[60654]

I hear taxes brought up a lot, but they're actually on par with major metro areas. Let's compare Chicago to SF:

1. Effective property tax rate: SF ~1.2%, Chicago ~1.7% *

2. State income tax: SF 9.3%+, Chicago 4.95%

3. Combined state, county + city sales tax: SF 8.5%, Chicago 10.25%

(* But property taxes do get much higher in the suburban townships!)

Altogether, the lower state income tax more than offsets the slightly higher property tax.

But taxes is a favorite bugbear in local political campaigns, because they're an easy item for politicians to harp on (who doesn't want lower taxes after all?). The other day I saw a political ad where the actor proclaimed, "I'm moving out of Illinois because taxes are too high! Support XYZ for governor." But let's be honest, uprooting one's family just to optimize a few percentage points on the tax return is a terrible idea. And as long as there are good jobs available, taxes are just one living expense among many.

As for the other items, I can't agree with them either. Chicago Public Schools are totally fine - they're very much focused on educating working-class and/or immigrant kids, so they're not like rich suburban schools with all the bells and whistles, but they do their job very well. And the magnet schools are top notch. Public works are a patchwork, but for example CTA is very well funded and runs much better than either MTA or MUNI. As for corruption - ok, I'll give you that one. ;)

[lotsofpulp]

If you're thinking about long term, 10 to 20+ years into the future, you need to look at the state's debt, namely unfunded defined benefit pension obligations. IL is the worst, and that's using rosy assumptions:

https://graphics.wsj.com/table/Connecticut_102015

Combined with the fact that the rest of IL isn't burgeoning, and that Chicago is the main source of income, it would be prudent to expect ever increasing taxes and reduced services. Other states also have problems, but there are a few states whose problems are in another league.

Personally, I would need a big discount to consider Chicago, as being outdoors is a big part of my life.

[60654]

Yeah, if the pension plan had no assets, the state would be in deep trouble, as would most others. But in terms of pension cashflow as a fraction of total assets, IL is actually doing really well, better than the vast majority of states: https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-bri...

Which is what allowed politicians to kick the can down the road for so long. So yes, there is a hole and it needs to be plugged. But this is a big state, plan assets are considerable, and there's a lot of new contributions coming in all the time as well. This won't trigger "ever increasing taxes" as some doomsaying politicians put it, there can be a correction once there is political will to do so.

[lotsofpulp]

The deficit is including any returns on existing plan assets. And each year, the share of the tax receipts that go towards paying debt (including pensions) keeps increasing. Obviously, something will have to be cut to make up for this.

[phatboyslim]

Most families (who likely pay the most in property tax) live in the surrounding suburbs, which as you have noted are indeed much higher in terms of property tax. Similar suburbs around Nashville are averaging 50-70% lower property tax rates, which is significant enough to move oneself out of the state. This is only going to increase the tax burden for the remainder of residents of the state. The city proper only comprises 2.7m residents per the 2010 census, while the metro area is 9.5m residents.

My evidence on the other items is anecdotal, but that is my opinion and I'm understanding of the fact others may disagree.