Jump to content

Daley announces city budget plan including...


NorthSideSox72

Recommended Posts

Daley says to cover a budget shortfall for 2008, the city needs $108 million in new property taxes, in addition to a new tax on bottled water, and increases in a variety of other fees.

 

This is in addition to the absurd proposal by Cook County to add 2 points or more to the sales tax, which would push it over 11%.

 

At what point do these government agencies look into getting out of the pension business, just like most businesses are doing. That is a huge cost of doing business, and I think its time they drop out of it. Any obligations they currently have they need to keep of course, but going forward, no more. Offer a 401k, with a match even, to save a lot of money. That is better for everyone involved for many reasons. And try some buyout programs for people who have only been on the payroll for like 5 or 10 years - some will take it.

 

For the record, I am actually OK with the water bottle tax. Its a use tax, those things are becoming a huge problem for waste purposes anyway. But that property tax increase?! Come on.

 

I'd also rather see them chase down offenders more often for things like false 911 calls and traffic offenses and increase revenue that way. I wouldn't shed a tear if they fined people a little more for running red lights or calling 911 because their neighbor's dog pooped on their lawn.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 12:55 PM)
At what point do these government agencies look into getting out of the pension business, just like most businesses are doing.

You hit the nail right on the head. Same problem with the CTA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 12:32 PM)
The City and County governments were find until their primary source of revenues growth fell apart. They really need to cut services and become more effecient like any other business would have to do.

Eh, I think there are other ways beyond cutting services. I think you do a combination of things, including getting out of pensions, some targeted tax and fee increases on nuisance activities (traffic violations, water bottles), and then the most important part - raise the fees associated with lesser used services. This way, everything available now is still available, but the people actually using the services are the ones paying for them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

an 11% county sales tax is messed up. way too high. i think it would be the highest in the country.

 

so we will have the distinguished honor of having the highest gas prices and highest taxes!

 

seriously, they need to cut something, not raise taxes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 04:11 PM)
an 11% county sales tax is messed up. way too high. i think it would be the highest in the country.

 

so we will have the distinguished honor of having the highest gas prices and highest taxes!

 

seriously, they need to cut something, not raise taxes.

I'll say again... there is an alternative.

 

If all of the business-minded conservatives here want the government to really be run like a business, then you need to look at the services it provides, and charge the actual users of those services a rate that closely matches cost. If at that rate no one uses it, THEN you cut it. But if you can break even* at a given rate for the service, then cutting it makes no more sense then running it out there while losing money.

 

* = for a for-profit business, it would be a net income equation, but for government its zero-sum, so break even is sufficient.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 05:43 PM)
I'll say again... there is an alternative.

 

If all of the business-minded conservatives here want the government to really be run like a business, then you need to look at the services it provides, and charge the actual users of those services a rate that closely matches cost. If at that rate no one uses it, THEN you cut it. But if you can break even* at a given rate for the service, then cutting it makes no more sense then running it out there while losing money.

 

* = for a for-profit business, it would be a net income equation, but for government its zero-sum, so break even is sufficient.

 

sounds good to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...