98 Comments - Demoralized - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:21 am: The Governor could have just as easily said that it raises taxes on he and his friends and he doesn’t like that. He could have continued by saying the whole reason he was elected was to ensure he and his rich friends are protected. Can anyone point to any proposal that he has made that would impact the rich at all? Because I can’t think of any. I’m not suggesting that only the rich are taxed but I’m certainly suggesting that they should not be protected. - AC - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:24 am: Mathematics and Rauner’s own budget require more revenue, if not through a graduated tax, then how should sufficient additional revenue be raised? Where’s the plan? It’s easy to be a critic and difficult to be a problem solver, a leader, a Governor. - Skeptic - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:25 am: I didn’t realize the Dept. of Revenue made those sorts of projections? How would they know whether someone is likely to move if their taxes are raised? Just wondering. - Handle Bar Mustache - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:25 am: Rich, your subtle resistance to this concept seems out of character. I don’t understand it. Isn’t this a no-brainer? Widely accepted by most people, fair, etc. The only strenuous opponents of a graduated tax seem to be ideological zealots and some (not all) of the super-rich. - Fusion - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:25 am: That top blurb from the Trib is comical. I actually laughed when I read it. - N...Just N - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:27 am: Governor Rauner’s Department of Revenue?? Is this separate and unique from the ILLINOIS Department of Revenue? - Norseman - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:29 am: Surprise, a Rauner agency predicts dire consequences if rich people are taxed at higher rates. Trust? Frankly, the amendment isn’t going to pass anyway so it’s all theater. - Handle Bar Mustache - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:30 am: ==Surprise, a Rauner agency predicts dire consequences if rich people are taxed at higher rates. == lol - Rich Miller - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:32 am: ===Rich, your subtle resistance to this concept=== Subtle resistance? lol - okgo - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:34 am: I would hope that I would have a decreased incentive to work once I made $1 million in a year compared to someone making minimum wage… BVI, here I come! - Anony - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:34 am: How is a tax that is unequal considered fair? Everybody paying the same rate is fair. - justacitizen - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:35 am: Has the commission on government forecasting and accountability (COGFA) prepared a fiscal note? It seems the assumptions used in the somewhat sophisticated “modeling” by Revenue’s consultants could be disputed. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:37 am: It’s not the math of the tax that’s killing it, it’s the math of 60/30 that’s killing it. - Norseman - is right, it’s just theatre now… - Bleh - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:40 am: @Anony think the majority of states, and the Feds are taxing taxpayers unequally? To the post, the Governor keeps talking about reforms. Reforming the way the state taxes its workforce is a good reform. Come on governor, you’ve already said new revenue (aka higher taxes) will be part of the grand compromise. Why not allow for a graduated income tax? I’m not saying I agree with the rates Lang proposed, but it’s surely a good start. - Whatever - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:43 am: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, total non-farm employment(seasonally adjusted) in Illinois was 5,975,700, 5,994,300, and 6,009.000 in January, February and March of this year, respectively. A 20,000-job swing over umpteen years isn’t even a rounding error, and I’m surprised any economic model could predict it with any confidence. - Johnny Pyle Driver - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:48 am: We either need new revenue or we don’t. If we need it, who’s it gonna hit if not the people most able to pay it? If it’s paired with cuts, I have to suspect any cut is going to hit the poor and middle class the hardest, so it doesn’t seem right to come after them again with a tax hike. I dunno, I just don’t see what other options there are. It’s like we just continue to pretend we don’t have a mountain of debt to pay off - cdog - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:51 am: “the proposal would also decrease the state’s gross domestic product by nearly $2 billion.” This is a ridiculous assertion. And, with IL GDP running at $735Billion, does it really matter. https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ILNGSP IT IS FAIR to expect a significant contribution to the public good by the beneficiaries of a system that encourages underpayment of wages and overcharges for goods and services. Profit is fine, but is there a line where too much profit is damaging? I think so. The common citizen sees this. Hopefully today is the day they will be truly represented in government. - cgo75 - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:54 am: I think most of the feedback as it relates to the Graduated Income Tax concept has been favorable…Regardless of the outcome, I respect Lou Lang for floating the legislation and wish that more innovative concepts could be considered from the Republican side of the aisle. Perhaps, they could be melded into one approach that both sides could support. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:55 am: —A report from Gov. Rauner’s Department of Revenue found that a switch from a flat income tax rate to a graduated system would drive 43,000 workers out of state and lead to a loss of more than 20,000 jobs within the first four years. … According to the revenue department, the proposal would also decrease the state’s gross domestic product by nearly $2 billion.—- Wow, that’s quick work on the arithmeticin’ and the projectin’. Less than a week. Talk about Superstars. Yet after more than a year and much willful, real destruction in the name of the Turnaround Agenda, not a word from the governor’s office as to how many jobs it would create or how much it would increase the GDP. Why is that? The numbers seemingly fell out of the sky when it came to projecting the impact of the graduated tax proposal. But when it comes to the governor’s prime objectives, his public rationale for refusing to engage on the budget, just a daily heapin’ helpin’ of limp word salad. Kind of strange. - Huh? - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:55 am: Hey 1.4% - How many jobs have been lost because you don’t have a budget? What does your Department of Revenue say about that little problem? - Bryan - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:56 am: I’m not surprised the Chicago Tribune edit board, which understands economics about as well as they understand workers’ rights, is going against a graduated income tax. - Bryan - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:58 am: “Illinois House Democrats delayed a measure to tax millionaires at higher rates if voters approved the plan in November.” Everyone seems to selectively forget that voters approved taxing millionaires at a higher rate in 2014 (60 percent, vs. Rauner’s “mandate” 50.8 percent)! - Concerned - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:59 am: I have never understood the argument that higher marginal tax rates reduces the incentive of high earners to work. I am in a higher earning bracket (though not millionaire range) and to the extent I pay attention at all to marginal tax rates (for personal planning reasons–I do pay attention for policy and good/effective government purposes), a higher rate would be more likely to cause me to make greater effort to make more money (e.g., work harder), in order to maintain or increase my net (of taxes) income. So conversely, a lower marginal rate means I wouldn’t have to work as hard to get to a higher net (of taxes) income level. Not that 1, 2, or 5 percent higher marginal rate would even cause me to engage in such analysis. I work hard because I enjoy what I do. I do well and the marginal tax rate has ZERO effect on how hard I work or my incentive to work. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:02 am: ===Yet after more than a year and much willful, real destruction in the name of the Turnaround Agenda, not a word from the governor’s office as to how many jobs it would create or how much it would increase the GDP.=== This. This is the politics… of what the Department of Revenue will do to “drive results” Rauner wants out there… … and Rauner will sit in his hands and ask the Department of Revenue to do the same… when weighing… and measuring… the Turnaround Agenda. Or… Rauner knows the numbers for the Turnaround Agenda DON’T work… and after getting burned by the 1.4% - $500+ million ROI rollout… maybe all this isn’t accidental. After piggy-backing on - Wordslinger -, I’ll leave my two-cents here. - justacitizen - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:04 am: ==It’s not the math of the tax that’s killing it, it’s the math of 60/30 that’s killing it.== But if you show the math is sketchy, then you can prove it’s theatre. - Tone - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:10 am: - Huh? - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 9:55 am: Hey 1.4% - How many jobs have been lost because you don’t have a budget? What does your Department of Revenue say about that little problem? Not sure if you noticed, but job growth has picked up without a state budget. But keep your head in the sand. It makes you look smart. - SAP - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:13 am: I am for the concept of a graduated income tax. I guess the idea of “tax the wealthy” appeals to me. That said, I think a Constitutional amendment would need some kind of cap on how far apart the top and bottom rates could get from each other. I don’t quite know what the correct cap is, but I feel that Mr. Lang’s proposal exceeds it. Keeping the top and bottom rates within say, 3%, of each other does not seem too outrageous. - Carhartt Representative - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:13 am: The wine club–won’t anybody think of the wine club?! - DuPage - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:19 am: The Rauner department of revenue=the Rauner department of turnaround campaign propaganda. Rauner dept. of revenue credibility rating=0.0% - Honeybear - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:21 am: Man they will do whatever it takes to keep that money flowing. The ghosts of Lessie Bates, Emerson Park, Catholic Charities. Lutheran Social Services will be haunting these folks for eternity. Got to keep those dollars. Where they worth it Ebenezer? - Grandson of Man - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:29 am: It’s not okay for Rauner, his super-rich allies and Republicans to fix this mess solely through cuts and harsh concessions from thousands of middle class workers. This is the message that has to be pushed politically by any state resident and voter of good conscience. Some screamed bloody panic about the 2011 income tax hike, but instead we got bills and pensions paid, and the economy improved. There was a long period in which the unemployment rate steadily fell. Schools and social services were funded. If anything, the tax hike probably hurt those of lower or middle incomes, because it’s regressive. Poll respondents and voters strongly support a progressive income tax/millionaire surcharge. I’m not at all surprised that a progressive income tax would fail again. This has been a large part of the problem–not having the will to raise taxes on the highest incomes. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:29 am: - Tone - “Not sure if you noticed, but job growth has picked up without the Turnaround Agenda being passed. But keep your head in the sand. It makes you look smart.” Better. - Angry Chicagoan - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:33 am: Maybe the governor and his billionaire friends can have a whip-around to raise money for a downpayment on the pension contract debacle then. $20 billion down? That ought to get us over the hump. Just where else do they expect to get the money? The lower middle class and the poor are taxed here more heavily than every neighboring state. They don’t have any more to give, yet there’s a big fat contractual requirement out there that has to be fulfilled somehow. - benniefly2 - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:36 am: Remember the times back some years ago when all of the millionaires fled from California and Wisconsin and New York and Minnesota and Hawaii and Vermont and Idaho and Iowa and New Jersey because the top marginal tax rate was between 7.4% and higher? Actually, no. I don’t remember that at all because it never happened. - OneMan - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:36 am: I guess any tax plan that tells you 99% of the people are going to pay less gives me pause. If you are going to tax a relatively small number of people you are going to end up being dependent on a very small tax base, one that to a degree you risk losing in general. Lets use property taxes as a bit of an example, what if they were graduated based off the value of the house (so home value of something over X is taxed at a higher rate) do you think that might encourage the guy who owns the biggest house in town to move? I am not against a graduated tax, but the idea that we can significantly improve revenue and 99% of people pay less in income tax seems risky to me. I think a graduated plan that has an interlock between the lowest rate and the highest rate (like it can’t be more than 2x higher) with a higher start point (lets say 10k in income) might work better. - Saluki - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:41 am: How else ya plannin on payin the bills gubna? - Gruntled University Employee - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:48 am: The following is an excerpt from a job interview at Rauner’s Revenue Department: Interviewer: (Question) What is 2 + 2? Candidate A: (Answer) 4 Interviewer: Thank you for coming in, we’ll let you know. Interviewer: (Question) What is 2 + 2? Candidate B: (Answer) 4 Interviewer: Thank you for coming in, we’ll let you know. Interviewer: (Question) What is 2 + 2? Candidate C: (Answer) What do you want it to be? Interviewer: When can you start? - Joe - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:50 am: Don’t bet against the ‘tax the rich’ scheme not getting voter approval. Prop 30 sailed through in CA, where there are plenty of people who are not affected by the tax to vote in favor of someone else paying the increased tax. It was so successful, it probably serves as a model for other jurisdictions to emulate. If 43 percent of people pay no federal income tax, it is not hard to get all or most of them to vote in favor of a tax increase on the rest of us who do. - Huh? - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:51 am: Tone - Don’t be an egg, your tune is a little off. According to the US department of labor, the size of the work force has increased, employment has increased and UNEMPLOYMENT has increased. Last June, the unemployment rate was 5.8%. In March the rate was 6.5%. How many people have been laid off as a direct result of the State not having a budget? - CharlieKratos - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:53 am: Businesses aren’t the true “job creators”. Consumers are the job creators. If there’s no demand for a product or service, there will be no need for a business to produce that item or provide that service. When are Rauner and many Republicans going to learn that by harming the middle class and cutting their ability to have extra, disposable income, he’s harming business? - illinoised - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:53 am: At the risk of being admonished as naively cynical, that report is ridiculous and as wildly speculative as the governor’s 2016 budget which was predicated on pension reforms which were highly improbable. - Honeybear - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:54 am: Okay so with graduated income tax off the table, how are they going to raise revenue? I say we go Colorado and legalize/tax weed. That would probably solve all problems including mellowing out Rauner. He could then transition into a kind of Dennis Hopper style governor on his Harley. I don’t know. It sounds more authentic then the perfidious character he is now. - Me - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:56 am: ““This is a $2 billion tax hike on successful job creators including many small and medium-sized manufacturing companies that pay taxes under the individual rate. ” Who in there right mind files their business income this way? I can’t imagine what kind of small / mid-sized manufacturing company files all their business profits on an individual return, it just does not make any sense. - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:02 am: All this panic over a graduated tax! How are the 40+ states and their citizens who have this tax structure coping with life? How does it square with our federal graduated tax structure? A flat tax is only fair if it is truly flat. No deductions on anything, all income included, period. But we all know that’s not how it is. All the protests from wealthy about paying one penny more only reveals who they are. Selfish, greedy boors with no understanding of humanity outside of themselves. We live in a society that is supposed to function together, not serve you. - cdog - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:06 am: Me, Many small businesses, myself included, are organized as S-corps. We receive a K-1 as the shareholder of the s-corp, which is like a fancy 1099, and have to claim any gain or loss on the 1040. There are many benefits, including limited liability, by using this s-corp option. To your other point–“This is a $2 billion tax hike on successful job creators including many small and medium-sized manufacturing companies that pay taxes under the individual rate. ” Many uber rich folks, do not create jobs. They receive passive income in the form of interest, dividends, and capital gains because their capital is invested in things other than humans. Human capitol is, and has been losing ground to automation, paper assets, commodities, land, etc. Times they be a’changin’. - Jimmy H - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:08 am: The time is not right for this proposal; give the idea a year to mature. As it stands this is a distraction and would not do anything until November, IF voters approved it. Human Services and Higher Education need money now. Raise the flat back to 5% and other revenue sources. All eyes should stay on the ball, a FY16 and FY17 budget by June, THIS June… Or the consequences. While I agree with the concept of a graduated income tax; if there were to be a graduated income tax, I believe this proposal to be too steep at the top. Maybe those making over $220,000/year pay 5%, then ramped in increments to a max of 7.8%, 3.5% on the low end. - Grad Tax Glad - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:21 am: What makes the grad tax fair? It comes to equalizing the tax load. Lowest incomes earners pay 13.1% of income for state and local taxes combined. Highest pay 4.6%. Not to mention highest have many assets and make purchases out of state, which further reduces their tax load. Matter of fairness. Another approach would be to eliminate property and sales tax entirely and rely on the flat rate. As far as the people claiming an exodus of the rich, oddly it is the very people who claim there would be no exodus if retirement income were to be taxed. - Honeybear - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:23 am: Okay, to tie back to yesterdays conversation in the open thread, does this loss of a graduated income tax complicate the production of a Grand Bargain? I would think it does because it seems to me that GA is putting counter pressure on Rauner to suggest the revenue method, which he needs to float the ship. What revenue might the Raunerites suggest? Or is that the point, they won’t thus sinking the whole kit and caboodle thus dispersing blame from all? Fascinating cloak and dagger stuff politics is. That and deadly and devastating to those who have to live in the devastation wrought by the games. Reminds me of a Clausewitz quote. “War is politics by other means.” I would rather have what Han Solo requested. “Bring ‘em on, I’d prefer a straight fight to all this sneaking around.” - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:25 am: === How is a tax that is unequal considered fair? Everybody paying the same rate is fair.=== The are a lot more factors involved in defining fairness than just sameness! - forwhat - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:27 am: === How is a tax that is unequal considered fair? Everybody paying the same rate is fair.=== The are a lot more factors involved in defining fairness than just sameness! - Federalist - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:32 am: “Fair”, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. To me, fair tax is a flat % tax (not a true flat tax which is the same dollar amount for everyone) with NO deductions. ALL income taxed the same %. Then we can all quarrel about the amount whether at the federal or state level. - RNUG - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:32 am: == “The increase in the tax rate for persons in the higher income tax bracket, results in a decrease in the incentive to work for individuals in that tax bracket. == Not really. Once you’ve got that much money, it’s nt about providing for the family. It’s about earning more than the next guy for ego and bragging rights. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:32 am: –Not sure if you noticed, but job growth has picked up without a state budget. But keep your head in the sand. It makes you look smart.– You see a causal relationship there, do you? Quite certain you haven’t noticed the thousands who have lost their jobs as a direct result of “no budget.” But your head isn’t the sand. You are quite the contortionist to get it where it’s at. - Harry - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:38 am: Fix the top income tax rate at not more than the corporate rate (including the PPRT surtax) and you would have graduated rates with some income potential that is rational and not wildly distort economic choices. This needn’t be all that complicated if people would come together to compromise rather than to one-up each other. - MacombMike - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:42 am: @HoneyBear That would be the smart thing to do but when have politicians in Illinois ever done the “smart thing”? - AC - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:55 am: Some days my comments have less chance of being posted than the Governor singing a graduated income tax into law. It seems to be due to the automated filter, but there’s no way of knowing what’s wrong. Even a simple message: banned word, too long, IP address associated with spam, anything would help. Sometimes I even wonder if I pressed the right button, usually there’s a very long pause when the comments go into the ether. - OneMan - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:56 am: All this panic over a graduated tax! How are the 40+ states and their citizens who have this tax structure coping with life? How does it square with our federal graduated tax structure? Because I suspect most states don’t propose setups that result in 99% of the taxpayers paying less than they are under a flat tax. Illinois has always been a huge fan of the TOP (Tax On other People) and a graduated income tax without some sort of ratio limit is just going to make that worse. I can fix the financial problem and it isn’t going to cost YOU anything is in part how we got into this mess in the first place… - Jason Horwitz - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:58 am: Is this Dept. of Rev. report publicly available? Does anyone have a link? - Jerry Callo - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:01 pm: The ultimate question: Regardless of the tax scheme, can this legislature be relied upon to spend the proceeds appropriately? - James Knell - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:08 pm: If there is anything we can do to get right wing plutocrats to leave the state and leave us alone, I’m all for it. Surely, the economy would take off without them hoovering up every last bit of cash like human black holes. Perhaps I should try planting some wolfsbane and garlic on LaSalle & Wacker. - Handle Bar Mustache - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:17 pm: ==Subtle resistance? lol== So you’re totally opposed? Or Laughing because you haven’t come out one way or another? Sorry if I missed it. Again, I always thought of you as a guy whose heart stayed with the working class even as you’ve climbed the economic ladder. - Zonker - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:39 pm: @Bryan –Everyone seems to selectively forget that voters approved taxing millionaires at a higher rate in 2014 (60 percent, vs. Rauner’s “mandate” 50.8 percent)!– Bryan, any non-binding referendum promising to raise taxes ON SOMEBODY ELSE will always win in Illinois, especially when no consequences are provided. In other states, voters get write ups on “pros and cons” of a ballot measure passing, and actually have an informed opinion on for what they’re voting. Of course, political ignorance is bliss in Illinois, which is why it’s a catastrophe. - Zonker - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:45 pm: @Jerry Callo Oh, I thought it was Jerry GALLO!LOL =The ultimate question: Regardless of the tax scheme, can this legislature be relied upon to spend the proceeds appropriately?= Of course not. The reason for the increase is to maintain the patronage jobs, union featherbedding, and crony vendors that form the political base for the “combine”, as well as to keep K-12 education in Illinois overfunded compared to the rest of the nation. Sacred political cows in Illinois never die, they just get keep getting bigger and bigger as revenues decline. - Tone - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:50 pm: “Sacred political cows in Illinois never die, they just get keep getting bigger and bigger as revenues decline.” And people flee the state. We have the 4th highest tax burden in the nation, right now. - anon - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:57 pm: ==It’s not the math of the tax that’s killing it, it’s the math of 60/30 that’s killing it.== Actually, its 71/36 on the graduated income tax. And the fact is that, despite what a couple of the proponents said, they never had any GOP votes in the House. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 12:59 pm: ===The reason for the increase is to maintain the patronage jobs, union featherbedding, and crony vendors that form the political base for the “combine”, as well as to keep K-12 education in Illinois overfunded compared to the rest of the nation. Sacred political cows in Illinois never die, they just get keep getting bigger and bigger as revenues decline.=== In other words… “Get off my lawn!!” Your Raunerbot talking points after 15 months are comically pathetic. You said nothing in that paragraph, but… I’m sure it felt good! lol. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:01 pm: ===Actually, its 71/36 on the graduated income tax.=== I was being antidotal, not actual. You are “correct” - weltschmerz - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:16 pm: The main goal of the wealthy is to keep as much of their wealth as possible. They hire tax lawyers and advisers to accomplish this. They also buy, I mean contribute to politicians to retain and increase their wealth. Don’t think for a minute they’ll lose and we’ll win. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:27 pm: Whatever, you make an excellent point. The projections from “Gov. Rauner’s Department of Revenue” are ridiculously precise, given the scales of the base numbers and all the dynamics that go into economic forecasting. GRDOR estimates a job loss of 43,000 from a current base of 6,100,000. That’s .7 of 1%. GRDOR estimates a GDP loss of $2B from a current base of $736.3B. That’s .27 of 1%. Wow, those guys are goooooood. Who’s doin’ the modelin’ and projectin’ — freakin’ sharks with freakin’ lasers on their heads? Yet not even ballpark projections on the ROI for The Turnaround Agenda. Go figure. Or not, in this case. I’m thinking they just made it up on the fly and nobody put the “work” to the Absurdity Test. They were supposed to add some zeroes on the back ends of those “projections.” - Rich Miller - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:38 pm: ===GRDOR estimates a job loss of 43,000 from a current base of 6,100,000. That’s .7 of 1%. GRDOR estimates a GDP loss of $2B from a current base of $736.3B. That’s .27 of 1%. === It’s even lower than that because it’s an estimate over 14 years. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 1:47 pm: –It’s even lower than that because it’s an estimate over 14 years.– LOL. they didn’t give it a deep think before putting this out. - On My Own - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:19 pm: Why stop with a graduated tax system? Under the guise of fairness, shouldn’t we see graduated prices at restaurants, stores, etc? Come on, if you earn $50,000/year, shouldn’t you be paying more for your steak? You have the ABILITY to pay more for it, right?? And for the record, I’m middle class and I’m not a Raunerite…just sick of everybody always wanting someone else to pay for things and attacking the rich guy. No tax loopholes and a flat tax is the only fair method. You make more, you pay more…that’s how percentages work. - Just Me - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:19 pm: How come the Democrats think it is okay to call Republicans bills up for a vote when they know they won’t pass, but they won’t do it for their own bills? Are they scared of the roll call it will generate? Surely their ideas are so awesome and superior that putting them up for a vote and having them fail and producing a record of that vote will make for AWESOME campaign material, wouldn’t it? - Rich Miller - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:21 pm: === shouldn’t we see graduated prices at restaurants, stores, etc?=== Are you 12 years old? Because that’s how they argue. - On My Own - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:24 pm: === Are you 12 years old? Because that’s how they argue. === No I’m not. Nice come back Rich. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:25 pm: ===How come the Democrats think it is okay to call Republicans bills up for a vote when they know they won’t pass, but they won’t do it for their own bills?=== 1) The Sponsor decided not to call the bill. Ask the Sponsor. 2) If one Party has the Speaker or President of the Senate, they can decide to call bills they know will fail… that’s knowing it will fail… to get the minority on the record. Yeah, it stinks, but… Why do you think structured roll calls breed trust? So the majority only “embarrasses” the minority a limited number of times (read: trust) Trust stops a lot of the games. Always has. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:30 pm: Ugh. It dropped off… 3) The Dems have run bills similar to GOP Bills, just without poison pills, but are Dem bills. - Midway Gardens - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 2:47 pm: Finland uses a person’s income to levy traffic fines. Seems pretty fair. After all someone wealthy is hardly penalized by a $100 fine but to someone struggling it’s a go straight to jail card. - Grandson of Man - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 3:14 pm: In the spirit of OW, I offer this: Unions, government employees, social services providers and recipients, students, teachers and school workers, Rauner and the Republicans he controls want to fix this gigantic and complex mess on your backs or are allowing schools and services to be severely harmed and squeezed out. He and his super-rich backers and supporters don’t want to pay a penny more in taxes and are quick to smash any proposal to do so. Vote accordingly. Too bad Rauner isn’t someone who thinks it’s fair for the wealthy to pay more. There are many very wealthy people who are willing to pay more, including Minnesota’s governor. - Earnest - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 3:16 pm: Stopping this is a great win for Rauner. The deeper the hole gets, the more leverage he will obtain over time. I cringe to think of the positive changes House Republicans could have locked in in exchange for votes on this. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 3:18 pm: (Tips cap, humbly, to - GOM -) Indeed… - DuPage - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 3:57 pm: @Rich ==Are you twelve years old?== I wish could be and live all those years again! - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 4:03 pm: Maybe we should flip this and allow those in the 1% an absolution from paying any tax whatsoever and ask those with incomes of under 50K to pay 9% or more? Does that seem right? If the 1% had their say, that’s exactly how it would be. - DGD - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 4:12 pm: –There are many very wealthy people who are willing to pay more, including Minnesota’s governor– I hear the IDOR takes checks. - RNUG - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 4:16 pm: == Why stop with a graduated tax system? Under the guise of fairness, shouldn’t we see graduated prices at restaurants, stores, etc? Come on, if you earn $50,000/year, shouldn’t you be paying more for your steak? == Actually, this already happens. If you are poor, you eat at a cheap diner. If you are rich, you eat at an upscale restaurant. Both can have a steak, but both the quality and price will vary drastically. - DGD - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 4:21 pm: - including Minnesota’s governor - If states were people Illinois wouldn’t even be allowed to sit in the same room with Minnesota. Mn has one of the highest tax rates in the country, but they have great schools, good roads, lower property taxes, and no tax on food or clothing. In other words, they take care of business first before frivolous programs. - Whatever - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 5:02 pm: On My Own @ 2:19 ==Why stop with a graduated tax system? Under the guise of fairness, shouldn’t we see graduated prices at restaurants, stores, etc?== Actually, businesses love to do this. Niche markets, branding, “exclusivity,” etc. Or do you really think Cadillacs are that much better than Chevrolets? - Anonymous - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 5:11 pm: ==many wealthy people are willing to pay more== Our governor doesn’t believe that statement as he is not one who is willing. - Lucky Pierre - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 6:10 pm: Can someone explain why Democrats never proposed a graduated income tax during the 12 years they had total control of Springfield? The temporary 5 percent income tax was a terrible idea and they have only themselves to blame for current revenue problems. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 6:22 pm: ===Can someone explain why Democrats never proposed a graduated income tax during the 12 years they had total control of Springfield?=== That’s easy, they were waiting for you to pretend you’re a babe in the woods, a victim of your circumstances… ===The temporary 5 percent income tax was a terrible idea and they have only themselves to blame for current revenue problems.=== Rauner begged for it to expire. The Dems obliged. “Simple” Rookie mistake. Rauner owns it now. - Lucky Pierre - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 6:49 pm: I see you have your full goalie uniform on OW defending Madigan. Is a 24/7 job - anon - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 7:53 pm: ===Can someone explain why Democrats never proposed a graduated income tax during the 12 years they had total control of Springfield?=== In 2007, a proposed graduated tax amendment sponsored by Rep. Mike Smith came up for a vote. It only got about 53 votes. So Democrats did bring up a graduated income tax. - Grandson of Man - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 8:14 pm: “The reason for the increase is to maintain the patronage jobs, union featherbedding, and crony vendors” Yet Rauner and his firm were right there for decades, investing pensions of unionized public employees, for 30 years. How much money did Rauner and GTCR make from pensions? Here is an excerpt from an article: “Like other private-equity firms, which typically acquire companies in the hopes of profiting when they sell them or take them public, GTCR has raised a significant portion of its money, perhaps the largest percentage, from public pension funds. They supplied half to two-thirds of the firm’s funds, by Mr. Rauner’s estimate.” http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130406/ISSUE01/304069983/rauners-love-hate-relationship-with-pension-funds - Lucky Pierre - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 8:56 pm: Good answer Anon. Thank you. In some sense we do have a graduated income tax in the form of property taxes. Since the rich are likely to live in expensive homes they are paying probably paying a hefty property tax bill. A true grand bargain would trade a property tax freeze through increased state funding for schools for a graduated income tax where the brackets are much closer together than what has been proposed - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:01 pm: - Lucky Pierre - Your willful ignorance is fun. Knocking it down is just fun, but it’s too easy at times… - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 10:59 pm: –Good answer Anon. Thank you. In some sense we do have a graduated income tax in the form of property taxes.– You can’t be serious. - wordslinger - Wednesday, May 4, 16 @ 11:12 pm: –In some sense we do have a graduated income tax in the form of property taxes. Since the rich are likely to live in expensive homes they are paying probably paying a hefty property tax bill. A true grand bargain would trade a property tax freeze through increased state funding for schools for a graduated income tax where the brackets are much closer together than what has been proposed– LOL, run that one by the governor, Griff, Ty and the Civvies and see what they say. I’m guessing it will be a two-word Anglo-Saxon phrase that starts with F and ends with U. I think your abacus must be busted. Your arithmetic is kookla. For those of you new to Planet Earth, the whole years-long attempt to weasel out of deferred pension contributions and escape that liability was to avoid the push for a graduated income tax. Illinois corporations like CAT, Abbott, Illinois Tools Works, McDonalds, Walgreens, etc., pay oogats in state corporate income taxes. Right now, their execs pay the same percentage as everyone. Make it graduated, it’s a different story. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, May 5, 16 @ 5:53 am: Go back and read the Edgar proposals from 1998 that proposed exactly that and get back to me Wordslinger and OW. You guys are really too much with your condescension. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.