people have any number of reasons for choosing where to live, and a business that has established ties (customers, vendors, workers) cannot so easily just move lock stock and barrel to another state. Tax money in state coffers will be spent as it comes in–it really isn’t taking that money out of the economy, but just reallocating it to preferential uses. To the extent that the money is used to support vulnerable populations who would otherwise create a burden on local and state government anyway, it is clearly a win-win proposition. And of course if the state funds are used in ways that encourage business startups or new types of businesses to move to the state (and use supplies, hire workers, etc.), the state expenditures will give greater bang for the buck than leaving them in the hands of weathier state residents who would have invested them abroad. When tax increases permit a state to satisfy the various obligations it has entered into, that fosters a climate of business certainty and trust–state employees know that the contract they have entered will be honored, businesses in the state agree to contract with the state because they will be paid, and the state and its municipalities can successfully borrow in the muni market to meet those capital expansion needs that require longer term financing.
All in all, it seems that reasonable tax increases should be a win-win proposition, even during difficult economic times. What is reasonable? A tax increase that will be paid by people and businesses that can afford it and that will be used to support worthy state endeavors.
At any rate, that is the decision that Illinois Democrats reached today, as an income tax increase “squeaked through” the Illinois House (60-57 vote Tuesday) and Senate (30-29 vote Wednesday) before the new legislative session began this afternoon. See Karen Pierog, Illinois Lawmakers Pass Big Tax Hike to Aid Budget, Reuters, Jan 12, 2011. The bill temporarily increases the individual and corporate income tax rates, and sets a spending limit through fiscal 2015. For a description of the proposal put together by the Governor and Speaker and Senate President, whichapparently had stiffer rate increases and other provisions than the bill actually passed last night (which is not yet available on the Illinois website), see here (Phil Milsk legislative update on January 7 for Illinois Association of School Social Workers).
Yet here in RI land, we have our second tax cut for the top bracket from 9.9 to 5.9. The first one was so more rich people would move to RI and create jobs. Yeah, that worked. NOT!
Thats the big thing, the amount of money state taxes deal with is so small that it really doesn’t affect that much. 7% versus 9%? That’s a rounding error. Yeah states with no income taxes who instead soak it to the poor through sales taxes and usage fees can become havens for the wealthy (Hi Florida!) but there can only be so many of those.
Note that however the states without income taxes do have high property taxes. If you are wealthy typically you have a higher value house, and if the assesments are honest you pay more property taxes for the house. Property taxes have and additional virtue over income taxes that include capital gains that they are far less volitale. CA got in trouble because such a large segment of the state revenue was capital gains, when they ceased the revenue collapesed.
CA shows that the use capital gains for ongoing revenue does not work. Perhaps a capital budget which applies capital gains proceeds to capital projects only. Operation is funded on another basis. When the gains are not there the capital projects stop.
Illinois it not a typical state, it has a long history of accounting flim-flim, corruption and general mismanagement. Temporary? Yeah.
Most government employees in Michigan want tax hikes as well, Michigan too has a long history of mismanagement, even without considering Detroit. The only growth industries in Michigan seem to be moving vans and corruption convictions (and to be fair the Michigan story is quite complex).
Linda Beale is a law professor at Wayne State University law school who specializes in taxation. I raise this point because Beale didn’t mention the specific budget problems faced by the State of Illinois nor did she address the economic development picture for the state. Beale didn’t cover a lot of ground that is specific to the State of Illinois. And, yes, it matters.
1. What are the major problems with the operating budget of the State of Illinois? That info is available.
2. Were there viable, worthwhile alternatives to raising those specific taxes?
3. Which proposed taxes were not approved by the lame duck Democrat legislature?
4. What have been the responses of the neighboring States?
5. What is the likelihood that new industries and businesses will be attracted to the State of Illinois as a result of the passed tax package? Note official statements from Catepillar, among other corporations in the State.
Beale ignored all of these basic points. She only provided one paragraph in her lengthy narrative that discussed the State of Illinois. The last paragraph. And, of course, the title is tied to the last paragraph.
When you cut to the chase, Beale’s blog post ends up supporting bigger government over smaller government, which is one of her standard promotion themes.
Beale’s conclusion in this post is simple: “All in all, it seems that reasonable tax increases should be a win-win proposition, even during difficult economic times. What is reasonable? A tax increase that will be paid by people and businesses that can afford it and that will be used to support worthy state endeavors.”
Readers didn’t gain any exposure to the driving deficit issues in Illinois from Beale’s post. Yet, some AB readers may believe that Beale’s generic conclusion is the best answer. I suggest that further reading is warranted before accepting that single approach as the best or most viable answer.
Linda says:
a win-win proposition: A tax increase that will be paid by people and businesses that can afford it and that will be used to support worthy state endeavors.
A win win Linda? More state taxes is the answer? More federal taxes would be good too I guess.
Ms. Beale you are dead wrong on this. You want a future for the next generation or so? Then you have to go the other way. Cut expenses. Raising taxes just creates a bigger beast.
MG.
Linda Beale is a law professor at Wayne State University
A public university heavily dependent on state & federal spending. So we know how her bread gets buttered.
MG.
Linda Beale is a law professor at Wayne State University
Yes. A public university heavily dependent on state & federal spending. Just so we know how her bread gets buttered.
Linda,
Illinois is in a very tough spot, and it needs to cut spending and probably raise taxes to save itself. I won’t mention the corruption & mismanagement by the Governemnt authroities there, but this line by you just leaped out at me:
“Tax money in state coffers will be spent as it comes in–it really isn’t taking that money out of the economy, but just reallocating it to preferential uses. “
WHO’S preferential uses? Taxes come from individuals and are the individual’s money – not the states. These funds are being taken from Illinois citizens and reallocated by the whim of the corrupt Illinois Government. The idea that the Illinois Government is wise enough to decide, by the fact they are the “best and brightest” with nice shiney Ivy League degrees, what is the best way to reallocate the citizens money to what they feel are ‘preferential’ uses is absurd. Statements like these smack of elitism and communism.
Never forget its the individual citizens money – not the government’s money. A fundamental error.
And that does not mean we don’t need taxes or government. But the idea is it doesn’t matter since its all going to the economy is crazy. And Illinois needs to realluy do some serious slashing to its budget.
Islam will change
Valid point made Lyle regarding the stabilityof property taxes from a budgeting perspective. CT got in trouble with .dot crash com relying on continued large capital gains due to the huge equity gains priot to thecarsh. They figured all that cap gain revenue would go on forever. With the crash, the lost a big income stream & they were flabbergasted. Geez. sounds like the all pension gurus thinking that the market just goes up 8%- 12% a year.
The way governments budget makes no sense period. If they do have surpluses the rush to spend it willy nilly.
My last point is that Illionis residents better get used to that tax rate because it will never go down. Same thing happened here in CT with Lowell Weicker passing thur the State Income Tax. It was supposed to be for 5 years only and the personal property tax was going to be eliminated as well. Of course both are still with us & are almost garanteed to rise than ever be reduced.
There probably was no alternative to some tax increase in Illinois, the state had accumulated at least $8 BILLION just in overdue accounts payable.
It is tough to fix a problem that was 20 years or more in the making.
Illinois residents tend to vote for people who routinely end up in federal and state prison. that could be a aprt of the problem.
Michigan is an interesting place.
The largest county in Ohio has three County Commissioners.
The largest county in Michigan has fifteen part-time County Commissioners all receiving full-time pay and benefits (Detroit of course).
Even the rural county where I have a house has 7 County Commissioners.
Buff
as a tax payer i find it easy to agree that a lot of tax money is misspent.
but “it’s their money” is a fundamental error. without government taxes, most of the citizens of illinois would be digging for their supper with a sharp stick. and the bigger citizens would take it away from them.
you and sammy take it as a religious principle that taxes are money taken away from people with no fair return, and are a drag on the economy. that really hasn’t been true since the american revolution when the peasants stopped being taxed to support the king’s whores.
why don’t you become an American patriot and work on solving the country’s problems, instead of digging a bigger hole with the “it’s my money,” chant.
Linda also failed to tell us what sort of bait works best with brook trout, what yeast most commercial bankers in high altitude areas prefer for brioche and whether bears go pottie in the woods. There are people who would be interested in each of these, and by golly, Linda left them high and dry because she selfishly insisted on writing the article she wrote instead of the one some other people wanted her to write.
No matter what one writes, no matter how much one writes, it is always possible to claim that one missed some issue or other. This is a blog post and those tend to be shorter than, say, academic research papers or NYT Magazine features, but even longer formats simply do not allow for covering every side of an issue. MG has written a response to Linda in a form common to blogs and academic debates alike – a cranky insistence that the author should have covered the issues that the crank wants covered, instead of the ones the author wanted to cover.
Yes, Linda has shown a preference in this case for the approach that the Illinois legislature took. She had the option of showing no preference, or of arguing for a preference that she doesn’t actually support. But, when one goes to the trouble to write a persuasive essay, the conventional thing to do is to argue for one’s own views.
Yep, the whole “it’s your money” business is just an easy-to-swallow politcal statement, with no objective reality behind it. Because we have chosen the methods we have for funding government, amounts show up on pay statements and W2 and the like which show money that never actually belongs to the person holding the pay statement.
If you look at the Constitution, you’ll find that it does not put the individual at the top of the sovereign heap. The Constitution delineates the right of the several states and of the federal government, while protecting the citizens in certain ways from both. Nothing in the US Constitution says “it’s your money”. The duly elected lawmakers of the state of Illinois voted for the tax increase. That’s the way our system works.
“it guarantees that a truly rainy day will come and there will be no funds to meet the unexpected needs”
It is raining. The question is just how long it will keep raining.
I doubt most states ever have enough rainy day reserves, but this downturn is bad enough that no state would have thought they needed enough to get though this. The reality is that people with jobs (and other sources of funds) are going to need to be the ones to support/revive the economy.
Just a thought: What if states tied temporarily increased income taxes to the continuation of the “temporary” Bush/Obama tax cuts? Neutral to those of us with jobs, it would move funds to the states. Is that where funds are most needed?
Based on my time as an outdoorsman bears definitely do go pottie in the woods.
kharris – “whether bears go pottie in the woods”
This statement should put to rest the notion that kharris is a man.
Buff,
The State of Illinois could have undertaken a combination of spending reductions and tax increases.
kharris – “No matter what one writes, no matter how much one writes, it is always possible to claim that one missed some issue or other.”
Beale didn’t discuss any of the issues facing the State of Illinois. This wouldn’t be a post about the budget problems in the State of Illinois had Beale left off the last paragraph of the main post and changed the title.
Beale is pitching a single solution for all States that are facing budget problems. No mention or discussion of the budget problems related to a specific State’s operation. No economic analysis. Beale’s approach is one size fits all States. Raise taxes. End of story.
And kharris wants to offer cover for this nonsense on an economic blog. She, like Beale, apparently doesn’t see the need for identifying the specific problems facing the State of Illinois nor the need to identify alternative courses of action or any combination of spending reductions and additional taxation.
One issue going forward based on the taxation decision of the State of Illinois is whether moving Illinois up to the third highest corporate taxation State in the nation will have an adverse impact on attracting new industries and existing corporate expansions.
We’ll see…
sammy
i don’t know about wayne state, but the local state colleges.. heavily dependent on state and federal funding have a thing called the agriculture extension service. has a lot to do with how your bread gets butter.
not to mention how your butt gets bread.
kharris
bravo. i agree totally. but MG was not being an ordinary crank. he was just giving us his generic blog comment. he doesn’t particularly care what Linda covered, he just wants the rest of us to know that unless she covers everything she isn’t fit to be read.
krasting
the time to cut expenses was then.
the time to raise taxes is now.
Keep telling your normal lies, coberly.
coberly,
Where is any evidence that reduced spending shouldn’t be part of the plan that the State of Illinois has undertaken? Do you have the slightest knowledge of the budget problems in the State of Illinois? Do you know anything about the State’s corporate economic base or that of the neighboring States?
Accountability! Rasing taxes without addressing the underlying issues will just creat more issues… This country has been on the road of self-denial. People on public pay roll just don’t see that people actually have to work for them to have a job in the city, state, and universities.
The tax payers are asked to pay more, but the public servants felt entitled to the tax money!
Let’s adopt a more sensible way of measuring performance… How much money actually goes into building roads, helping the poor, and public projects instead of how much being paid to cover the administrative cost of paying public servants and their pensions.
If higher taxes cures the problem, so be it. But if I do believe if the administrative cost exceeds the cost of public “good.” The public pay must be curtailed!!! Why should any one donate to charity that pays themselve a fat salary/benifit and less than half goes to helping real people?
It’s like the Univeristy of California regents decide to raise the student tuition fees to pay themselves a fat pay salary raise while the federal government is freezing salary for two years.
The people in public pay roll must stop living in entitlement dream land and actually start respecting the taxpayers that pays their salary… University professor included….
MG:
Again a superficial post with no basis for what you say. Curious and thoughful readers what some substance rather than hearsay and citations to others who have taken the time to detail a discussion.
Linda’s purported by you one paragraph certainly certainly outways your thoughts. Why not answer the questions you posed rather than state them and run. Neither Linda or anyone else are your librarians. Your argument is a shell and nothing more.
MG:
The door is open for you to discuss them as a retort to Linda’s post. As a former Illinois resident, I doubt you know them . . . gauntlet thrown down. Prove me wrong.
Bruce:
Which generation? Those who can easily afford to pay taxes or those who can not afford to live without a job?
Nor did she even TOUCH the very serious issues in the State of Queensland today. Thousands of people flooded out of their homes and yet did Prof Beale’s post on state taxation even TOUCH what this will do for eastern Australian taxation going forward? Plus I have it on good authority that there was at least one murder in the State of Sinaloa Mexico today. Not a word on that either.
For shame. I will be happy to send her an annotated list of appropriate web sources to read up on before her next post. The second after I extract this broom stick from up my ass.
Have you ever even seen money? All the money I have says United States of America on it because it was issued by the government of the US of A. Just about all of my money has pictures of government CEOs on it, and some if it has pictures of government buildings and bureaucrat signatures on it. In fact, all the private property I “own” is just stuff the government says I can use, and they’ll back it up with cops, courts, armies and whatever else. We call land real estate because it used to all belong to the king, back when we had a king. (Real is from the same root as royal.)
Don’t get all mystical about private property and ownership. Those are just stuff that the government does, and they charge us taxes so they can keep doing so. This country has been seriously undertaxed since the early 80s, and it has shown up in our lackluster growth rate and flatlined living standards. We aren’t going to see renewed growth until we get serious about funding the source of our wealth.
One downside of higher taxes is that people pay a premium to live in high tax areas. Look at real estate prices versus total effective tax rates. There’s a significant positive correlation. If you need a place with an extra room in IL, now is the time to move, before the tax increase starts luring in eager and well heeled buyers.
There is no shortage of available information detailing the short- and long-term budget problems facing the State of Illinois.
The State of Illinois has provided a good explanation of its structural deficit problems. Moreover, the State created a public forum for discussion and recommendations by citizens which has drawn considerable attention and participation.
Those individuals who have any desire to understand the structural deficit problems could take note of information provided by the State of Illinois as well as that addressed in multiple other forums in Illinois.
coberly,
the local state colleges.. heavily dependent on state and federal funding have a thing called the agriculture extension service. has a lot to do with how your bread gets butter. not to mention how your butt gets bread.
Really? Did they invent bread? or butter? Do they grow wheat, or bake it, or transport it? They may add a little to the body of knowledge about agriculture, but to say it “has a lot to do” with food supply is a gross exaggeration, and shows your disconnect with reality.
coberly,
the local state colleges.. heavily dependent on state and federal funding have a thing called the agriculture extension service. has a lot to do with how your bread gets butter. not to mention how your butt gets bread.
Really? Did they invent bread? or butter? Do they grow wheat? or bake it? or transport it?
They may add a little to the body of knowledge about agriculture, but to say it “has a lot to do” with food supply is a gross exaggeration, and shows your disconnect with reality.
“We aren’t going to see renewed growth until we get serious about funding the source of our wealth.”
You mean the Federal and State Governments are the source of our wealth???
Bwahahahahaha!!
Funniest thing I’ve heard today! Thanks!
Islam will change
sammy
do you know anything about the productivity of fields today compared to a hundred years ago?
thank your state agriculture college. while you are at it, you might look at where basic medical research is done.
or the physics that saved you from having to learn japanese for “yes, boss.”
and if you use anything that runs on electricity, you might consider that Michael Faraday received welfare as a child, and worked for the “state” his entire life. not that you would know who Michael Faraday is/was.
buff
shows you don’t know much history. without an effective and honest government there is no wealth.
your “ideas” would lead you to a government, you hope, of Ayn Randian heroes. You would still have to pay taxes, and might very well find yourself among those “second raters” who instead of a “handout” during hard times would get good advice.
better we should have a government of the people, by the people, for the people.
Pax
speaking of dreamland, you need to do some serious research and find out what work public employees do and how much they are paid.
i suspect some of them are overpaid and worthless, but most of them are just ordinary workers like you and me. they took the job they could find. passed the civil service test for it, and accepted the pay offered… generally less than similar private sector pay, made up for with better benefits and job security. a fair trade.
you simply don’t know enough to have a valid opinion. jokes about public workers are not real information.
Coberly:
I have never said public workers should not be paid well. Nor I am opposed to any responsible tax increase. I am not at all against public workers, their entitlement benifits. But like everything in the press, we tend to highlight the abusers that makes any system looks bad.
Just I said in the past about the wall street fat cats, the same I will say the same about public servants living in their dream land. Is it okay to ask one segment of public to pay more without giving something back in return? Is this a joke like you said? This is the same situation in the state Illinois. The elected officials decides to continue business as usual, without regard or have any real plan to fix the systemic issues. This is not accountable.
The rank and file public workers will ultimately pay the price, not your top elected officials, intellectuals. If the public workers gets laid off, it’s not your elected officials, senior public workers, university professors! It’s your average government Joe!!! President Obama already did whats required, he asked for a federal salary/benifit raise. This is leadership by example. If state of Illinois cannot get their acts together, why should they not be criticized?
The newly electived government Jerry Brown is trying to do the same thing in California. He is at least trying to find an acceptable solution in a financially mismanaged state. Can Illinois do the same?
Most the public actions will just benifit a few as it is now, not the tax payer, certainly no benifit to the middle class. That’s why I am pointing out a simple rule I follow when I look at organizations… The administrative cost/payout ratio. If the administrative cost exceeds payout, there needs be a serious look at the structure, why does it cost more to administer benifit than for the public good itself…
Coberly:
I have never said public workers should not be paid well. Nor I am opposed to any responsible tax increase. I am not at all against public workers, their entitlement benifits. But like everything in the press, we tend to highlight the abusers that makes any system looks bad.
Just I said in the past about the wall street fat cats, the same I will say the same about public servants living in their dream land. Is it okay to ask one segment of public to pay more without giving something back in return? Is this a joke like you said? This is the same situation in the state Illinois. The elected officials decides to continue business as usual, without regard or have any real plan to fix the systemic issues. This is not accountable.
The rank and file public workers will ultimately pay the price, not your top elected officials, intellectuals. If the public workers gets laid off, it’s not your elected officials, senior public workers, university professors! It’s your average government Joe!!! President Obama already did whats required, he asked for a federal salary/benifit raise freeze. This is leadership by example. If state of Illinois cannot get their acts together, why should they not be criticized?
The newly electived government Jerry Brown is trying to do the same thing in California. He is at least trying to find an acceptable solution in a financially mismanaged state. Can Illinois do the same?
Most the public actions will just benifit a few as it is now, not the tax payer, certainly no benifit to the middle class. That’s why I am pointing out a simple rule I follow when I look at organizations… The administrative cost/payout ratio. If the administrative cost exceeds payout, there needs be a serious look at the structure, why does it cost more to administer benifit than for the public good itself…
coberly,
As I said on this thread and I’ve said before, we need government and we need taxes to pay for it.
But the idea that the Fed and State Governments are the source of our wealth is not born out in ANY econmics or history text ever written. get a grip. Government has a necessary function in the modern world, but it doesn’t creat wealth.
Explain again while all lefty solutions tend to more a greater control of the individual by the centralized government and less individual liberty? Every time!
Islam will change
coberly,
As I said on this thread and I’ve said before, we need government and we need taxes to pay for it.
But the idea that the Fed and State Governments are the source of our wealth is not born out in ANY econmics or history text ever written. get a grip. Government has a necessary function in the modern world, but it doesn’t creat wealth.
Explain again while all lefty solutions tend to more a greater control of the individual by the centralized government and less individual liberty? Every time!
Islam will change
Michigan has a relatively low income tax and it will take a state constitutional amendment to change it to a higher progressive tax. Are public employees (like myself) in favor of higher taxes.. I am, though I would be one who would pay more in taxes if such a higher tax were enacted.
Sammy
State universities across the nation get around 30% to 50% of their funding from the state, not like the “old days” when almost all of the funding was from taxes and tuition for instate students was very low. Most state universities have realized that they have to do all of the things that private universities do to raise money, yet they are subject to much more control from the state because of their state funding.
At the same time, state universities generally view themselves as having an important mission to serve the state and its citizens–through education and research and other public service means. The state universities’ agricultural research is enormously important, but so is the medical research at Wayne State, for example, and the biology, engineering and other basic scientific research.
I find it interesting that you cast aspersion on what I write because I happen to be a public employee of a state university–I suppose we are all self-interested in continuing our employment, but that doesn’t appear to be the stinger that you intend it to be, in terms of discrediting what I say.
cutting expenses is a good idea, to the extent possible. But Illinois isn’t going to dig itself out of the hole it is in by cutting expenses, unless you want to cease important state services and fire employees, creating a hell of a lot bigger problem than the one that exists.
Buff
you are repeating some of the Ayn Randian notions about taxes–that it is all “your” money and the state is taking it away; that your individual preference is what counts, and not the preference of the people of the state as expressed by the enacted laws. But that libertarian view of taxes simply won’t work–nobody would ever pay any taxes, and a volunteer system would result in the haves getting more and the have less having even less. The fact is, the state needs to act to allocate taxes to uses that meet the needs of the state. If the state is corrupt and not transparent, that will be problematic. The people need to hold it accountable.
Pax Romana
Your attack on people on the public payroll is ludicrous. Public employees are generally doing an important job and working hard to do it. Salary freezes may be necessary, but they won’t solve Illinois’ problem. The tax increase was necessary, and really should have been passed long ago.
this mess is still just beginning not only for IL. but for the Nation as a whole. We have to get used to cutbacks in everything from food stamps to public roads. There are no quick fixes but only hard choices. We can not count on the Feds to bail us out as they are running below empty as well.
If the Counties keep reassessing the property taxes higher while the housing prices are still falling people will be taxed out of their homes. I know people that are taxed to the limmit and are about to send jingle mail to the Government.