i voted 'yes' but only because i hate rich fucks who live next door to me and i want them to pay all the taxes when my delightful little 115 year old house is sold for a tear down.
also, robyn i hope you were in graciela's state sen district (i'm just to the east of her). i worked with her for many years and she rocks. that lady is GOING places.
Well, "Bring Home Chgo" tanked 'cuz MOST of the burden of the $1.5M and above "McMansion Tax" would be born by commercial real estate-office buildings and (yes, renters) apartment buildings, and not McMansions. Commercial R. E. vacancies are generally sky high, thus they're tanking and can ill-afvord the tax; and most apartment building owners I know aren't really making Cayman Islands laundering-type bank, so they're gonna vote for a tax increase? Find a way to make actual rich fucks pay. Then it'll get passed.
I don't, and certainly, that's part of the complexity of this issue. I have no problem trying to tax large commercial real estate consortiums and corporations, as they can afford it, certainly.
The problem is, as the bill was written, it made no distinction between holders of large portfolios of commercial real estate, and somebody like my friend R, who co-owns a small commercial building on the north side of Chicago with her brother. That building is probably worth more than the $1.5M threshold to get dinged by the "McMansion tax",, and so they'd have to pay quite a bit more if they were to sell it. R is an underemployed artist, her brother is in the Navy...are they the sort of gazillionaires you'd suggest should pay much more in transfer taxes? I'd say no, that Mayor Johnson and the clowns who wrote this bill would say that, OOPSIE, I guess that we really didn't do our homework on who would truly be affected by this tax.
And, by branding it the "McMansion Tax", the writers of this bill sought to market it, once again, as an "little guy versus the big bad rich guy" straw man argument...without actually ascertaining just who would be affected.
so no, I can't show you any "math on that"; but I can ask you to think beyond your biases,
In the story I related above, my friend is on Medicare and has trouble holding down a job for medical reasons. Her bro is in the goddamn Navy. NOBODY is a millionaire. And there are thousands of cases like this across the city.
Tax those who can afford it. Calling the tax "a McMansion Tax" as a way to deflect from its poorly-conceived language is a bullshit way to raise money.
I've been having second thoughts about the $25 a month I toss in the general direction of my city's anti-homeless organization, since it's been rife with corruption, several programs have fallen through, the tent city is getting shut down, and I still see a sign for someone who is homeless at every other intersection.
This month, the name of the org changed. And I found out one of my husband's colleagues has been elected to the board, and they're going to give another go.
So I'll keep my subscription for a little while longer, and see if they get any better.
Thoughtful post, Robyn, but don't overlook how this could also be seen as a referendum or poll or whatever on Brandon Johnson, who frankly is off to a terrible start as mayor.
Being vague and uncommunicative, especially regarding the specifics of what he wants to do, is getting to be his style. And people don't like it.
They think he's fumbling the issue of the migrants pouring into Chicago from the Greg Abbott Fuckhead Express. They were confused by his decision to stop using ShotSpotter, a controversial "gunshot locator" technology -- but only in six months, after the Democratic National Convention is over. Speaking of that convention, as it draws closer, I for one hope he gets a lot more decisive about things like security.
IOW, his heart seems to be in the right place, but he's an amateur, and it shows. I think that might be a large part of the reason people didn't trust him about this.
The reason homelessness isn't going to be fixed has to do with the fact that capitalists want something to threaten people with - "take our lousy pay for your labor or you'll be out on the street!"
I think that the homeless explosion has been caused by the people who have turned residential housing into investment properties. They have created this problem and they are the ones who should be taxed heavily, to the point that they get out of this racket.
Oh, absolutely. I'd prefer laws that prohibit ownership of more than 2 single family residencies by an LLC or individual besides their own primary residence. So it'd still let the richie riches have their summer house or a wealthy parent by their kid a starter condo in college, but prevent a slumlord from buying 10 houses on a block and renting them out for 3 times the mortgage value with zero maintenance done on them.
I would prefer to see a land value tax instead of taxing the building on the property. That way, landlords couldn’t pass the tax on in the form of higher rent.
I mean, I can see the point about not handing a city government that couldn't manage a lemonade stand without committing some sort of graft a big pile of money without crystal-clear instructions on what to do with it.
Someone really thought through the tax side of this - and I mean that, I love the tax idea here - and forgot to put nearly as much thought into the spending side.
I have a pair of knee-high, mule-skin snake boots I inherited from my Grandfather. I occasionally wear them when I go birdwatching, because snakes, and my Husband has remarked that I look like I'm off to search for the headwaters of the Orinoco.
i voted 'yes' but only because i hate rich fucks who live next door to me and i want them to pay all the taxes when my delightful little 115 year old house is sold for a tear down.
also, robyn i hope you were in graciela's state sen district (i'm just to the east of her). i worked with her for many years and she rocks. that lady is GOING places.
Well, "Bring Home Chgo" tanked 'cuz MOST of the burden of the $1.5M and above "McMansion Tax" would be born by commercial real estate-office buildings and (yes, renters) apartment buildings, and not McMansions. Commercial R. E. vacancies are generally sky high, thus they're tanking and can ill-afvord the tax; and most apartment building owners I know aren't really making Cayman Islands laundering-type bank, so they're gonna vote for a tax increase? Find a way to make actual rich fucks pay. Then it'll get passed.
Why do you think that a real-estate office building worth more than a million is owned by poor people? Can you show me the math on that?
I don't, and certainly, that's part of the complexity of this issue. I have no problem trying to tax large commercial real estate consortiums and corporations, as they can afford it, certainly.
The problem is, as the bill was written, it made no distinction between holders of large portfolios of commercial real estate, and somebody like my friend R, who co-owns a small commercial building on the north side of Chicago with her brother. That building is probably worth more than the $1.5M threshold to get dinged by the "McMansion tax",, and so they'd have to pay quite a bit more if they were to sell it. R is an underemployed artist, her brother is in the Navy...are they the sort of gazillionaires you'd suggest should pay much more in transfer taxes? I'd say no, that Mayor Johnson and the clowns who wrote this bill would say that, OOPSIE, I guess that we really didn't do our homework on who would truly be affected by this tax.
And, by branding it the "McMansion Tax", the writers of this bill sought to market it, once again, as an "little guy versus the big bad rich guy" straw man argument...without actually ascertaining just who would be affected.
so no, I can't show you any "math on that"; but I can ask you to think beyond your biases,
I think the lives of the millionaires getting slightly harder is not a reason not to tax the billionaires.
Who da fuq was talking about millionaires?
In the story I related above, my friend is on Medicare and has trouble holding down a job for medical reasons. Her bro is in the goddamn Navy. NOBODY is a millionaire. And there are thousands of cases like this across the city.
Tax those who can afford it. Calling the tax "a McMansion Tax" as a way to deflect from its poorly-conceived language is a bullshit way to raise money.
You were talking about a millionaire couple. If you own a 1.5M building, you own more than 1M, making you a millionaire.
And your thinking is SO simplistic it's a wonder you can feed yourself.
Ta, Robyn.
I've been having second thoughts about the $25 a month I toss in the general direction of my city's anti-homeless organization, since it's been rife with corruption, several programs have fallen through, the tent city is getting shut down, and I still see a sign for someone who is homeless at every other intersection.
This month, the name of the org changed. And I found out one of my husband's colleagues has been elected to the board, and they're going to give another go.
So I'll keep my subscription for a little while longer, and see if they get any better.
No. It's the children who are wrong.
Thoughtful post, Robyn, but don't overlook how this could also be seen as a referendum or poll or whatever on Brandon Johnson, who frankly is off to a terrible start as mayor.
Being vague and uncommunicative, especially regarding the specifics of what he wants to do, is getting to be his style. And people don't like it.
They think he's fumbling the issue of the migrants pouring into Chicago from the Greg Abbott Fuckhead Express. They were confused by his decision to stop using ShotSpotter, a controversial "gunshot locator" technology -- but only in six months, after the Democratic National Convention is over. Speaking of that convention, as it draws closer, I for one hope he gets a lot more decisive about things like security.
IOW, his heart seems to be in the right place, but he's an amateur, and it shows. I think that might be a large part of the reason people didn't trust him about this.
mr fuf met him on set at work and said he was utterly delightful. again, breaks my heart.
this is absolutely accurate and breaks my heart.
The reason homelessness isn't going to be fixed has to do with the fact that capitalists want something to threaten people with - "take our lousy pay for your labor or you'll be out on the street!"
See: workhouses
I think that the homeless explosion has been caused by the people who have turned residential housing into investment properties. They have created this problem and they are the ones who should be taxed heavily, to the point that they get out of this racket.
Oh, absolutely. I'd prefer laws that prohibit ownership of more than 2 single family residencies by an LLC or individual besides their own primary residence. So it'd still let the richie riches have their summer house or a wealthy parent by their kid a starter condo in college, but prevent a slumlord from buying 10 houses on a block and renting them out for 3 times the mortgage value with zero maintenance done on them.
Whar boot pix?
I would prefer to see a land value tax instead of taxing the building on the property. That way, landlords couldn’t pass the tax on in the form of higher rent.
That’s my journey with Georgists
after Daley sold the parking meters and the skyway toll, it's not exactly surprising that people's wariness is being taken advantage of.
I mean, I can see the point about not handing a city government that couldn't manage a lemonade stand without committing some sort of graft a big pile of money without crystal-clear instructions on what to do with it.
Someone really thought through the tax side of this - and I mean that, I love the tax idea here - and forgot to put nearly as much thought into the spending side.
They didn’t forget- that was by design
All of that stuff ends up as a slush fund. Remember the tobacco settlement?
𝙎𝙬𝙚𝙚𝙩 𝙃𝙤𝙢𝙚 𝘾𝙝𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙜𝙤 - Robert Johnson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8hqGu-leFc
But he says and I quote " back to the land of California, sweet home Chicago"
But are four and two six?
Those boots are made for walking, maybe, but primarily for kicking ass and taking names.
Kinky boots
Good boots can multitask.
true, mine once made me hit the ceiling.
TBH it wasn't the boot's fault . . . one of my littles (and i think i know which one) dropped a Lego in.
you know how you get your foot most of the way in and *thunp* the foot goes all the way in . . . my foot tried to make a fist!
Yikes!
that's not what i said.
Certainly not. That's obviously an audience reaction.
I have a pair of knee-high, mule-skin snake boots I inherited from my Grandfather. I occasionally wear them when I go birdwatching, because snakes, and my Husband has remarked that I look like I'm off to search for the headwaters of the Orinoco.
Starts singing Enya...Sail away sail away, sail away...
lol I luv this version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9eSnSBP1Po
A program to address homelessness was poorly defined and hand-waved away? Shocked face.
dang, those boots look like something a Bratz doll would wear!
love 'em!