Well, if you are Rahm Emanuel and it is Chicago, there can be only one answer to that question? Raise taxes… it’s always the solution.
So Rahm proposes raising taxes a half-billion dollars, or a measly 500 million, just to tide them over until, well, the next tax increase.
He suggested a choice between drastic cuts and raising taxes. Now who always wins that battle? Right. It could have something to do with big union contracts and the inability to keep these big lucrative contracts flowing like wild honey. Incidentally, the one business probably thriving above all others in Chicago are the Funeral parlors. (another story)
Good thing “Chicago is thriving” as he called it, otherwise it might not be able to afford the tax hike.(sort of a joke) It’s what Rahm calls “progressive” so at least there’s that.
Rahm Emanuel gave a speech where he said:
“In short, if we were to fund our pensions with cuts alone, our city services would become unreliable. Our city would become unlivable. And that would be totally unacceptable.”
Isn’t that one hell of an admission? (think about that) Outrageous. I mean if the cost to float those contracts requires a 20% cut to the police force, losing 48 fire departments and 40% of firefighters — just to afford them — then what in the world is in those contracts? Wouldn’t any sane person say wonder if and how they could afford those contracts?
So the answer is to raise the taxes — good thing they can afford them, uh? Right, rather save the contracts by raising taxes. No losses there. Or tell people that they will lose all their services they already paid for, if the city doesn’t raise taxes.(Is there a hostage negotiator in the house) Don’t worry because he calls it a “progressive” approach — who can dislike anything progressive? Guess what? Even Chicago Dems do not like hikes.