Sig, what is outrageous is that Illinois has no way of actually paying for these pensions. The State has been downgraded 21 times since 2009, and this is all driven by the pension crisis. The answer from Illinois politicians continues to be more tax hikes. But Illinois is losing residents and businesses at an alarming rate.
You talk about what is a fair wage. The Illinois Policy Institute claims that Illinois State Workers are the highest paid State workers in the US when adjusted for each State's Cost-of-living Index. https://www.illinoispolicy.org/reports/illinois-state-workers-highest-paid-in-nation/
I personally have absolutely NO problem with the average Illinois State worker pay level of $59K. But if you want to continue with your assertion that paying School District Superintendents $330K per year and small local government executives and small town managers $250K per year is necessary - I would strongly beg to differ.
I pulled this from an October 2019 article from the Chicago Tribune: "Real estate professionals like Tom Keefe, owner of Keefe Real Estate in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, have noticed an influx of Chicago residents moving to The Badger State for a number of reasons, but the lower tax burden seems to trump them all.
“For the same size house in Illinois, taxes are triple and quadruple what they are in Wisconsin. And a lot of people think the services here are just as good, if not better, particularly when it comes to schooling,” he said."
You talk about what is a fair wage. The Illinois Policy Institute claims that Illinois State Workers are the highest paid State workers in the US when adjusted for each State's Cost-of-living Index. https://www.illinoispolicy.org/reports/illinois-state-workers-highest-paid-in-nation/
I personally have absolutely NO problem with the average Illinois State worker pay level of $59K. But if you want to continue with your assertion that paying School District Superintendents $330K per year and small local government executives and small town managers $250K per year is necessary - I would strongly beg to differ.
I pulled this from an October 2019 article from the Chicago Tribune: "Real estate professionals like Tom Keefe, owner of Keefe Real Estate in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, have noticed an influx of Chicago residents moving to The Badger State for a number of reasons, but the lower tax burden seems to trump them all.
“For the same size house in Illinois, taxes are triple and quadruple what they are in Wisconsin. And a lot of people think the services here are just as good, if not better, particularly when it comes to schooling,” he said."
In what universe is $100,000 a year some outrageous salary that should be utterly verboten for any public employee? Heck, that's a starting salary for a bunch of fields. Most military officers cross $100K at just past the 10 year mark unless they're living in govt housing, and yet pretty much every one of us got a major pay raise when we got out indicating that we were underpaid relative to our skill level...should we all be outraged that we're paying military folks that much despite the fact that apparently the market thinks they're worth more?
Get real people, it's not the 1950s any more! Over 14 million Americans make over $100K a year, it's not some outrageous salary that should lead to this kind of outrage. And no, the benefits of working for the government aren't worth nearly what you're all making them out to be, most could be replicated for not a lot.
And honestly, how many of you getting apoplectic about this also complain about all public service employees being stupid and worthless? Do you honestly expect that you should be able to pay a group of people crap and then somehow expect the best and brightest to go take those jobs?
Certainly there are some issues with public sector benefits, specifically the practice that is still ensconced in many union contracts of basing retirement on high 1, 2, or 3 and including overtime in those high years. But arbitrarily deciding that $100K a year is an outrage...is itself a bit of an outrage.