OT: Illinois fair tax: yes or no?

[dice]

Trump is heading for reelection, possibly by a greater margin than in 2016...

when you start a post with this, you're asking for the remainder not to be taken seriously, no matter how well-reasoned. trump got 304 electoral college votes in 2016. his chances of topping that this year are remote. the gold standard in election forecasting (note the electoral probability graph):

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

trump could certainly pull another upset (a significantly bigger one than last time), but if there's a landslide coming, it'll be for biden

even a betting public with PTSD from 2016 and skittish about trump legal shenanigans sees biden as a significant favorite:

https://electionbettingodds.com/President2020.html#chart

I think it’s so hard to tell though because Trump voters are mostly tight lipped still.

trump voters? tight lipped?



trump won last time because he won a landslide amongst last minute undecided voters ("what the hell, let's try the outsider"). this time around, he both has a record to run on AND there are substantially less undecideds

current polling average: biden 51.8%, trump 43.4%, 4.8% undecided
2016 final polling average: clinton 45.7%, trump 41.8%, johnson 4.8%, 7.7% undecided

[Almost Retired]

Trump is heading for reelection, possibly by a greater margin than in 2016...

when you start a post with this, you're asking for the remainder not to be taken seriously, no matter how well-reasoned. trump got 304 electoral college votes in 2016. his chances of topping that this year are remote. the gold standard in election forecasting (note the electoral probability graph):

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

trump could certainly pull another upset (a significantly bigger one than last time), but if there's a landslide coming, it'll be for biden

even a betting public with PTSD from 2016 and skittish about trump legal shenanigans sees biden as a significant favorite:

https://electionbettingodds.com/President2020.html#chart

I do an extensive amount of study on an issue as important as this election. I totally ignore popular opinion, popular "wisdom", corporate media and I don't watch TV. I could write a fairly long treatise here on the tea leaves that clearly (to me) point to a significant Trump victory today. I'll spare you that, but I will call the outcome here at 2:18 PM on Election Day: Trump 327 Biden 211.

[dice]

Trump is heading for reelection, possibly by a greater margin than in 2016...

when you start a post with this, you're asking for the remainder not to be taken seriously, no matter how well-reasoned. trump got 304 electoral college votes in 2016. his chances of topping that this year are remote. the gold standard in election forecasting (note the electoral probability graph):

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

trump could certainly pull another upset (a significantly bigger one than last time), but if there's a landslide coming, it'll be for biden

even a betting public with PTSD from 2016 and skittish about trump legal shenanigans sees biden as a significant favorite:

https://electionbettingodds.com/President2020.html#chart

I do an extensive amount of study on an issue as important as this election.

well, whatever you're studying is apparently way different from what anyone else is studying

I totally ignore popular opinion, popular "wisdom", corporate media and I don't watch TV.

and polling, apparently (which is neither opinion, "wisdom" nor beholden to corporate overlords)

I will call the outcome here at 2:18 PM on Election Day: Trump 327 Biden 211.[/b]

87% of vote in from duval county (jacksonville area) in FL: biden +5.4%

trump won duval county in 2016 by 1.4%

that's a 6.8% swing in favor of the democrats. it'll probably narrow somewhat as same day results will likely comprise much of the remainder, but...not a good sign for mr. trump

[Jcool0]

I do an extensive amount of study on an issue as important as this election. I totally ignore popular opinion, popular "wisdom", corporate media and I don't watch TV. I could write a fairly long treatise here on the tea leaves that clearly (to me) point to a significant Trump victory today. I'll spare you that, but I will call the outcome here at 2:18 PM on Election Day: Trump 327 Biden 211.

[ATRAIN53]

So this was an L

Read on Twitter

[dougthonus]

So this was an L

Read on Twitter

I thought it was going to pass. I am more happy than sad that it failed though had mixed feelings about it overall. Hopefully we actually address the real problem now, but we probably won't. We'll probably just spin into further financial problems.

[Friend_Of_Haley]

Well wherr do they go?

Raise taxes on everyone to 6 or 7%?
Cut services tremendously?
Pension reform?

I'm guessimg mostly column A and a sprinkle of B. C will remain untouched for another decade as we dig the hole deeper.

[dougthonus]

Well wherr do they go?

Raise taxes on everyone to 6 or 7%?
Cut services tremendously?
Pension reform?

I'm guessimg mostly column A and a sprinkle of B. C will remain untouched for another decade as we dig the hole deeper.

Which is probably the worst case scenario, but yeah, probably what we'll do.

[TheStig]

So this was an L

Read on Twitter

I thought it was going to pass. I am more happy than sad that it failed though had mixed feelings about it overall. Hopefully we actually address the real problem now, but we probably won't. We'll probably just spin into further financial problems.

You must be new to IL

They're not solving anything! Just gonna kick the can down the road and raise taxes on everyone now.......

[TheStig]

Well wherr do they go?

Raise taxes on everyone to 6 or 7%?
Cut services tremendously?
Pension reform?

I'm guessimg mostly column A and a sprinkle of B. C will remain untouched for another decade as we dig the hole deeper.

Obviously C is the solution but unfortunately it's nearly impossible to do. They've tried, taken it to court and failed.

[stl705]

Really, anybody is surprised at NO result?? With all the millions $$$$ poured into that side? Money talks but big money walks.

Now i guess we’ll just let the state lay off teachers since we can’t have the billionaires pay their taxes. Better get ur resumes updated for anybody without tenure.

[TheStig]

Really, anybody is surprised at NO result?? With all the millions $$$$ poured into that side? Money talks but big money walks.

Now i guess we’ll just let the state lay off teachers since we can’t have the billionaires pay their taxes. Better get ur resumes updated for anybody without tenure.

I honestly was very surprised. I thought this was going to be a slam dunk. The No has basically raised everyone's taxes. I didn't expect people to vote for their own tax raise.

To me, it's me more of a reform of on the trust on the legislature than anything. And now we all pay.

[stl705]

It didn’t have close to a chance. You had the IL manufacturers association telling people they wouldn’t have jobs if they voted yes.. how many millions did they pour into Dupage County? For every Yes sign I see 200 Nos.

So where do we go now? A lot of smart people here leaning democrat said they are voting no because they didn’t Want future tax increases for middle/lower class... well what do you think is going to happen now? JB just gna say well how about no budge like Rauner? Unbelievable.

[dougthonus]

Really, anybody is surprised at NO result?? With all the millions $$$$ poured into that side? Money talks but big money walks.

Pritzker put over 50M in advertising FOR the fair tax fund. Not sure how much money was set up against it, but there sure as hell was a lot of money spent on ads for it too.

Now i guess we’ll just let the state lay off teachers since we can’t have the billionaires pay their taxes. Better get ur resumes updated for anybody without tenure.

This amendment wouldn't have impacted billionaires much at all because billionaires are earning through equity not salary and can hide their money easily. There are also only a handful of billionaires in Illinois (literally you'd run out of billionaires before fingers and toes if you were counting).

This would have largely impacted the lower upper class people like doctors / lawyers whom earn large salaries. Not saying those people shouldn't pay more taxes, but this rhetoric that "billionaires need to pay their share" is misleading because that wasn't likely to be the result of this bill.

We shouldn't lay off teachers, but maybe we should stop paying teachers 2M in pension benefits.

[stl705]

Absolutely agree with you that pension reform is where we need to look, but good luck with that. Unfortunately that will be a fight to the bitter end from every union in the state.

Regarding Pritzker money towards YES, I don’t know the numbers but I sure know I seen 2 TV ads about YES and daily radio ads on 93.7. Regarding ads for NO, they were on every commercial break it seems to me. Maybe I’m in a certain target market or had selective memory, but as a marketing person I think I noticed where the money was. Again just my thoughts and opinions that dont mean didly

Edit: one comment, billionaires, millionaires... don’t make a damn bit of difference to 97% of the state if u got 6 zeros or 9, you got more than enough money to pay higher taxes.

[dougthonus]

Regarding Pritzker money towards YES, I don’t know the numbers but I sure know I seen 2 TV ads about YES and daily radio ads on 93.7. Regarding ads for NO, they were on every commercial break it seems to me. Maybe I’m in a certain target market or had selective memory, but as a marketing person I think I noticed where the money was. Again just my thoughts and opinions that dont mean didly

I only saw ads one way or the other on the NFL games and they seemed to be about 50/50 to me. Often they played back to back. I don't watch a lot of TV with ads though, don't drive anywhere to see billboards, and don't listen to sports radio, so my universe when it comes to seeing ads is pretty limited

Edit: one comment, billionaires, millionaires... don’t make a damn bit of difference to 97% of the state if u got 6 zeros or 9, you got more than enough money to pay higher taxes.

Sure, not arguing against the idea that the wealthy should pay higher taxes, but saying billionaires makes it sound like you're going to get all this money from the absurdly rich people, but that isn't true. You're going to get a lot of money from people that aren't rich enough to retire or rich enough/mobile enough to be remove themselves from bad tax situations.

Not arguing those people shouldn't pay more, but the advertising was pretty intellectually dishonest when it says "make billionaires pay their share!" that wasn't what was going to happen or who was going to pay all this extra money. Just like it was intellectually dishonest when it said 97% of people get a tax break, yeah by 1/10th or 1/20th of a percent, just a completely irrelevant amount that was only negotiated so they could make that statement without actually saving anyone money.

At any rate, it doesn't really matter, the "yes" ads really bothered me because they seemed incredibly dishonest. The no ads were actually a pretty straight forward announcement of my fears with the bill. "They will come for the middle class next", "spending is out of control, why should I give these guys more money". Both of those things are exactly why I voted no on it.

[stl705]

I still don’t understand the NO vote because what is stopping springfield from raising our taxes right now even with a NO decision? Are we “really” locked in to 4.95%? Guess we’ll find out quickly.

I agree whoever was in charge of messaging for the YES commercials did horrible. They tried to pit it against trump in a democratic state.. yes i see what you are trying to do but it is choppy messaging. The 2 commercials I saw for YES were sandwhiched in between NO commercials, but again maybe I was only seeing 1 side of it and ignoring the other.

Regarding the signs, go drive through Addison or Elk Grove Village in the industrial parks and you’ll find them.

I ain’t trying to be doomsday or say people are wrong for voting no, I respect citizens votes. I just don’t know where we go from here? What gets cut? Is part of the cuts in schools as JB Pritzker is on record saying or was he bluffing? It’s either higher taxes for everybody, a massive cut in state and local services or a combination of both.

[dougthonus]

I still don’t understand the NO vote because what is stopping springfield from raising our taxes right now even with a NO decision? Are we “really” locked in to 4.95%? Guess we’ll find out quickly.

We may still raise taxes, but the amount we can raise them is pretty limited because the democrats will get murdered by their base if they raise taxes on anyone except the wealthy.

I ain’t trying to be doomsday or say people are wrong for voting no, I respect citizens votes. I just don’t know where we go from here? What gets cut? Is part of the cuts in schools as JB Pritzker is on record saying or was he bluffing? It’s either higher taxes for everybody, a massive cut in state and local services or a combination of both.

We need to cut pensions. There is no other choice in the long run that will be good for the state of Illinois. That is the answer here, and the only meaningful answer IMO. Raising taxes will continue to make the environment worse and worse for people. We're one of the few states that have people fleeing it (the most of any state in the nation over the past decade), and if we just had average population growth instead of people leaving, we'd already have made as much money in increased tax revenue as this tax bill was supposed to generate.

Making the environment worse for people in the state, not attracting earners or businesses isn't a solution either. It might help stop the bleeding for a few years, but ultimately being one of the worst tax states in the US (already true) and making it even worse isn't likely to be a long term winner, especially when we're already #1 in the last decade in population losses.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

The actual poll results perfectly matched the poll results on this thread. Take that Nate Silver.

I called it earlier in the thread.

[Friend_Of_Haley]

Well wherr do they go?

Raise taxes on everyone to 6 or 7%?
Cut services tremendously?
Pension reform?

I'm guessimg mostly column A and a sprinkle of B. C will remain untouched for another decade as we dig the hole deeper.

Obviously C is the solution but unfortunately it's nearly impossible to do. They've tried, taken it to court and failed.

Well, it would likely take a constitutional amendment. It would be an uphill fight, but so was the fair tax, and they at least tried it.

However it gets done, it will require big compromise. Throw away any plans like Illinois Public Policy that will have you believe this is fixable in something like 5-10 years. We built up the liability for far too long. Part of what needs to happen is a true short term tax increase that pays off the borrowed spending from the prior generations.