walter russell mead peter berger lilia shevtsova adam garfinkle andrew a. michta
Feed
Features
Reviews
Podcast
Detroit, Is That You? Chicago In Big Trouble

shutterstock_129028808

It looks like Detroit may yet have competition for the distinction of America’s most poorly run city. The unprecedented triple-drop in Chicago’s bond rating and the city’s shiny new long-term debt figure—$29 billion—should have pols quaking in their boots. The Chicago Sun-Times has published some distressing numbers from Chicago’s recent audits:

  • The number of “physical arrests” by Chicago Police officers declined again — from 152,740 in 2011 to 145,390 in 2012. That continues a six-year trend that coincides with the hiring slowdown that caused a dramatic decline in the number of police officers. Police made 227,576 arrests in 2006. The number of arrests has been dropping like a rock ever since….
  • Emergency responses continued their steady rise — to 472,752. That’s up from 300,971 in 2006.…
  • The 55 percent subsidy to retiree health care that Emanuel wants to phase out and retirees are suing to maintain cost the city $97.5 million in 2012.
  • The condition of Chicago’s four city employee pension funds is growing ever more precarious. The firefighters pension fund has assets to cover just 25 percent of liabilities, followed by: Police (31 percent); Municipal Employees (38 percent) and Laborers (56 percent).

In addition to the pension, law enforcement, and emergency response concerns that remind us of a certain bankrupt city across the lake, the report notes that three of Chicago’s four largest private employers (JP Morgan, Accenture LLP, and Northern Trust) are in finance. It seems like blue cities have a codependent relationship with the one percenters progressives claim to hate.

It hasn’t all hit the fan quite yet, but Chicago seems perilously close to real trouble. The city is all out of money, and with an imploding public education system and harrowing levels of violence, it is losing residents fast. Illinois, which itself lost more than 800,000 people to out-migration in the past two decades, is essentially Chicago on a larger scale, with hundreds of billions in unfunded pension liabilities and complete political sclerosis. The state cannot bail out Chicago, and judging by the feds’ reluctance to even lift a finger for Detroit, Chicago shouldn’t expect much more.

Stories like these tend to expose the pointlessness of a lot of American political debate. Defenders of the blue social model will prattle on about its many virtues, and they certainly have some accomplishments to point to. But ultimately the blue model is no longer a matter of choice: cities like Detroit and Chicago and states like Illinois will eventually have to shift away from blue policies whether they like them or not. When the money runs out, one of the luxuries you can no longer afford is self-deception.

We hope that an economic recovery will give cities like Chicago some more time to make adjustments, but if the past is any guide to future behavior, any new income the city sees will be spent on maintaining a Potemkin façade, with the next inevitable downturn finding Chicago in worse shape than ever.

[Image of Chicago skyline courtesy of Shutterstock]

Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • bpuharic

    The blue social model is certainly viable IF the US does not proceed down the path of 3rd world countries where inequality is the order of the day.

    WRM seems to be unaware that crony capitalism…whether in blue or red states…is a threat to freedom. Rick Perry has made quite a fortune for himself and his friends, while TX has the highest percentage of minimum wage jobs in the US.

    But perhaps he’s happy with the idea of most Americans working for 7/hour while getting the perennial lecture about being moochers.

    • Jeff Jones

      > WRM seems to be unaware that crony capitalism…whether in blue or red states…is a threat to freedom.

      You say that like all capitalism is crony capitalism. Solyndra was crony capitalism, as in executives with an inferior product taking money from the government, knowing they can’t compete. Most Texas business is nothing like that.

      • bpuharic

        Really? Ever been to TX? I lived there. Rick Perry is a master at crony capitalism

        Stick to stuff you know about.

        And unregulated capitalism is, by definition, crony capitalism, as Adam Smith pointed out

        You may have heard of him.

        • Jeff Jones

          I live in Texas. And we have regulations in Texas. We learned from the Enrons of the world…unlike you who clearly haven’t learned squat from any of these failed welfare systems.

          • bpuharic

            Actually TX had some of the strongest banking regulations in the country (e.g. its capital reserve requirements were higher than alot of other states) so its banking industry was less affected by the recent meltdown

            But Rick Perry is a great example of a crony capitalist, while he preaches ‘free market’ economics.

            And social welfare programs protect the middle class which is why the right hates them

          • Jeff Jones

            > social welfare programs protect the middle class which is why the right hates them

            Uh huh. We “the right” as you call everyone who doesn’t agree with redistribution hate social programs because you “the left” can never control how many people are on the payroll. Those programs inevitably end up insolvent because there aren’t enough rich people to fund ever growing obligations. So, you end up raising taxes on the middle class, which you did at the beginning of 2013.

            Once again, you’re taking money out of the economy to put it back in at the discretion of politicians who are always looking for a political gain.

  • PapayaSF

    Minor quibble: Detroit is not really “across the lake” from Chicago.

    • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

      Yes, several lakes.

  • Cory Atkin

    Any system based on coercion will eventually collapse. The only questions are how long will it take and how disastrous will be the fall.

    The blue welfare state is such a system.

    From the government enforced monopolies of the unions to the welfare system that we are all compelled to join (with no option for opt out), the coercion guarantees corruption, waste, fraud, and a total resistance to reform.

    This thing is just like the Titanic. It was doomed to sink as soon as FDR launched it in the 30’s.

    We are at the stage where we have already hit the iceberg, but not many people are aware of it yet because the band is still playing.

    • bpuharic

      Reactionary fanatical fundamentalism is a disaster, whether Wahabi Islamist or American right wing delusional economics

      The ‘blue’ welfare state is a 1st world economic system designed to protect American workers from economic excursions caused by business cycles. There’s no reason American workers should subsidize concentration of capital among the 1% with our families and our society.

      Joseph Stiglitz said the American right wants to socialize the risk and privatize the reward and that’s exactly what this type of fanaticism does. There’s a reason no country in the world has tried this fantasy as an economic system

      The reason we’re in such bad shape is BECAUSE the American right had total success at deregulating financial markets, enabling one of the greatest redistributions of wealth from the middle class to the wealthy in history.

      And now the right is unsatisfied the middle class wasn’t completely destroyed

      • Jeff Jones

        > The ‘blue’ welfare state is a 1st world economic system designed to protect American workers from economic excursions caused by business cycles.

        It takes a real suspension of disbelief to allow for a statement like that when southern Europe and so many blue states in the US are in the shape they are.

        Plus, it doesn’t make any difference what we believe. From here on out, the defined benefits of welfare states are going to be replaced with defined contribution plans, as they should. Those of us who have been saving for all of our adult lives will do just fine. And, I’m certainly not part of what you and yours call “the 1%.”

        • bpuharic

          The states with the poorest, least educated populations? Red states. States with highest infant mortatlity? Red states.

          And in case you hadn’t noticed, deregulating our financial markets did NOT cause a boom in the US unless you think an explosion and meltdown is a boom. We gave Wall Street EVERYTHING it asked for. How’d that work out?

          The right insists the middle class do more and more with less and less while it insists the 1% do less and less with more and more

          • Jeff Jones

            > The states with the poorest, least educated populations? Red states. States with highest infant mortatlity? Red states.

            Again, non-left slanted source please.

            And what do unregulated financial markets have to do with budget shortfalls in Southern Europe and the blue states? Those budgets did not just start having shortfalls in 2008.

            > the right insists the middle class do more and more with less and less.

            Why am I not seeing this? I am a middle class guy. Seems to me it’s the democrats who want to raise taxes. Or are you still under the delusion that the democrats only want to raise taxes on rich people.

            The dems wanted to raise taxes on anyone making over $250,000. That includes small business owners who pour most of that back into the business.

          • bpuharic

            Financial catastrophes are contagious. The worldwide meltdown was a financial one.

            Well run social democracies like Sweden, Canada and Germany weathered the storm better than we did because they had stronger banking regulations and because their middle class was better protected than ours is.

            The GOP wants to raise taxes on the middle class (they INSISTED on the payroll tax increase at the beginning of this year) while cutting them on the wealthy (Paul Ryan wants to eliminate capital gains taxes.)

            Small business owners are a vanishingly small percentage of people making over 250K.

          • Jeff Jones

            > Well run social democracies like Sweden, Canada and Germany weathered the storm better than we did because they had stronger banking regulations and because their middle class was better protected than ours is.

            I beg to differ. They weathered better because they’ve engaged in austerity, as this George Mason University study points out.

            Read the sections on Germany and Sweden. And, my NYT article already pointed out how Canada’s healthcare system is increasingly relying on private clinics, so you’re on shaky ground there too.

            http://mercatus.org/publication/austerity-relative-effects-tax-increases-versus-spending-cuts

          • bpuharic

            And we should have been doing the same instead of larding the rich with tax cuts and going to war in Iraq like the right insisted we do. Glad to see, however, you admit universal healthcare is possible! You’re making progress.

          • chip1

            Canada has lower taxes than the US now, and a much smaller debt.

            Sweden was on the brink of ruin until it shifted right by cutting taxes, privatizing hospitals and embracing market incentives.

            German banks have a massive exposure to deadbeat EU countries, which till now have been bailed out by the ECB.

            As for US banks, you do realize that the US govt through Fannie and Freddie held or back a majority of sub prime loans?

          • bpuharic

            Gee. Sweden AND Germany AND Canada have universal healthcare which the right says is impossible.

            And subprime loans weren’t the problem. CDO’s were since, in 2007 they amounted to over 600 TRILLION dollars.

            As a result of deregulation

          • cubanbob

            Right. Raising the tax rate to 40% and phasing out deductions is really going to get small business to hire. And then there is Democrate-Care. That’s really going help small business.

          • bpuharic

            Less than 1% of employees are affected by the employer mandate, but thanks for playing

          • Jeff Jones

            > Paul Ryan wants to eliminate capital gains taxes

            Good. That will work out great for middle class people like me who are enrolled in employee stock purchase programs.

            It pisses me off that the government taxes my stock awards as soon as they’re issued, then turns right around and taxes them again when I sell those shares.

            Yes…yes…I know. It will allow rich people to get out of being taxed twice. Who cares? Their success doesn’t affect me in the least. And any dollar that we can keep out of the hands of the most inefficient distributor of wealth in the history of the planet (the US gov’t) is one small win.

          • bpuharic

            Bad. But you’re a good little water carrier for Wall Street.

            The middle class gets virtually none of its income from investments.

            Funny, though, that the right loves capital gains tax cuts for the rich but doesn’t complain when 401K’s are taxed as ordinary income…

            There’s nothing Wall Street can do which would make the right wing not have a case of puppy love

          • Caiden

            He can’t give any, he thinks he’s Michael Moore, that we’ll accept anything he says as fact. Why are liberals always so damn stupid?

          • Jeff Jones

            I know. Finding neutral sources that debunk bpuharic’s laughable claims is the easiest thing I do all day.

          • bpuharic

            Why, then, don’t you post any?

            Oh. There aren’t any.

          • bpuharic

            I guess part of being right wing is not being able to google.

            States by median income

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_income#States_ranked_by_median_household_income

            Oh look! the 10 poorest are red states! Just like I said!

            Infant mortality by state:

            http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/states/INFANT_MORTALITY_RATES_STATE_2010.pdf

            8 out of the worst 10 are Red states, just like I said!

            Golly…almost as if you don’t know what y ou’re talking about.

            And it was the GOP that INSISTED payroll taxes be raised. They INSIST capital gains taxes be ELIMINATED

            Virtually no middle class workers get their income from investments

            You really need an education

          • evianalmighty

            What are the demographics for each red state.

          • bpuharic

            You saying race trumps policy? Red state policy is a failure?

            Hey…who am I to argue?

          • evianalmighty

            I am not saying anything. I just asked a question and you bring up race. Why would you do that?

          • bpuharic

            Because you did? See the word ‘demographics’?

            Oh. You don’t know what it means.

          • evianalmighty

            WOW! You really need to see someone. Demographics are everything from income to education. Race is just a tiny portion. That is unless you are a racist. Is that why you bring it up. You are one of those liberals that think blacks can not do for themselves and you must protect them from ever being wrong. Damn man. Racists like you disgust me.

          • bpuharic

            Conservatives like John Derbyshire and Victor David Hansen of National Review (the former who was fired for racism) are always telling us of ‘demographics’ that lead inner city blacks to commit crime, etc.

            You’re one of those conservatives who think code words are an excuse to cover failed policies.

          • evianalmighty

            Derbyshire did nothing wrong. Here are some facts for you. Detroit was 26% black in 1960 yet blacks committed 67% of all crime. This is why people moved out. After Coleman Young was elected and basically told all the non blacks that this is a black city you should move, it got worse. Do not where or how you grew up ,for me I grew up in the city with blacks. Blacks were the problem then and are even worse now. I live in DC now and though the city is better over all as the blacks move out it is still not safe in many areas. I have told my sons to watch out for blacks but they already knew as we were in PG county at the time. Black crime and racism destroyed Detroit.

          • bpuharic

            Rich Lowry, editor of National Review said he couldn’t tolerate Derb’s racist screed. That’s why he FIRED him.

            GO argue with him. You right wingers have a racist problem. It keeps cropping up.

            Deal with it.

          • cubanbob

            Walmart does more for the middle-class than any blue-state does.

          • Jeff Jones

            “The Gas Pipe” has done more for my middle class existence than any liberal social program. In other words, next to nothing.

          • bpuharic

            You mean like when their workers get govt subsidized food stamps because they can’t afford to feed their families?

            Again and again the right proves they’re socialists for the rich

          • Yale2001

            Keep believing whatever you wish as I sit back and watch the most liberal cities slowly fall until it engulfs the entire country. You will still deny the truth. Denial is many of Americans coping mechanism.

          • bpuharic

            States are in trouble. THe most conservative ones.

            I’ll sit back and watch right wing supply side economics continue to put people out of work while blowtorching the middle class

      • Doug

        Stiglitz is amusing. He has decided to provide intellectual cover for the redistributionist wing of the Democratic Party with the new voodoo economics – the claim that you can have redistribution and economic growth, too. He, along with most other Democrats, including President Obama, should read the book written by the famous liberal economist Arthur Okun in 1975 – “Equality and Efficiency – The Big Tradeoff.” Okun, who personally believed society would be fairer if everyone had the same income and wealth, understood that that policies to redistribute income came at the expense of economic growth, and that the point of smart policies was to find the right balance. Alas, Stiglitz and Obama and all the others on the Democratic left (is there any other part of the Democratic Party?) no longer understand this. The result is the stagnation and ongoing collapse of employment that we have seen during the Obama presidency.

        • bpuharic

          The right wing is redistributionist; it’s called TARP. You guys are socialists for the rich, with middle class money. It even has an acronym so I wouldn’t be too quick to slam Stiglitz.

          So you guys DID redistribute income from the middle class to the rich.

          But since the rich can do no wrong, according to the right wing, this is just WHY we have a middle class…it’s a social welfare program for the 1%

          • Doug

            I respectfully suggest that you read Okun’s book. It’s quite short and might open your mind a bit.

  • David Bennett

    Perhaps WRM meant Milwaukee.

  • David Bennett

    The blue social model is “certainly viable” if you don’t pay any attention to the fact that it is producing disastrous results.
    Although the last paragraph certainly contains one typo (7/hour) it may contain two; are most Americans working?

    • bpuharic

      Producing disastrous results? Yeah…like a viable middle class….certainly a disaster according to the right.

      • Jeff Jones

        Cite a source that shows any conservative saying a middle class is a disaster. And one of your vague references to the 1% won’t suffice.

        It’s you liberals who fear a strong middle class, because we don’t need you and your redistribution programs. You need us so you try to make it look like conservatives are out to get us. It is working less and less every day.

        • bpuharic

          Mitt Romney’s view that the 47% are moochers is hardly an isolated one among the 1%.

          The right has socialism for the rich and capitalism for the middle class. The wealthy get to gamble, knowing tthat the middle class will bail them out if they screw up, courtesy of right wing economics.

          • Jeff Jones

            hmmm. No source. Shocker.

          • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

            It is the so-called Right that has opposed ALL the bailouts from jump. If you don’t know that you don’t know much.

          • bpuharic

            Hmm…AKA locking the barn door.

            YOU guys created the conditions that made a bailout inevitable. YOU guys invented supply side economics and told us that if we gave the rich all our money they’d created jobs

            We did that. In 2007 we lost 9 million jobs

            You were saying.

      • Caiden

        Sorry, idiot, but where is the middle class in Detroit? I know you live in a fantasy world but do you think you moronic short statements are dazzling? You putz, you should have been aborted. That’s were conservatives are wrong, women abort babies that would grow up to be adult losers like you

      • Loader2000

        If you’ve read a lot of Mead’s stuff, you will realize that he thinks (and I agree) that the Blue Model worked very well in the 50’s and 60’s (when we had no foreign competition), but started crumbling in the 70’s (at which time we still had a 70% tax rate on the highest earners). The 70′
        s and early 80’s was a decade of slow economic growth because, for the first time, the US didn’t have a monopoly on trade throughout the free world, energy prices began to spike and disruptive technologies (like the PC) because to give lots of individuals the ability to break the monopoly that the very large government backed organizations (like AT&T) had over the entire country. Once those things happened, the Blue Model simply didn’t work any more (just like the small family farm simply didn’t work anymore at the turn of the century). If it had been working, the 70’s wouldn’t have been known as the decade of stagflation. It is time to move on to something better, and the faster we do it, the faster we get out of this painful transition period.

        • bpuharic

          The recent Piketty and Saez work showed that marginal rates of 80% is about the point that the rich stop investing

          And we gave ‘em the lowest tax rates in 60 years, in 2007. We lost 9 million jobs.

          I agree we need a new business model, but the 30 year old supply side Red model is a failure that the right will not admit.

  • David Bennett

    bpuharic, why do you think the right is not the middle class. The 1%ers are almost universally progressives at this point. The Wall Street that you rail against are the people contribute to progressive politicians. The remaining right exists in the middle class.

    • bpuharic

      Wall Street gave more money to Obama in 2008. They gave more money to Romney in 2012. The Koch Bros, etc. are not known for being progressives.

      The right is middle class, but it’s robustly resistant to evidence (e.g. 60% of Republicans are creationists.) They think America has the highest social mobility when it actually has the worst in the western world. They believe America is the land of opportunity, not realizing their own ideology has turned this country into an oligopoly

      • Jeff Jones

        News flash, bpuharic….bringing up the Koch brothers is tinfoil hat material.

        • bpuharic

          Yeah they don’t spend money on campaigns

          Funny that the richest 0.01% gave 28% of all campaign spending in 2012. But I’m sure they expect NOTHING for it. After all, the right wing tells us, the rich are beloved of god and are perfect

      • chip1

        The Koch Brothers aren’t Wall St. They build and own businesses.

        And why they’re relevant to a story about Chicago is is anyone’s guess, though I suppose psychological tics have no logical basis.

      • Doug

        And your evidence for your claim that “60% of Republicans are creationists” is what? How about if I claim that 60% of Democrats believe that vaccines cause autism? Or that 60% of Democrats believe that CO2 is a poisonous gas? I can make ridiculous stuff up, too.

        • bpuharic

          WHOA tall dark stranger. There’s a difference between the idiotic notion that vaccines cause autism, vs the idea that leprechauns caused our universe to exist.

      • Edward Royce

        “e.g. 60% of Republicans are creationists.”

        I call BS on that. Now prove this with facts or be exposed as a liar. Put up or STFU.

      • harkin

        At the senate climate hearings last week, the panel of scientists assembled were asked to raise their hands if they agreed with Obama’s recent claim that scientists agree that global warming was accelerating…..
        …..no hands were raised.

        • bpuharic

          And yet AGW is a fact that 98% of climate scientists say is happening.

          So the right wing is wrong

          Again.Even WRM admits it and he’s no liberal

      • Caiden

        Wow you’re just nuts. This country was the land of opportunity until the liberals made it fashionable to be a crybaby victim. Look at the OWS, a bunch of over privileged white kids crying their liberal art degrees didn’t get them jobs.
        The liberal idea that “you didn’t build that” and that it’s fair to “redistribute the wealth” made people who would have created bigger businesses decide not to expand, or maybe not even try to start their own company.
        The evil 1 percent you’re crying about are the people who provide jobs in the US, unlike the parasites who live off welfare and cry for Omabacare. Ironic the article mentioned how Chicago is propped up by 1 percenters who would leave if they realized how much idiots like you would steal all their money.
        Why do you get to decide who is rich and who is poor? because you’re a jealous loser angry and confused that you can’t afford health insurance.
        Oh spare me any claims you have insurance and are looking out for other people, we all know you’re worthless.

        • bpuharic

          Ah, Rush (PBUH) talking points. Sweet!

          OWS is a latecomer to the 30 year wage stagnation and lack of social mobility engendered by right wing supply side economics.

          The right keeps preaching that, if we give ALL our money to the rich god will make them create jobs.

          Proof? Well…there’s the 2007 recession in which capital gains taxes were lower than they’d been in 60 years. We deregulated Wall Street. CEO pay and Wall Street profits were at record highs

          And the middle class lost 9 million jobs

          But the right says we need to give the rich MORE money because we didn’t give ‘em enough, god bless ‘em!

      • Loader2000

        I bet the 60% statistic actually referred a question like, “Do you believe God played a role in creation” (or something like that) which covers whole a lot of different world views (of which creationism is only a small percentage) and to which 50% of democrats would probably have responded ‘Yes’. It is typical hyper-partisan spin (and willful hardheadedness) to describe that 60% statistics as referring to ‘creationists’. It is the kind of ridiculous idea you get when you read a lot of one-sided, singing to the choir, hyper-partisan websites for your news and information.

        • bpuharic

          Is there a reason right wingers don’t know how to Google? All you had to do is type in ‘60% of Republicans are creationists’ and BOOM! Up comes the Gallup poll

          You’re wrong.

          But it does say alot about the inability of the right to use and find data.

  • cubanbob

    Chicago is broke. Most Democrat run big cities are broke. There won’t be a bailout. There aren’t enough suckers and gamblers to buy the bonds to tie them over. There you have it.

    The only way out is to get policies in place that encourage real growth like that of the eighties. And that just isn’t going to happen in the next four years.

    • bpuharic

      Bankruptcy tends to happen when you suck the money out of the middle class and transfer it to the 1% like we just did in the financial meltdown. Funny how the right can’t link cause and effect.

      ALL…repeat…ALL of the income growth in the last 3 years went to the 1%.

      • Doug

        That is almost solely the result of the Fed’s actions. Whether you want to blame Obama for that or not is your choice.

      • larryj8

        Funny, my income went up over the last 3 years and I’m far from the 1%. I upped my income, up yours.
        In addition, the federal government is spending $1 trillion a year on social welfare programs and that doesn’t include Social Security or Medicare. Sounds like a lot of money is being given to the bottom 47%.

        • bpuharic

          Hey I love the Reader’s Digest. All those little anecdotes and stories about your neighbor’s hairdresser…

          But liberals argue evidence. Conservatives argue anecdotes. And the DATA shows the middle class hasn’t had a raise in 30 year

          But you stick with the Digest. They have some great recipes in there.

      • Edward Royce

        And who was President? And which party controlled the US Senate? And the House in 2009-2010? And who controls Chicago? And who controls Illinois?

        C’mon I know you can connect those dots right? Right?

        • bpuharic

          You mean the GOP which controlled congress AND the presidency for the 6 years leading up to the financial meltdown?

      • cubanbob

        When are you going to stop with this tedious and stupid class-warfare garbage? Your problem is your envy of those who can and do earn a lot more than you because they can and you can’t. Get over it. Move On.

        • bpuharic

          And the same question can be asked of the right which INSISTS that, no matter WHAT the evidence says, the middle class is doing just fine.

          Wrong.

      • Loader2000

        Actually, during the financial meltdown, the 1% lost ground to the rest of us. In other words, the gap in income between the 1% and the 99% actually shrunk slightly in 2009. That is because the largest loss of wealth happened to stock and real estates markets where the wealthy put most of their money. After the meltdown, the only real improvement in the economy was that the stock market rebounded, which, of course, put a majority of money the wealthy lost in 2009 back into their pockets. Technological transitional periods (like the early decades of the industrial revolution) always favor the wealthy as they are best positioned to profit from disruptive technology. This is what is happening right now. However, last time this occurred, the rest of us did eventually catch up. The same thing will probably happen again, and the the faster we can push through the early phase and embrace change, the faster it will happen.

  • http://whenfallsthecoliseum.com/author/kwatson/ megapotamus

    At the very end is the most important bit. Even a recovery with a seven-handle on national growth can only DELAY the reform of urban socialism. And it doesn’t matter if one is a virtuous Progressive like Weiner or Rahm, the money isn’t there and isn’t coming. Cities, counties and states across the country are indeed in the same pickle barrel but above all, the federal govt, with some $300t in unfunded pension and medical obligations and far, far more in promised spending that both Wall Street and Main Street depend upon, hovers. For the moment.

    • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

      The political viability of these socialist systems rests on a plurality of voters being unaware of how they really work which is why the Democrats like big, complicated polities. It lets them hide the pea better in this con game.

      But this model viability through over-complexity scam isn’t long term viable either as more people get better computing power on their desktops and transparency has a powerful narrative that Democrats buy into as well.

      http://www.citizenintelligence.org

      • ChuckFinley

        Good point. As people catch on to the fact that the game of three card monty is rigged, Democrats respond by offering four card monty, twelve card monty and fifty card monty. These games are all more complicated but they have one unchanging rule that the sucker always loses.

      • bpuharic

        The right has socialism for the rich. They just call it TARP. Or capital gains tax cuts. But it’s socialism.

        • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

          I believe you’re referring to the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008″, when you say TARP. You really ought to look at the roll call vote in the House:

          http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml

          Nobody covered themselves in glory there but the majority of the yes vote came from Democrats and the majority of the no vote came from Republicans.

          • bpuharic

            This is truly hysterical, watching the right spin this

            They set up the conditions for the disaster. THEN they try to tell us how pure they were to vote against TARP

            It merely shows, quite frankly, what whackos and fringe fanatics the right truly has. There was NO CHOICE! Credit was frozen. The economy had ground to a halt. But the right tells us how they understand economics

            Quite frankly, they understand nothing. Not a doggone thing. It’s amazing they can even drive.

          • http://chicagoboyz.net/ TMLutas

            Funny how the right says the exact same thing about the left. If you look at the history, the right’s story is better. We’ve been predicting disaster for Detroit for, literally, decades while the left played rah rah games about Detroit’s prospects and how one more push would bring the city back.

            On TARP, two words would have made that crap sandwich a one time emergency and not the model for things to come it actually became, “insufficiently insured”. Instead of calling these institutions TBTF, call them insufficiently insured and watch how they shrink as they desperately try to escape that label and customers abandon them in droves, shrinking them naturally. Instead they’re just as big and insufficiently insured as before but with a lot of our tax dollars in their pockets.

  • Alarms & Discursions

    Have no doubt, when Chicago collapses, the GOP will be blamed.

  • ChuckFinley

    There is a silver lining in the news that Chicago is following Detroit into economic collapse.

    It demonstrates that it is the policies of corrupt Democrat machine politics that bankrupt cities and not because Detroit is run by black Democrats. The white Democrats who misrule Chicago are producing the same disastrous results as the black Democrats who misrule Detroit.

    In the aftermath of the racial antagonism ginned up over the Trayvon Martin incident, it is nice to see some good news when it comes to race relations.

    • bpuharic

      And all those white Republican Wall Street bankers like George Bush…how’d they do for our economy in 2007?

      • ChuckFinley

        George Bush was a Wall Street banker? When was that?

        • bpuharic

          He was a failed oil man bankrolled by daddy’s pals

          What’s the difference

          • ChuckFinley

            The difference is that he was not a Wall Street banker like you originally stated. If you don’t care about facts or accuracy then I guess you won’t care about the difference.

          • bpuharic

            They all wrecked the economy. You want to split hairs

            Let me send you a nice Kyocera set of ceramic scissors I just bought. You’ll need ‘em.

          • ChuckFinley

            When Bush was President the unemployment rate was 4.5 %. The only reason Obama’s unemployment rate is reported as less than twice that is because they don’t count people who have been out of work too long.

  • Steve Lisicki

    Why did Boeing relocate to Chicago? This has always made little to no economic/fiduciary sense. Unless you look at the move as an attempt to keep the Democratic machine off their backs with their moves to right to work states. Dems provided enough bluster to cover their backsides, but still allowed Boeing to go to S.C.

    • bpuharic

      Funny that the right complains about unions even though it was Wall Street that blew a 19 trillion dollar hole in our economy

      But the right has a bad case of puppy love

      • Brakedust

        Let’s say you’re right about Wall Street. Nothing, but nothing can compare to the ballooning pension liabilities. Today’s 18 billion dollar Illinois shortfall is estimated to grow to 350 billion by 2025. Across localities, states and Federal entities…it’s clearly a black hole, dude. Maybe you’re on that gravy train?

        • bpuharic

          One of the reasons we have the pension liabilities is the tax payer base shrank after Wall Street put 8 million taxpayers out of work. believe it or not, taxpayer base as ALOT to do with tax revenue.

          And it’s going to keep happening as long as we refuse to break up the banks and institute real banking reform…opposed by conservatives

  • kurt9

    Socialism fails when other peoples’ money runs out.

    • Rick Caird

      That does seem to be the case in both Detroit and Chicago (as well as all over California). One proposed solution is to dump a bunch of the health care shortfall on ObamaCare, so we all get to pay for it.

  • Rich K

    But but but it’s Obama’s Boy running it so how on earth could it ever fail.Idiots and crooks the lot of them.

  • Yale2001

    One by one we watch them fall. Simply look at the population of blacks and percentage of blacks running each city and you can determine the next ones that will go..

    • bpuharic

      Conservatives aren’t racist. Nah. Not at all

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2014 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service