Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
Eugenie Danglars
Posts: 2353
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby Eugenie Danglars » Sun May 15, 2011 7:16 pm

What's the sales tax in Chicago?

User avatar
Emma.
Posts: 2401
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby Emma. » Sun May 15, 2011 7:40 pm

Eugenie Danglars wrote:What's the sales tax in Chicago?


Ridiculous. 9.5% or something?

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby ahduth » Sun May 15, 2011 8:27 pm

Emma. wrote:
Eugenie Danglars wrote:What's the sales tax in Chicago?


Ridiculous. 9.5% or something?


9.75%

They really need to lower it and institute an income tax like New York. The current setup is regressive and offends my bleeding heart liberal tendencies.

They also need to start charging congestion fees on people who drive into the city for work. That's an entirely separate issue, but the CTA is near and dear to my heart, smelly homeless people and all.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby 09042014 » Sun May 15, 2011 8:58 pm

ahduth wrote:
Emma. wrote:
Eugenie Danglars wrote:What's the sales tax in Chicago?


Ridiculous. 9.5% or something?


9.75%

They really need to lower it and institute an income tax like New York. The current setup is regressive and offends my bleeding heart liberal tendencies.

They also need to start charging congestion fees on people who drive into the city for work. That's an entirely separate issue, but the CTA is near and dear to my heart, smelly homeless people and all.


If Chicago started charging congestion fees the city would die. Even without them, plenty of business flees to the suburbs. Also the CTA barely exists city limits other than the Skokie Swift. And Metra pretty much only works if you work in the loop.

They need to figure out how to rework the Junction, and how to clear out the Dan Ryan better at night. Otherwise traffic flow isn't too bad in teh city.

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby ahduth » Sun May 15, 2011 10:29 pm

Desert Fox wrote:If Chicago started charging congestion fees the city would die. Even without them, plenty of business flees to the suburbs. Also the CTA barely exists city limits other than the Skokie Swift. And Metra pretty much only works if you work in the loop.

They need to figure out how to rework the Junction, and how to clear out the Dan Ryan better at night. Otherwise traffic flow isn't too bad in teh city.


This seems to be the standard corporatist argument against congestion charges. "We're not New York, we're not London, business will flee and our tax base will dry up."

You yourself point out that businesses have been fleeing to the suburbs wholesale for years. What businesses are going to be driven out by a congestion fee/tax? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... litan_area

I'll give you Pepsi and the insurance companies, kind of. These businesses still rely on highly educated professionals, a large number of whom prefer to live in an urban environment.

The point of a congestion charge would be to fund improvements to the CTA, and maybe the Metra, depending on the degree to which the suburbs were willing to pony up money. It is not to reduce congestion in the city. The last round of fighting over CTA funding resulted in the suburbs saying screw off, and bus routes being cut and train service being cut back. This disproportionately impacts the less well off residents in the city. And less obviously, the suburbs have no interest in having a dying metropolis at the center of their metropolitan area, no matter how short sighted and self-centered they are. Force them to pay - if the city shrinks, I'll be heartbroken that there's less traffic.

User avatar
Eugenie Danglars
Posts: 2353
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 12:04 pm

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby Eugenie Danglars » Mon May 16, 2011 12:13 am

9.75%?????????????/


Holy crap. :shock: That's a freaking tithe!

RTFM
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:45 pm

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby RTFM » Tue May 17, 2011 1:42 am

Eugenie Danglars wrote:9.75%?????????????/


Holy crap. :shock: That's a freaking tithe!


It was 10.25% (highest in the country) until last July. I drove out to the suburbs to buy my computer.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Chicago native (8 years) answering any ?'s about the Chi

Postby 09042014 » Tue May 17, 2011 2:10 am

ahduth wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:If Chicago started charging congestion fees the city would die. Even without them, plenty of business flees to the suburbs. Also the CTA barely exists city limits other than the Skokie Swift. And Metra pretty much only works if you work in the loop.

They need to figure out how to rework the Junction, and how to clear out the Dan Ryan better at night. Otherwise traffic flow isn't too bad in teh city.


This seems to be the standard corporatist argument against congestion charges. "We're not New York, we're not London, business will flee and our tax base will dry up."

You yourself point out that businesses have been fleeing to the suburbs wholesale for years. What businesses are going to be driven out by a congestion fee/tax? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... litan_area

I'll give you Pepsi and the insurance companies, kind of. These businesses still rely on highly educated professionals, a large number of whom prefer to live in an urban environment.

The point of a congestion charge would be to fund improvements to the CTA, and maybe the Metra, depending on the degree to which the suburbs were willing to pony up money. It is not to reduce congestion in the city. The last round of fighting over CTA funding resulted in the suburbs saying screw off, and bus routes being cut and train service being cut back. This disproportionately impacts the less well off residents in the city. And less obviously, the suburbs have no interest in having a dying metropolis at the center of their metropolitan area, no matter how short sighted and self-centered they are. Force them to pay - if the city shrinks, I'll be heartbroken that there's less traffic.



Look at the list of companies in city limits and look at the ones in the metro area (aka the surburbs). Pepsi is already in Schaumburg. Along with most of the major corporations in the area.

These businesses still rely on highly educated professionals, a large number of whom prefer to live in an urban environment.


When they are 25 and childless but when they are 30 with two kids they like living in Palatine or Arlington Heights. Less than a third of people in the metro area actually live in the city. And a bunch of those live in psuedo suburubs on the NW side. The commuters aren't driving for shits and giggles.

The point of a congestion charge would be to fund improvements to the CTA, and maybe the Metra, depending on the degree to which the suburbs were willing to pony up money. It is not to reduce congestion in the city. The last round of fighting over CTA funding resulted in the suburbs saying screw off, and bus routes being cut and train service being cut back.


The CTA doesn't really go to the Surburbs. If you live in the Surburbs, it's drive or take the Metra. That's the only options. And things like the Skokie swift or the park and ride near the blue lines suck ass because it still takes an hour to get downtown after driving there.

And less obviously, the suburbs have no interest in having a dying metropolis at the center of their metropolitan area, no matter how short sighted and self-centered they are. Force them to pay - if the city shrinks, I'll be heartbroken that there's less traffic.


Are you kidding me? Schaumburg, AH, Skokie, Tinly Park, Bollingbrook, Naperville, etc etc thrive off of business fleeing the city.

You aren't going to fit the 9 million Chicagoans into the city which currently holds 2.5 mil.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests