Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

You just cannot argue with some people

Posted in:

Illinois

* From an email…

Wait until rank and file state union members realize the new fair tax vote in Nov 2020 will also allow the state legislature to change pension details at will. ASCME leadership is very quiet on this topic so far. Now that will be fun to see hard core Democrat State workers standing with anti tax increase Republicans. Heck, that vote might even put Illinois in play for Trump. It will be like the anti gay marriage ballot feature that Karl Rove used to win six borderline states for Bush against Kerry. Illinois State Republicans will look like geniuses because Democrats are just too inept to get out of their own way. Same problem at the national level. Trump can’t losel because he is up against termites.

Um, what? The graduated income tax proposal has nothing to do with changing the constitutional protections of government pensions.

* I asked if he was insane. His reply…

So you claim the Fair Tax bill does not open the Pension System up for adjustment or you are just too lazy to research it? I’m a ASCME steward and we are starting our plan to protect our pensions from the ground up since leadership seems to be in denial. Trying to educate Media these days against their myopic, biased worldview is always eye opening but never a surprise. Have a nice pointless career.

Anyone who claims to be a shop steward and misspells AFSCME should not call anyone else lazy, particularly since they’re dead wrong about the graduated tax proposal and the pension system. I mean, click here and read it yourself. It ain’t in there.

* I reached out to AFSCME Council 31 for assistance and received this reply from Anders Lindall…

It’s understandable that years of attacks on pensions by powerful political forces have raised the level of concern and vigilance among public service workers and retirees who rely on that modest income in retirement. Even so, this is obviously a very confused person. The fair tax constitutional amendment has nothing to do with pensions and in no way affects any constitutional provision other than fixing the state’s unfair, outdated and inadequate income tax structure.

Union members and every Illinois voter should know, plain and simple, that voting YES for fair tax reform means that 97% of taxpayers will pay less or the same, rich people will pay their share and the state will raise more than $3 billion a year for schools, public services and to pay its past-due bills.

We’ll continue to educate union members on the need for fair tax reform like more than 30 other states and the federal government, where wealthy people pay a higher rate and working people a lower rate. And we’ll continue to correct any misinformation that may arise, making clear that this amendment has nothing to do with pensions or any other issue.

* I forwarded that to my pen pal and he replied this morning…

First, thank you for your efforts here. Secondly, any Constitutional language adjustment that allows a more direct change to taxing Illinois wage earners does indeed put everything on the table. It may be a 1% vale added tax for bailing out pension, it could also be rate changes at any level of the wage scale. What this bill does is open the process protected by the existing Illinois Constitution. In a more competent or less corrupt institution maybe we could roll the dice. In Illinois? No. Maybe you have witnessed something different than most witnesses to our finances since 1980? May I suggest a subscription to Crain’s Chicago Business to begin your recovery from Springfield gullibility. I have worked in Springfield handing envelopes to these dedicated drones. One who voted present and later moved into much larger job. The change in language in this bill does indeed open the options for future bodies and selected tax targets. For this staff member to state otherwise indicts him as either incompetent or a liar. Have him stand up and be identified as such. He has company down there.

#Facepalm

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:12 am

Comments

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue

Comment by The Zipper Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:17 am
The profanity rule really makes commenting next to impossible here.

Comment by A guy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:17 am
It’s not exactly “Time Cube”, but wow.

Comment by downstateR Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:20 am
Textbook example of disconfirmation bias at work.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:23 am
Rich are you going to take them up on that Crains subscription? Ha. Unreal

Comment by Seats Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:24 am
Rich, you’re correct, there’s no arguing with folks like this. When you refute their “facts” they move the goalposts to a completely different topic in an attempt to make a connection to the previous argument. Sounds a bit like a former governor we had, actually.

Comment by Fixer Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:24 am
In this Trumpian world, I can’t help but wonder whether this is a fake “steward” trying to spread misinformation as a dirty trick to defeat the graduated tax amendment. My apologies to Rich if he knows this guy is legit. In that event - two-handed facepalm.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:24 am
It is impossible to fix stupid. You can ignore it but you can’t fix it.

Comment by Retired Educator Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:25 am
===Rich are you going to take them up on that Crains subscription?===

lol

I get a free subscription since I *checks notes* write for them.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:26 am
Maybe the stewart needs to sit out a few plays.

It’s this type of confusing ignorance that got 2 in 5 union folks to support the former governor in his lone win.

You can know “of” an issue, the trick is actually knowing how the issue works.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:27 am
Anders may want to be careful about stating 97% of people will pay the same or less on taxes.

Just sayin.

Comment by Pick a Name Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:28 am
===Anders may want to be careful about stating 97% of people will pay the same or less on taxes.===

Why?

Be specific.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:29 am
This is about as obtuse as Madigan-hating, anti-Chicago crusader Brad Halbrook taking $300 in campaign contributions from Madigan lawyer Mike Kasper. Actually, “obtuse” might be far too nice and mild a word for any of this.

Comment by Linus Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:31 am
Soo.. Rich please put me in contact with this person because I have a bridge to sell and I must also mention to them I’m a Nigerian Princess

Comment by Soo... Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:31 am
This is an issue of lazy people cross referencing two issues for their own pontification. Nothing more nothing less. The Fair Tax amendment has nothing to do with changing the pension clause. The Fair Tax does open up the ability to change tax rates for future General Assemblies to pay for pensions. I think we will see more of this misinformation before the 2020 General Election.

Comment by Nagidam Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:34 am
Email him one more time and see if he’ll tell you go back where you came from.

Comment by Whatever Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:36 am
There is fear out there. Some of it very irrational. The pension clause in the Illinois state constitution has nothing to do with taxation. Having said that, those on pensions are afraid of changes in the status quo. Many fear that any changes in the state constitution could one day affect their pension check. If JB can sell a progressive income tax as a “fair” tax: the other side can sell a lot of other things even with blatant lies. I’m not saying this right or honest. I’m just saying that’s way political advertising sometimes works.

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:37 am
If he doesn’t know who Anders Lindall is, I seriously doubt if he is a shop steward for AFSCME. I do know that some stewards have put out bad information, so I generally wait for the Council to confirm or deny any rumors. Back in Rauner’s early years, the rumor mill went crazy with “lock-out” which never came close to happening.

Comment by A Jack Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:37 am
If you say it loud enough and often enough, it becomes true, right? If you choose to prolong this exercise, I predict his next response will be in all capital letters for added gravitas.

Comment by CEA Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:38 am
= The change in language in this bill does indeed open the options for future bodies and selected tax targets.=

What the what? This cat isn’t even remotely intelligible.

Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:39 am
About the lamest scare tactic ever. Did it come from BTIA or one of the very few Twitter troglodytes who dwells in the its comments?

Speaking of lame, the IPI is now saying that educating employees and not getting them to leave AFSCME is its primary purpose—as it’s currently engaging in an opt-out mailing campaign. This is in response to or concurrent with AFSCME gaining members post-Janus in Illinois. The anti-union rich are spending tons of money to educate workers and not to weaken unions. Lol, yeah, right.

https://www.sj-r.com/news/20190712/public-union-membership-not-down-significantly-since-janus

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:39 am
Are they arguing that any amendment to the constitution opens this door or just this specific amendment. I guess it does not matter since the language is not in either amendment. Why didn’t this pension plucking plan occur when they amended the constitution for the Safe Roads Amendment? /s

Comment by Young Dinosaur Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:40 am
I’ve worked with a lot of people like this. When countered with irrefutable facts, they will stare at you then go off on another tangent.
Some people just want to be miserable.
Pretty sad.

Comment by efudd Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:42 am
Sir: Please Google “constitutional convention” and “constitutional amendment”. Oh yeah, then read the descriptions.

Comment by Out Here In The Middle Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:42 am
This person sounds like like Bruce Rauner in disguise to me.

Comment by Me Again Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:43 am
Bruce? Is that you?

Comment by Huh? Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:45 am
==Pick a Name==

Ok, how about “Obtuse?”

Comment by MG85 Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:46 am
With Mayor Lightfoot talking about wanting to tax pensions (even though it’s not on the agenda) you can understand how some people might want to stick with a flat tax. A flat tax makes it more difficult to change tax rates because it applies to everyone. Once you have a progressive income tax it does make it easier to change rates . Right now, if Illinois taxed pensions, it would apply to everyone on a pension . But, once you go to a progressive tax you could just tax pensions over 100k or any amount . So, you can understand the fear out there if you are on a fixed income. It might not be a rational fear but you can understand it.

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:48 am
Nothing surprising about this. Having managed email and social media accounts for many elected officials and campaigns, I can say this kind of facts-be-damned, circular argument from conservative ideologues is very common.

For them, their political belief system is similar to their religious belief system. Both are fueled by a deep faith in a set of ideals, not facts. It’s one of the reason they are drawn to conspiracy theories.

Don’t get me wrong, I encountered fact-denial on the left, too. It just didn’t have the religious-like fervor I saw on the right.

Comment by TNR Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:48 am
“Anyone who claims to be a shop steward and misspells AFSCME”

Looks like concern trolling—trying to hook people with common cause so they can feed them the right wing positions.

“Anders may want to be careful about stating 97% of people will pay the same or less on taxes.

Just sayin.”

Is there a secret tax plan out there with secret rates that are different than what was passed? Please share.

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:51 am
===A flat tax makes it more difficult to change tax rates because it applies to everyone. Once you have a progressive income tax it does make it easier to change rates.===

60/71, 30/36, signature.

It’s not more or less difficult. It’s the same.

The same political will must exist to change things…

Your premise is inaccurate.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:51 am
1. This guy is confusing a Convention with an Amendment.
2. AFSCME should relieve him of his volunteer duties as he appears to be operating in direct opposition to this position under the guise of a representative of said organization.
3. His ill-informed ad hominem attacks on Rich get all the lulz.

Comment by Harvest76 Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:52 am
===Right now, if Illinois taxed pensions, it would apply to everyone on a pension . But, once you go to a progressive tax you could just tax pensions over 100k or any amount . ===

Really? How so? Please explain, skip no steps.

===But, once you go to a progressive tax you could just tax pensions over 100k or any amount .===

Huh? Whaa?

How did you get… here… based on what… facts?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:53 am
OW

Those numbers are difficult but doable with a progressive tax . Most people in the private sector don’t get 100K pensions but after a progressive tax more legislators could vote for that. It’s taxed in other states. It doesn’t apply to the overwhelming majority of people. If Lori Lightfoot is for it: she’s more popular than say Bruce Rauner, Koch brothers, Illinois Policy Institute in the state of Illinois. It’s not a crackpot idea.

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:57 am
“AFSCME should relieve him of his volunteer duties as he appears to be operating in direct opposition to this position under the guise of a representative of said organization.”

Very doubtful it’s a steward. More like a concern troll, trying to scare people away from a graduated income tax, aka the rich paying more. Who could be behind that or engages in this kind of stuff?

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 10:58 am
This individual gives us the most half-baked conspiracy theory in quite some time.

Suggesting that Rich subscribe to Crain’s is just the icing on this half-baked cake.

Comment by thunderspirit Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:00 am
==Most people in the private sector don’t get 100K pensions==

Most people in the public sector don’t either.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:00 am
===Those numbers are difficult but doable with a progressive tax .===

What do you base this on? Spidey-sense?

===Most people in the private sector don’t get 100K pension===

… which has zero to do with anything, since taxing pensions, how would illinois go about that. Be specific. What does your Spidey-sense say about that coming?

===It’s taxed in other states. It doesn’t apply to the overwhelming majority of people.===

“In other states”, but why not here?

===If Lori Lightfoot is for it: she’s more popular than say Bruce Rauner, Koch brothers, Illinois Policy Institute in the state of Illinois. It’s not a crackpot idea.===

Seems easy enough. Give me the step by step. Don’t leave anything out.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:01 am
==I’m a ASCME steward==

Based on everything else this person does not understand, they may think they are a steward when they are actually something else.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:02 am
- Demoralized -

You are right, most people in the public sector don’t get 100K pensions. That’s why it would be easier to tax 100K.

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:05 am
Was he emailing from the perimeter of Area 51?

Comment by Northsider Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:06 am
This is common tactic…example a caller will say I am a long time Democrat but…and then speed some right wing talking point ….true or not. So I suspect that is what this is either on his own initiative or some outfit that can’t get the facts straight.

Comment by Not a Billionaire Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:07 am
===You are right, most people in the public sector don’t get 100K pensions. That’s why it would be easier to tax 100K.===

I dunno… right now there’s no tax on $1 pensions, let alone $37 kabillion pensions. Why is that?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:08 am
The reference to Rich needing to read Crain’s is really quite funny. Until it isn’t.

So much bad info out there.

Comment by Winderweezle Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:09 am
Lightfoot didn’t propose taxing pensions, she proposed taxing retirement income.

And it is easy peasey for the mayor of Chicago to call on the legislature to raise taxes.

It’s sure easier than raising revenue yourself.

It is also not going to happen as kind as the AARP remains opposed.

Comment by Thomas Paine Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:11 am
OW

Here are the steps (for political viability to tax pensions) as you are well aware of.
1)The state of Illinois constitution has to be changed to a progressive tax
2)The legislature could then pass a bill taxing pension income only over 100K.
3) The rate could be lower than the income tax rate, could be the same , or could be higher.

4)Most pensioners probably wouldn’t care because it doesn’t apply to them.

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:11 am
The taxes could be changed on retirement income now and out at a high level so we are in another diversionary tactic.

Comment by Not a Billionaire Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:11 am
===2)The legislature could then pass a bill taxing pension income only over 100K.===

You *sure* about that?

Think on it, for one second.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:12 am
- AFSCME should relieve him of his volunteer duties as he appears to be operating in direct opposition to this position under the guise of a representative of said organization.-

I hope they don’t.
He’s a go getter.
He’s doing something.
If he’s legit and not an IPI plant
I hope they
with respect and skill
tuck him back under wing.

To quote Monty Python Life of Brian
“Oh Great, we need doers in the movement”

Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:14 am
. I have worked in Springfield handing envelopes to these dedicated drones. - “ASCME Guy”

Just back away slowly…don’t upset him by disagreeing…he doesn’t look dangerous…just confused. - Frightened Springfield pedestrians?

Comment by Dotnonymous Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:16 am
Legislature might not pass the bill right away but… it’s doable within 4 to 5 years AFTER a change to a progressive income tax. I never thought about it until Lori Lightfoot brought the subject up. Other states do tax pensions as you know. I’m not for taxing pensions or income but , I have to admit reality.

Comment by Steve Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:18 am
I hope that guy gets a good deal on tinfoil for his hat-making needs.

Comment by SAP Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:19 am
===it’s doable within 4 to 5 years AFTER a change===

Outside of your own imagination, please explain how, in the real world, something like this will pass.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:19 am
For once I’m not following OW. Mechanically, it’s easy to tax pensions in their entirety, or even without an amendment, over $X. Just amend the existing deduction for all retirement income and cap the deduction at $100,000. Or $50,000. We already have similar exemptions and deductions. No differential rates, no problem with the existing constitution. The mechanics are easy, but maybe this is where you’re going: the politics aren’t.

Comment by notsosure Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:20 am
===it’s doable within 4 to 5 years ===

Now it’s 4-5 years…

That sounds not so doable.

Heck, Lightfoot might not even be Mayor in… 5 years.

Anything else?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:20 am
I’ve encountered similar arguments from other state employees who are political conservatives. They can’t bring themselves to admit that a liberal Democratic from Chicago is looking out for them in the governor’s office. So, they turn to conspiracy theories to explain that the seemingly good things JB and the Dems are doing for them are part of an elaborate ninja mind trick that will screw state employees in the end.

Bruce Rauner made it very difficult to be a Republican state employee who is worried about his or her pension.

Comment by Telly Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:22 am
- notsosure -

You see the political will?

- Steve - even “concedes” a 4-5 year doable timetable.

That’s doesn’t sound so easy.

Now I need to worry about 4-5 years down the road?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:22 am
Wow, this person makes me look good.

Comment by pool boy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:22 am
With a tip of the hat to Wordslinger, I’m just going to say that this guy has started his weekend early.

Very early.

Comment by Nick Name Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:24 am
ASCME no more questions…

Comment by Strategy Geek Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:31 am
“If he doesn’t know who Anders Lindall is, I seriously doubt if he is a shop steward for AFSCME“
Anders is the spokesperson for Council 31. I guarantee he knows what he is talking about. As for the supposed steward, they actually teach you the name of the union and what each letter stands for in steward training.

Comment by union proud Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:31 am
It sounds like this person is having a really bad trip. Wow.

Comment by State of DenIL Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:32 am
He also might be calling it ASCME because he saw the word Afscammy too many times. l

Comment by union proud Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:37 am
===This is an issue of lazy people cross referencing two issues for their own pontification===
===I think we will see more of this misinformation before the 2020 General Election.===

I literally wrote this an hour ago and here we have ‘Steve’ not understanding the facts of life.

Yes there are some that want to tax pensions. No this has nothing to do with the Fair Tax. The GA could have done this at anytime in the last few decades. Why didn’t they? Well there is an art in Springfield called counting noses. There just aren’t enough noses for the last few decades or in the next 4-5 years to pass legislation to tax Pensions.

Comment by Nagidam Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:37 am
- Steve -, - notsosure -,

The process must have a political will, the legislature AND governor willing to go, first “Green” on that and havee enough “Green” to get that to a governor, any governor, willing to put his/her pen to make it so.

The concession on 4-5 years, that kinda takes away the “easy” description.

Also, in that thought, moving *any* rates up quickly, same issue(s).

Political will is exactly what Governor Pritzker showed this session, working with the GA, and getting an agenda passed and signed.

If you’re telling me the will, in 4-5 years will be there, 5 years ago we all were debating how long a short term budget stalemate is.

Convince me there are enough “Green”, in both chambers and a governor willing to put their name to it.

That’s process, same as understanding the mechanics.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:38 am
Bet Rich’s pen pal is having a good chuckle and really enjoying himself over all the energy being expended on this post as a result of his trolling nonsense.

Comment by West Side the Best Side Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:52 am
===over all the energy being expended ===

LOL

Nobody is even breaking a sweat.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 11:59 am
The progressive income tax reduces the chances of pensions being taxed. The need for more revenue is reduced and with reduced need there is even less will for taxing pensions.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:06 pm
If it was a call for a State Constitutional Convention, he would have a point. But it isn’t.

Heck … even Rauner knew the difference.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:08 pm
Willy, I guess Anders meant taxpayers would pay the same or less in income taxes–maybe. He didn’t mention increased real estate taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes and all sorts of fees. Bottom line, people will take home less. But, wait–minimum wage is increasing, twice in 2020, so payroll taxes to the state will increase. That is assuming businesses don’t lay off folks or cut hours.

There was a president who said families will save $2500 in health insurance and if you like your doc…..

I think many are aware of sleight of hand.

Comment by Pick a Name Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:10 pm
===There was a president who said families will save $2500 in health insurance and if you like your doc…..===

… whom you call Barry.

===I guess Anders meant taxpayers would pay the same or less in income taxes–maybe===

The language and numbers say so.

===…didn’t mention increased real estate taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes and all sorts of fees.===

Since the email is talking about income tax, your straw man lacks on all sorts of levels.

===I think many are aware of sleight of hand.===

Your looking for a magic trick. The email and issue here is the income taxes and the retirement pension issue.

You again… lack.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:15 pm
How much money would taxing pensions over $100,000 even raise? There can’t be many retired State employees with pensions over $100K, and even fewer significantly over that. Would the amount of revenue raised be worth the political risk of passing such a tax?

Comment by Twirling Towards Freedom Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:21 pm
Rich, you probably should be flattered that the GRU is now sending trolls after you. (Removes tinfoil hat.)

Comment by Keyrock Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:37 pm
== How much money would taxing pensions over $100,000 even raise? ==

In order to quickly answer that question, I’m going to rephrase that slightly. If you taxed all retirement income (pensions, annunitys, 401K’s, 403B’s, 457’s, SS, etc.) over $50,000, I believe the figure IDOR came up with a couple of years ago was $500M - $700M. Obviously, it would be less at the $100,000 level … my guess would be $200M - $300M or less.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:38 pm
==You again… lack.==

What’s the title of the post OW? You just cannot argue with some people.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:41 pm
===You just cannot argue with some people.===

… and yet you troll… and try and try… to get attention.

LOL

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:45 pm
- Demoralized -

Apologies. I thought it was my good friend, who calls the former President Barry.

That’s on me, friend. Sincere apologies.

OW

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:50 pm
Based on the trolling quality, it looks like the IPI/BTIA (see today’s post on gas tax paying for vertical infrastructure projects).

Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 12:54 pm
It’s a sad world when someone who disagrees with you is “incompetent or a liar,” especially when you have not really presented much of a case.

===and if you like your doc===
The reason this trope gets so much traction on the right is because Obama was a generally truthful guy, and this was only mostly true. Times change, don’t they.

Comment by Jibba Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 1:40 pm
STEVE The merits of such a policy aside, repealing the tax exemption on some or all retirement income is very unpopular, especially among people over 50, who happen to constitute a majority of primary voters, if my memory is correct. In short, it is politically infeasible. Which is why there is no legislator in either party advocating your idea.

Comment by anon2 Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 1:55 pm
“Most people, when directly confronted by evidence that they are wrong, do not change their point of view or course of action but justify it even more tenaciously. Even irrefutable evidence is rarely enough to pierce the mental armor of self-justification.” ~ Carol Tavris & Elliot Aronson, MISTAKES WERE MADE (but not by me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions and Hurtful Acts (Harcourt, 2007)

Comment by anon2 Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 1:57 pm
Crazy gonna crazy.

Comment by Lt. Guv Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 2:02 pm
While I like the idea of a graduated income tax structure fof Illinois, the fact that there are no provisions to ensure lower tax brackets would pay lower tax rates. Example: I you have 5 income brackets, with one being over 1 million and 5 being less than 20,000. If the proposed amemndment stated that the rate for bracket 5 has to be at least 5 percent lower than for bracket 1, and that the rate for bracket 4 has to be al least 4 percent lower than bracket 1 and so on I could support it. But as it is proposed, the poorest or middle income could be taxed at a rate higher than the richest persons. Might seem like a stretch, but the proposed ammendment would allow for it.

Comment by Frank Ambrose Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 3:00 pm
Can people stop referring to taxing “pensions?” That is misleading as any such tax would have to apply to ALL retirement income including private pensions and private sector 401(k). It’s no wonder public sector employees feel paranoid.

Comment by anon Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 3:24 pm
“Now I need to worry about 4-5 years down the road?” Well you know Madigan may not be in office for another 5 years, so with him gone anything is possible. Er…right? Or maybe we just need redistricting.

Comment by Skeptic Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 3:25 pm
Keep in mind this guy/gal’s vote counts exactly as much as each of ours. Who said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others.”

Comment by What's in a name? Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 4:22 pm
===this guy/gal’s vote counts exactly as much as each of ours===

Your point?

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 4:24 pm
Welcome to the internet Mr.Miller. Where everyone’s existence is pointless.

Comment by filmmaker prof Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 4:31 pm
Rich’s pen pal apparently sprained his brain trying to construct such a fabulously bad argument.

Comment by revvedup Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 6:01 pm
“where wealthy people pay a higher rate and working people a lower rate”

Isn’t this a false dichotomy. Making more than 750K to $1M means that you aren’t working people?

Comment by Kevin Highland Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 7:30 pm
What do ya mean? “What da ya mean”

Comment by NorthsideNoMore Tuesday, Jul 16, 19 @ 9:48 pm