83 Comments - TheInvisibleMan - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:13 am: How much would we have to raise taxes to get this guy to leave along with his hurricane friend? Ask him directly for a specific number. Then, lets raise taxes exactly that much. - Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:14 am: As far as a word for anyone thinking this logic is valid-not a single word but: 1) Anyone associated with the Illinois Farm Bureau 2) Anyone associated with the Illinois Chamber of Commerce 3) Republicans, in general. - Stritz - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:15 am: Not so fast about the mention that most likely we will all be taxed more if this amendment does not pass. I’m guessing it’s going to be very, very hard to increase the flat tax on the poor which would happen in that instance. Very hard. - Actual Red - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:16 am: The whole purpose of the constitutional flat tax requirement is to make it impossible to tax the ultrawealthy without putting the squeeze on normal folks, and thereby prevent too much of the owning class’s dragon horde from flowing into the public coffers. But we need to raise revenues, period, so you can choose whether that revenue comes from regular people or from the Pritzkers and Rauners of the world. Seems obvious to me. - Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:17 am: Stritz- Uh, okay, go with that. - J. Nolan - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:19 am: Saying that voting NO is really voting for everyone’s taxes to raise is basically victim blaming. With taxpayers the victims and the politicians who refuse to get control of our spending/pensions being the abusers. The consequence of taxpayers saying NO to more taxes should not be to raise taxes anyways - it should be to right-size government. Because that is what they voted for. Maybe voters will regret that signal to politicians if they perceive a dramatic drop in services but again - that is what they voted for should the progressive tax fail. - Gooner - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:20 am: I’m boggled that Kass still has a job. He has been churning out the same column for 20 years. There is no wit. No intelligence. No new perpective. He knows that if he repeats “Madigan bad” and “The Combine” and adds in the occasional allegedly authentic Greek recipe (they aren’t) he will keep his core readers. It is really unfortunate that he held Royko’s old column slot for so long. - Pundent - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:21 am: All of this was predictable. The opposition is casting this as a tax increase on everyone. Confusing the issue and adopting that strategy was obvious from the beginning and it’s surprising that the flat tax proponents were called flat footed. They seem shocked that the other side isn’t being “honest.” Really? Did they expect that to happen. The no tax increase on 97% should have been baked in by now. But instead opponents have been able to frame this as a choice between raising taxes or doing nothing. If the measure fails and taxes are raised across the board it’s going to be a huge wake up call for many. It didn’t have to be that way. - thoughts matter - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:23 am: The legislature and the governor won’t have a choice. As Rich said, they can’t print money. The feds don’t appear to be in a hurry to help out. The Illinois Supreme Court already told them that they had a means of raising the revenue needed to pay the pensions- taxes. They aren’t going to change their mind. So it’s either try to tailor the tax bite to those who can best afford to pay, or raise taxes on everyone. - RNUG - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:23 am: I know I sound like a broken record … but I sure wish the GA had passed a contingent flat tax rate increase along with the graduated rates. That would have made the choice crystal clear. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:24 am: ===it should be to right-size government=== Remember how you said you were going to stop writing your column because you’d grown out of touch? Maybe revisit that. - Donnie Elgin - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:24 am: =Vote for it, vote against it. That’s your business. But I’ve been saying for a long time that if you vote “No” on raising takes on upper-income earners, you’re very likely voting “Yes” to increase everyone’s taxes= It may well be that taxes will be raised on all Illinoissianan. It also may well be that the political fallout of raising taxes makes lawmakers more amenable to looking at reducing the expenditure side of the ledger. That Dem supermajority will not want to wear the jacket of passing a huge increase that impacts their base. They think in tersm of election cycles. - Candy Dogood - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:25 am: The Fair Tax is the policy Illinoisans should have. Anyone that is in the bottom four quintiles of income in this state (and that’s most people in the state) that votes against the Fair Tax constitutional amendment deserves paying more in income tax. And the folks that represent the poorest parts of the state deserve to have to explain to their constituents why they advocated against a constitutional amendment that would have benefited them the most. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:25 am: ===I sure wish the GA had passed a contingent flat tax rate increase along with the graduated rates=== I kinda preferred raising flat rates right off the bat and billing the graduated tax as an immediate tax cut. lol - Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:26 am: ===makes lawmakers more amenable to looking at reducing === LOL Dorothy, wake up. - NIU Grad - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:27 am: I didn’t even need to know what author this was as soon as I saw “Chumbolone”. He really thinks he’s a witty, conservative modern-day Royko… - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:29 am: The thing about this “columnist”, the drummer of “the combine”, who accurately predicted Lisa Madigan rubbing for Governor in 2006, 2010, 2014… the Nostradamus writer here who has his beer can chicken smothered finger on the pulse of all things… … is utterly clueless to 60… 30… math… and worse of all, governing. The writer *is* the crabby guy, chain-smoking outside grumbling, letting the foolish consistency be the hobgoblin of a little mind… … complaining *about* Chicago and asking folks why they are still there… then selling his own home to move to Chicago. The writer seemingly wanted to jump from radio to TV, but now has his podcast that must be more map like because he going himself going Chicago Way… not moving to a beloved Indiana or Wisconsin or whatever state is the comparison. The state requires a needed revenue. The fair tax allows the pain to those most worried about First World Problems. I don’t care if you’re against the fair tax, it’s annoying and disingenuous to say you are with falsehoods that are easily provable. Facts matter, and the facts of this CA are as they are, and the reality of what would be next if it fails isn’t tax cuts for anyone, but a realization that tax hike for everyone will occur. - City Zen - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:29 am: Exemptions and credits. Credits and exemptions. If the Fair Tax fails and the flat tax is increased with no increases in tax credits or the personal exemption, then it is this administration’s fault that everyone’s taxes went up. - Just Another Anon - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:31 am: Taking the position that your taxes are going up no matter what you do, is indeed a safe position in Illinois. - Brownie - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:32 am: Yup, we just need to trust Madigan. One of the largest law firms in the US, just handed back 7 floors of their LaSalle street space to their landlord, as their attorneys are now working remotely. If they have no office in Chicago, why would these high earners remain here? - @misterjayem - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:33 am: Sorry, Rich — I was out at “Chumbolone.” – MrJM - Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:33 am: “Because that is what they voted for” I remember them voting for Pritzker, who tauted this during his campaign, so overwhelmingly that networks called the election minutes after polls closed. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:33 am: === That Dem supermajority will not want to wear the jacket of passing a huge increase that impacts their base.=== … or have to explain the cuts so damaging to the state that looking at more revenue seems prudent. Your confusion seems to be about taxing. The reality is cutting or ending services are as painful, to some even more painful. - Perrid - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:33 am: Donnie Elgin, we can not cut our way out of this hole. I think they would have to pair a flat tax increase with SOME cuts, I would think, but we are not, will not, and can not, get out of our fiscal problems by cutting. We aren’t going to cut education by billions. Roads, by billions. It WILL. NOT. HAPPEN. - Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:35 am: “why would these high earners remain there?” Yep, they’ll be flocking to Milwaukee and Des Moines in droves. - TNR - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:38 am: Farm Bureau…Illinois Chamber…Chicago Tribune If they really want a true flat tax, let’s give it to them. There are several exemptions in the current law that can be eliminated, exemptions they benefit from, including sales tax on newspapers. That’s one way to ensure everyone pays the same. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:38 am: ===… why would these high earners remain here?=== Condé Nast has Chicago “The Best City to Visit” for the 4th year in a row. Must mean Chicago has things people want, and it’s desirable to be here. I’d start there. - hisgirlfriday - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:38 am: If the amendment fails it’s all due to poor messaging and campaigning by the supporters. Maybe they should have branded it a “wealth tax” instead of a “fair tax” amendment to make sure it’s about going after rich people? I guess Ken Griffin’s crew would have found something else to attack it regardless. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:40 am: ===why would these high earners remain here?=== There are arguments on both sides of this. Fine. Have at it. But there is no credible argument against the fact that taxes are eventually going up one way or another. So, stick to the topic at hand, please. - Grandson of Man - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:45 am: “Saying that voting NO is really voting for everyone’s taxes to raise is basically victim blaming.” It’s the truth, and thankfully it’s being mentioned by LG Stratton and Vote Yes. Illinoisans voted for Democrats in part because we don’t want to slash the poor, students, sick people, people who do business with the state, state workers and so on. Who constantly hollers for cuts? The most privileged and those who are doing well economically. That includes Kass, Trib editorial board, Griffin and the rest. - CEA - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:47 am: ===why would these high earners remain here?=== Because most wealthy people have ties to their communities and are influenced by any number of personal and professional priorities in addition to marginal increases in their state income tax rate? Sheesh. - Kankakeed - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:51 am: “If the amendment fails it’s all due to poor messaging and campaigning by the supporters” Madigan, as the face of the Democrat party and state government, will also be a factor. - From DaZoo - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:51 am: The people behind the campaigns against the amendment are hammering at the idea that the amendment is a tax hike (it’s not). So I’m afraid too many people will be mislead into thinking that voting “no” will mean no income tax increases. IF defeated, this will be turned into the second volley of these campaign backers because when the inevitable tax hike comes they will hang it on Democrats (they have the super-majority in IL after all). I agree with @Pundent. In hindsight it looks like they should have drafted legislation if the amendment fails. Showing people in black and white that the flat tax would go from 4.95 to 5.95 with a “no” vote would make the above arguments disappear. I get you want to keep focused on the positive. However, the ability to “…frame this as a choice between raising taxes or doing nothing” has confused a number of people. - Leigh John-Ella - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:52 am: I get it. Kass fears a system where maybe the initial rates are low, but after a while they suddenly jump way up. You know, just like a Chicago Tribune subscription. - Ducky LaMoore - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:53 am: It really does feel like a choice between raising my own taxes and raising taxes on someone else. It really isn’t that hard of a choice for me. Selfish, yes. That’s politics. People vote for their own self interest unless they can be convinced otherwise. And sympathy for the ivory back scratcher crowd doesn’t work on me. - Ryan - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:54 am: Any one that votes for a tax increase period is insane. The state needs to be more fiscally responsible. Look at states that have no income tax. They don’t have these problems. - JoanP - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:54 am: There should be a rule that anyone demanding cuts in state spending must identify the specific cuts they support AND how much money that would save. - Eloy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:55 am: What TNR said. Good luck protecting sweethart tax exemptions if this goes down. - SSL - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:57 am: This tax really does need to happen, if for no other reason then to let the JB experiment fully play out. We are in too deep to turn back now. In two or three years we’ll know if it is beginning to work. Illinois is a big state and can’t just turn on a dime. There will be some who leave, but a much bigger number will stay. It’s all about the margins. - Out of the loop - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:58 am: Does this proposal merely allow legislators to change the system to graduated or does passage mean it will automatically change from flat to graduated? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:59 am: To the post, Before Raunerism, before IPI influence to the party, before the cheered division of the state and a want of a “new state”, there were Republicans. Who were they? They were champions of social services, of funding programs and helping agencies meet their missions, these Republicans saw the services that helped people, not only those in their districts, they understood the best part of this state is when we do what’s best for all. They respected the need for state services, they actually ran on being champions of helping those most needing and where the state can step in. They knew the cost, they spoke to those costs, and rallied to the benefits far more often, and the value of state programs to those costs. Now? Now we had had a governor with 2 years, no budget, where “reform” was the cover to hurt Illinois most needy… we now have folks who get angered that what others saw less than a decade ago as a worthy program, they see as “waste” It’s not that Raunerites are more fiscally responsible, it’s that Raunerites see no need because “if they don’t need it, no one does”. It’s bringing selfish and self-absorbed lacking of the needs of others… then making that a fiscal “policy” The reason Dems feel they can run on tax increase ms is because they see value for society. The reason Raunerites feel they can run against any taxes is they see only the value of their bubble, not looking at a greater good. The vote in this tax isn’t just a measure of dollars, it’s also an opportunity to weigh and measure if the state sees serving society has a value too. - Leigh John-Ella - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:02 am: Ryan, those states tend to have an ocean or year-round summers or are low-tier states where no one really wants to live. But let’s play this out. Most states don’t have as many public universities as Illinois. Go ahead and pick which 3 you would close in this great re-balancing of Illinois spending? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:02 am: === Look at states that have no income tax.=== Look at those states and the quality of services they offer, and the rank in things like healthcare, education, and investment in infrastructure. - Publius - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:09 am: Unfortunately what will happen is the vote will be no with a big part of that coming from the suburbs. There will be an increase in the flat tax and a decrease in state funding to local ententies who will then charge more in local property taxes. Then as others noted servies will be reduced especailly in other parts of the state. No one will like it but you get what you pay for. - TinyDancer(FKASue) - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:09 am: =why would these high earners remain here?= Ummmm. Let’s see: The Art Institute Field Museum Museum of Science and Industry Shedd Aquarium Adler Planetarium Lyric Opera Chicago Symphony Orchestra Local music scene Lakefront University of Chicago Northwestern University IIT to name just a few. - Count Floyd - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:10 am: “But let’s play this out. Most states don’t have as many public universities as Illinois. Go ahead and pick which 3 you would close in this great re-balancing of Illinois spending?” Not directed at me- but the starting point is easy. Chicago State- it would be unfortunate but I’m sure the 136 new Freshmen can transfer to better schools anyhow. So many stories of mismanagement at that place- I can’t imagine how many more have not been discovered and reported on. - RNUG - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:12 am: == I kinda preferred raising flat rates right off the bat and billing the graduated tax as an immediate tax cut. lol == Rich, that might have messaged a bit better politically. My contingent approach would have been more transparent and honest. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:14 am: === Most states don’t have as many public universities as Illinois. Go ahead and pick which 3 you would close in this great re-balancing of Illinois spending?=== LOL Why did Rauner try to passively close state universities? Governors *open* universities, not close them, Think a “She-Caw-Go” Governor is going to be in favor of closing any universities, including universities in central or southern Illinois? Nope. The universities are the economic engines of the regions. This is a great example of cuts… nose/face… - TinyDancer(FKASue) - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:15 am: =Look at states that have no income tax= You can pay me now or you can pay me later: New Hampshire gets nearly 68 percent of its revenue from property taxes — the highest rate of any state. In fact, four of the top five states that rely the most of property taxes have no income taxes. Alaska (51.8 percent) is second, Texas (45.0 percent) is fourth and Wyoming (44.5 percent) is fifth. (New Jersey, which has a state income tax, is third.) - RNUG - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:19 am: == - Out of the loop - Does this proposal merely allow legislators to change the system to graduated or does passage mean it will automatically change from flat to graduated? == Automatic. A bill has already been passed setting the graduated rates to take effect next year. - RNUG - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:23 am: I don’t know if it is still true, but Alaska used to get almost all of their revenue from oil companies. - Anyone Remember - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:25 am: =Look at states that have no income tax.= Wyoming - 62% of state revenues come from a coal extraction tax. When Illinois coal plants burn Powder River Basin low sulfur coal, Illinois ratepayers are paying that Wyoming extraction tax. Similar numbers for Alaska’s oil. Next? - City Zen - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:25 am: ==Look at those states and the quality of services they offer== US News ranks flat tax Massachusetts at or near the top in healthcare and education. No tax Washington ranks near the top in all three categories. - Dotnonymous - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:27 am: “It is really unfortunate that he held Royko’s old column slot for so long.” Kass couldn’t hold Mike Royko’s pencil sharpener…much less his position. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:27 am: ===…ranks flat tax Massachusetts at or near the top in healthcare and education. Does Massachusetts tax capital gains? - Anyone Remember - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:37 am: =Look at states with no income tax.= From Autoslash dot com, a website devoted to reducing car rental fees. “Question: Is Las Vegas making tourists pay for their airport? Answer: No, Las Vegas makes tourists pay for much more than the airport. Question: What do Nevada residents call tourists? Answer: Taxpayers!” - iggy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:42 am: we live in a remote world now. upper middle class workers are already getting their work done in their vacation homes. gonna be real easy to make that switch permanent when the tax man comes looking for more of our money. - Jibba - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:54 am: That Dem supermajority will not want to wear the jacket=== Dems are not the party lacking backbone. They passed the previous tax increase in 2011 without a single GOP vote, and very few in 2017. - City Zen - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:54 am: ==Does Massachusetts tax capital gains?== Same as Illinois. They also tax a portion of That Which Cannot Be Mentioned. Non-graduated tax states Washington, Utah, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts all rank near the top in healthcare, education, and infrastructure. Each state also does it with lower overall tax burdens on all taxpayers, from top to bottom, than Illinois. And they do it while having higher median incomes and lower poverty rates than us. Pretty sure none of those states aren’t one-trick ponies either (tourism, fossil fuels, etc). They seem to be doing fine. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:56 am: - City Zen - So… 4 states. Noted. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 11:59 am: Maybe if the writer of the column was writing from Washington, Utah, New Hampshire, or Massachusetts, I’d be even less dismissive, and yet the writer still not only lives in Illinois… - lake county democrat - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:10 pm: Gee,sure would have been nice if we had a party that would have countered Pritzker with, say, a compromise. Say “progressive tax, with some budget cuts now and a 60-vote requirement going forward for future non-flat increases.” That would have been an interesting debate - I might have even been persuaded. - lake county democrat - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:11 pm: (Sorry, meant 60% requirement) - Responsa - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:17 pm: ==The vote requirement for constitutional amendments is either (a) 60 percent of votes cast on the ballot measure itself or (b) a simple majority of all of those voting in the election.== An area where I think the messaging has been poor is the 60% vs 50% issue. Like it or not it looks skeevy to some people. - Jibba - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:29 pm: CZ, Washington does not have an income tax. - Leigh John-Ella - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:43 pm: Jibba, Washington does have a sales tax on services that Illinois does not impose. https://dor.wa.gov/taxes-rates/retail-sales-tax/services-subject-sales-tax - Grandson of Man - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:48 pm: “Gee,sure would have been nice if we had a party that would have countered Pritzker with, say, a compromise.” That would have been called “governing.” But the ILGOP is protecting the richest at all costs. That’s a terrible signal to voters from the party, that every kind of harm is on the table except for taxing the rich more. - Jibba - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:49 pm: New Hampshire doesn’t tax income, either. They tax some things, but not W2 income. BTW, Utah had a progressive tax until 2008 when the flat tax came into being. Previous brackets topped out at 7%. Comparing tax structure is a fool’s errand, especially given the legacy of different tax histories. Given our history of tax rates that were too low for the spending over decades, we have a situation that is unique and calls for unique solutions. - JS Mill - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 12:51 pm: =Saying that voting NO is really voting for everyone’s taxes to raise is basically victim blaming. With taxpayers the victims and the politicians who refuse to get control of our spending/pensions being the abusers. The consequence of taxpayers saying NO to more taxes should not be to raise taxes anyways - it should be to right-size government. Because that is what they voted for.= Umm, no. People are not voting for or against increased taxation. Anyone that understands the English language can see that. They are voting for a new income tax methodology similar to the federal income tax-progressive. The current proposal would maintain or reduce taxes on 97% of the population. Illinois government has a revenue problem, n part due to past generations failure to fund pensions creating massive legacy debt. Anyone want to cut our way out of debt should research Bruce Rauner and his administration. The punch line there is more debt, more expenses, human suffering as he played politics with peoples lives (where have we heard that recently?). - City Zen - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 1:09 pm: ==we have a situation that is unique and calls for unique solutions== Not taxing That Which Cannot Be Mentioned makes us extremely unique. We are bad at unique. We should be the opposite of unique. - Jibba - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 1:19 pm: And the range of services taxed. But weren’t you arguing that flat tax states are better? Your list is down to one, which is hardly compelling, and falls apart completely when you address our tax history legacy. - Levois J - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 1:22 pm: I’m not happy about any of this to be honest. Who is? At the same time were in hard times anyway. We already had fiscal issues that the state wasn’t able to settle and then we got this pandemic going. This state has to pay its bills better to feel some pain now because it won’t last long, hopefully. - JS Mill - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 1:23 pm: =Not taxing That Which Cannot Be Mentioned makes us extremely unique.= Can you give me a hint? Is a shrubbery involved? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 1:37 pm: === Not taxing That Which Cannot Be Mentioned makes us extremely unique. We are bad at unique. We should be the opposite of unique.=== Find the 71 and 36. Start with email addresses. They can be found at ILGA.gov. Until you do that, please stop with your silliness, because short of that, your choices of solutions are non-starters, even you won’t do the first step. - Go Big - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 2:12 pm: A no vote does most certainly mean a hike in the flat income tax rate. Just as certain is that zero Republicans will be voting for the increase. Guaranteed . . . .zero. A heavy lift, although doable, for the Dems. Some of the remaining downstate Dems are going to be in a pinch as their new Suburban brethren will be in no position to vote “yes” on the increase in the near term. Are the Republicans irrelevant? Yes. Are the Democrats on their own if this goes down? Most certainly. This will get interesting. - Unconventionalwisdom - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 2:19 pm: Past bills must get off the ledger if the state is going to reach financial respectability. Proponents of the the graduated tax make no mention of this reality. They would be more effective if they did so and how such a tax would be used to reach that goal. As it is it appears it means more taxes while still not solving some systemic problems. My personal view is that present tax is plenty high. However a five year ‘Sunset ’services tax’ should be enacted to get rid of the past bills and do so in an honest manner. - Union Thug Gramma - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 2:48 pm: ==The consequence of taxpayers saying NO to more taxes should not be to raise taxes anyways - it should be to right-size government. Because that is what they voted for.== Oh please, tell me where? Education? Ruiner did a great job there. State employment? We already rate 50th in this nation on state employees vs. the population of the state(per capita)…yes that means Mississippi and Alabama have better service towards there citizens than we do. People already whine because they have to wait months to get/renew FOID cards cuz, again, not enough staff to cover the requests. How about roads??? We can follow TX lead and just turn rural roads back to gravel/dirt… - Thomas Paine - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 3:08 pm: I find myself largely agreeing with the Executive Director of the Illinois Chamber’s Tax Institute: ‘In my estimation, (1) the proponents of progressive income tax rates are mistaken if they think graduated income taxes can solve state spending imbalances without taxing the middle class. (2) It’s equally unrealistic for opponents to such a plan to argue that taxes can be reduced if only cuts are made. (3) There’s no political will among current members of the General Assembly to make those kinds of cuts or tax rate changes. And, despite rhetoric from candidates of both political parties, (4) nobody, once in office, seems to be able to discover and eliminate enough “waste, fraud, and abuse” to make material changes to the spending side of the state’s ledger. 1. A graduated income tax is not a panacea. Choices will have to be made. Lowering the overall sales tax rate while taxing more services seems likely. Hell, include a 1% tax on lobbying services and you will be hailed as heroes. 2.The idea of tying a tax increase to pension cuts failed before the unanimous Supreme Court decision, it failed when Bruce Rauner was governor, and it is not going to succeed now.Republicans talk about pension reform, but most do not support pension cuts. 3. There was no “political will” when Republicans were in charge either. The voters reject deep spending cuts every time they are offered that choice. 4. Rauner’s directors were asked point blank where we could cut waste, fraud and abuse in their departments and came up with $0. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 3:16 pm: When dorm room thinkers point to the thoughtless, like the writer of the column that this post is… “about”(?)… these three important facts to the politics are not only “givens” in the “geometric” sense of the given, and the geometry to trying to make the writer of that column seem smart will never work. - Thomas Paine -… from the Executive Director of the Illinois Chamber’s Tax Institute ===The idea of tying a tax increase to pension cuts failed before the unanimous Supreme Court decision, it failed when Bruce Rauner was governor, and it is not going to succeed now. Republicans talk about pension reform, but most do not support pension cuts. There was no “political will” when Republicans were in charge either. The voters reject deep spending cuts every time they are offered that choice. Rauner’s directors were asked point blank where we could cut waste, fraud and abuse in their departments and came up with $0.=== The politics alone, it’s important to look back to understand why moving forward has few paths. - Really - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 5:14 pm: it’s sad that people assume their is no political will to reduce overspending but plenty of will to continue overspending and just take more money from folks in the middle of a pandemic. Can one of the tax and spend folks tell me what ever came out of the governor’s blue ribbon group to reduce local property taxes? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 5:16 pm: === it’s sad that people assume their is no political will to reduce overspending but plenty of will to continue overspending and just take more money from folks in the middle of a pandemic.=== It’s the top 3% Protecting millionaires and billionaires isn’t a winning argument. === Can one of the tax and spend folks tell me what ever came out of the governor’s blue ribbon group to reduce local property taxes?=== That’s not on the ballot Anything else? - filmmaker prof - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 8:09 pm: The only people who should vote against the Fair Tax are those who would be invited to Ken Griffin’s celebration party if it fails. - Jibba - Thursday, Oct 8, 20 @ 10:43 pm: what ever came out of the governor’s blue ribbon group to reduce local property taxes?=== It doesn’t take a committee to answer this. More money from the state is needed. No other significant solutions exist. Government consolidation might nibble around the edges, but that is all. Or Medicare for all. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.