RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: America's largest cities drowning in debt - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

America's largest cities drowning in debt with Chicago leading the way, study finds Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   MTP Reggie 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 36,820
  • Joined: 13-January 04

Posted 15 May 2019 - 07:26 AM

America's largest cities drowning in debt, with Chicago leading the way, study finds
By Frank Miles
Fox News
05/14/2019

<More Surprise Here Because We All Know How Well democrats Manage Money>

America's 10 largest cities, largely Democrat strongholds, are drowning in municipal debt, according to a new report from government watchdog Truth in Accounting. The report sought out "to determine what ... overlapping financial entities mean for taxpayers' bottom line." Truth in Accounting said its purpose was to "calculate the various bills (and surpluses, when available) at the city government level and divide them out to determine a per-Taxpayer Burden."

The two cities with the highest burden: Chicago and New York City; Chicago's combined taxpayer burden: $119,110; New York City's combined taxpayer burden: $85,600. Chicago has been a hotbed for such burdens. The Chicago City Council approved $2.4 billion in tax subsidies for two major developments in early April. Protesters gathered at City Hall chanting against the deals. Critics said the projects are in prosperous parts of Chicago and developers should pay for infrastructure improvements, not taxpayers.

  • Chicago's combined Taxpayer Burden: $119,110
  • New York City's combined Taxpayer Burden: $85,600
  • Los Angeles' combined Taxpayer Burden: $56,390
  • Philadelphia's combined Taxpayer Burden: $50,120
  • San Jose's combined Taxpayer Burden: $43,120
  • San Diego's combined Taxpayer Burden: $35,410
  • Dallas' combined Taxpayer Burden: $33,490
  • Houston's combined Taxpayer Burden: $22,940
  • San Antonio's combined Taxpayer Burden: $16,660
  • Phoenix's combined Taxpayer Burden: $13,290 ​​​​​​


Forbes reported that the city's taxpayer burden is attached to unfunded retirement obligations amassed over of a number of years: $39 billion in retirement benefits have been promised; $28 billion in pension and $842.9 million in retiree health care benefits haven't been funded.

(snip)

<More Surprise Here Because We All Know How Well democrats Manage Money>

This post has been edited by MTP Reggie: 15 May 2019 - 07:29 AM

0

#2 User is offline   zurg 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,365
  • Joined: 19-October 09

Posted 15 May 2019 - 07:54 AM

I wonder if Russians have graphs plotting “per taxpayer indebtedness” versus “democrat voters as percentage of taxpayers” ..... :whistling:
0

#3 User is offline   Martin 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Gold Community Supporter
  • Posts: 8,029
  • Joined: 02-July 03

Posted 15 May 2019 - 08:00 AM

During New York City's debt crisis of 1975, Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed, "The per capita debt of New York City is $2,400, while that of Chicago is $400." (These were 1975 dollars, remember.) "Just about any working man can pay a $400 debt. Most cannot pay a $2,400 debt. And that is realty all there is to say on the subject."

Debts which cannot be paid, won't be paid. The indebted cities will naturally demand a federal bailout from a government which itself is heavily in debt. That bailout will come in the form of high inflation, which really means gradual, continual expropriation of the creditors.
0

#4 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,876
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 15 May 2019 - 08:20 AM

View PostMTP Reggie, on 15 May 2019 - 07:26 AM, said:



The two cities with the highest burden: Chicago and New York City; Chicago's combined taxpayer burden: $119,110; New York City's combined taxpayer burden: $85,600. Chicago has been a hotbed for such burdens. The Chicago City Council approved $2.4 billion in tax subsidies for two major developments in early April. Protesters gathered at City Hall chanting against the deals. Critics said the projects are in prosperous parts of Chicago and developers should pay for infrastructure improvements, not taxpayers.

  • Chicago's combined Taxpayer Burden: $119,110
  • New York City's combined Taxpayer Burden: $85,600



Chicago is actually MUCH worse off than NYC. More so than even these numbers suggest.

Chicago's $119,110 taxpayer burden is 3.3x the city's median per-capita income of $36,010. NYC's $85,600 is (only) 1.7x the median income of $50,825. In relative terms that puts Chicago almost twice as bad off as NYC. It's one thing to have debt; It's quite another to have debt and no hope of ever paying it off.

For perspective, compare to household debt: As of 2018, The average American has about $38K in personal debt (car loans, credit cards, etc., but excluding mortgages) which is about 79% of US median per-capita income of $48,150. That's manageable... but only just barely. An individual with 3.3x their income in personal debt would have trouble making even minimum/interest-only payments let alone paying down any principal.

And that's essentially where Chicago is at.

This post has been edited by Dean Adam Smithee: 15 May 2019 - 08:21 AM

0

#5 User is offline   Noclevermoniker 

  • Wire Dachsies Matter
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,500
  • Joined: 13-November 03

Posted 15 May 2019 - 08:21 AM

Of the three Texas cities: All heavily and nearly continuously Dem ruled. Underfunded pensions for public employees are the culprits in Houston, and I'll bet the same for Dallas and San Antonio. There's a lot more glamour in trotting out the newest park, for "under-served" (and undeserving) "community" yutes, or system of (unused) bike lanes in the city, and merely paying off debt is so unsexy....
0

#6 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,876
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 15 May 2019 - 08:45 AM

View PostNoclevermoniker, on 15 May 2019 - 08:21 AM, said:

Of the three Texas cities: All heavily and nearly continuously Dem ruled. Underfunded pensions for public employees are the culprits in Houston, and I'll bet the same for Dallas and San Antonio. There's a lot more glamour in trotting out the newest park, for "under-served" (and undeserving) "community" yutes, or system of (unused) bike lanes in the city, and merely paying off debt is so unsexy....


Atlanta just barely missed the list at $11,400. And, YES, heavily and continuously Democrat ruled. The last Republican mayor of Atlanta was in 1879.
0

#7 User is offline   Natural Selection 

  • Decrypt the truth
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 18,689
  • Joined: 31-December 03

Posted 15 May 2019 - 08:49 AM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 15 May 2019 - 08:20 AM, said:

Chicago is actually MUCH worse off than NYC. More so than even these numbers suggest.

Chicago's $119,110 taxpayer burden is 3.3x the city's median per-capita income of $36,010. NYC's $85,600 is (only) 1.7x the median income of $50,825. In relative terms that puts Chicago almost twice as bad off as NYC. It's one thing to have debt; It's quite another to have debt and no hope of ever paying it off.

For perspective, compare to household debt: As of 2018, The average American has about $38K in personal debt (car loans, credit cards, etc., but excluding mortgages) which is about 79% of US median per-capita income of $48,150. That's manageable... but only just barely. An individual with 3.3x their income in personal debt would have trouble making even minimum/interest-only payments let alone paying down any principal.

And that's essentially where Chicago is at.


Thanks to public sector unions and the politicians who give them unfunded pensions in exchange for votes.
0

#8 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 26,144
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 15 May 2019 - 09:21 AM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 15 May 2019 - 08:20 AM, said:

Chicago is actually MUCH worse off than NYC. More so than even these numbers suggest.

Chicago's $119,110 taxpayer burden is 3.3x the city's median per-capita income of $36,010. NYC's $85,600 is (only) 1.7x the median income of $50,825. In relative terms that puts Chicago almost twice as bad off as NYC. It's one thing to have debt; It's quite another to have debt and no hope of ever paying it off.

For perspective, compare to household debt: As of 2018, The average American has about $38K in personal debt (car loans, credit cards, etc., but excluding mortgages) which is about 79% of US median per-capita income of $48,150. That's manageable... but only just barely. An individual with 3.3x their income in personal debt would have trouble making even minimum/interest-only payments let alone paying down any principal.

And that's essentially where Chicago is at.


Guess me and the wife are 'abnormal' then....
Credit card/car/personal debt etc etc about $1200.00
Other than our oldest car loan and student loans which we are co signed on the only other debt(s) we have is the house.

But, people need to understand that $ = votes, and since those dollars never come out of elected cretins pockets and THEY never feel the pain they are essentially free to spend how ever they want.


Oki
0

#9 User is offline   USMCforever60 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 825
  • Joined: 02-November 04

Posted 15 May 2019 - 09:37 AM

Dallas, Houston and San Antonio went in the proverbial S***er in the last 10 yrs. Dallas is the worst, duly elected retard/dip-sh** (yea redundant) people who have never had to make a payroll or live on a trust fund. I miss the 60's!
0

#10 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 6,780
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 15 May 2019 - 10:27 AM

Go figure.

Elect libtards, pay the cost.
0

#11 User is online   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 32,231
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 16 May 2019 - 04:27 AM

View PostRedSoloCup, on 15 May 2019 - 10:27 AM, said:

Go figure.

Elect libtards, pay the cost.

My city has elected nothing but dumbascraps since the early 1960's, hence why they are spending us into bankruptcy too. Even with our city worker "pension crisis" they refuse to cut any spending for useless feel good social programs.

Again, once I retire and do not have to commute for work, I'm outta here after living here for all of my life.

I'm off to the rural area where life is much more peaceful and cheaper to live, fewer taxes, non-existent crime, fewer busy bodies and no proggy libtards anywhere.
0

#12 User is offline   GhostOfAndrewJackson 

  • <no title>
  • Group: 100+ Posts NonDonor
  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 17-April 19

Posted 16 May 2019 - 08:35 PM

View PostRock N, on 16 May 2019 - 04:27 AM, said:

I'm off to the rural area where life is much more peaceful and cheaper to live, fewer taxes, non-existent crime, fewer busy bodies and no proggy libtards anywhere.


LOL, with some of that you are going to be so disappointed. A lot of rural areas derived income from massively subsidized industries or government facilities, they often talk a good talk, but vote for their vested interest. Most want conservative social issues and big government spending.

When I moved out, I ran a long series of soil experiments and agricuture/horticulture experiments on my own land. Never said a thing about what I was doing. People would drive by, slow down, shout stuff from their window like, you are wasting you time yo idiot, etc, etc. Then about 5 years later, I was in town and an old farmer came up to me and said "When I first saw you I thought you were a dumb-fu**, but then I tasted your dirt. That is the best damn dirt I ever ate. Don't ever give away your dirt. Guess you aren't such a dumb-fu** after all, My name is Wilbur, be pleased if you call me friend".

Turns out everyone knew every move I made, knew where I came from, knew what I had deposited in the local bank, knew I paid cash for the property, new what plants I brought in, what UPS shipped me etc, etc. And obviously people were pulling soil samples. I had one person ask me why my lights were on and moving though my house at 2am and 3am when I was up and working at 6am. They also knew every woman I had a relationship with in the area, and what I bought at the grocery store. I had one guy ask me why I did not drink (I never mentioned that to anybody). They also knew that (then) my favorite beverage was Dublin Dr. Pepper, something I had shipped in.

Also found out a lot of meth was made in rural areas. Funny no one did anything about that.

So yeah, more peaceful and cheaper to live, fewer taxes: check, check and check.

non-existent crime, fewer busy bodies and no proggy libtards: nope, nope, and nope.

Good luck wherever you land.

This post has been edited by GhostOfAndrewJackson: 16 May 2019 - 08:38 PM

0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users