Chicago Political Economy Group – Chicago Newstips by Community Media Workshop http://www.newstips.org Chicago Community Stories Mon, 08 Jan 2018 18:45:05 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.4.13 Don’t fear 15 http://www.newstips.org/2013/08/dont-fear-15/ Thu, 29 Aug 2013 23:07:21 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=7652 With fast-food and retailer workers striking in 58 cities Thursday — a dramatic increase over the seven cities where similar actions took place last month — calling for a $15-an-hour wage, here’s an interesting historical note:

Fifty years ago, when Martin Luther King spoke at the March on Washington, one of the demands was a minimum wage increase from $1.15 to $2 an hour.  That would be just over $15 in today’s dollars.

In case we’re tempted to get carried away with this “dream,” the Chicago Tribune offers us University of Chicago economist Allen Sanderson’s advice: “Don’t fight for 15.”

All in all, it’s a pretty thorough demonstration of how far the dismal science can stray from any connection with reality.

First of all, he warns that if workers become too expensive, they risk being replaced by automation.  In fact, though, it’s really hard to imagine how much more automated McDonald’s could be.   Or to picture computerized checkouts at Macy’s.

He suggests higher wages would mean even higher unemployment rates for minority teens.  That might be a factor if there were a better job market for older people, but there isn’t — especially with an economy that is quickly replacing middle-class jobs with low-wage ones.

More than half of new jobs are in low-wage retail and hospitality sectors, according to the Chicago Political Economy Group.  And the number of college graduates earning minimum wage is steadily growing.

In fact the surge in youth unemployment came before the 2008 crash, while the economy was growing (not very fast), as federal funding for youth jobs was eliminated.  As we noted at the time, it was the first economic recovery in which youth unempoyment increased.  That was without a minimum wage hike, too.

Really poor?

Sanderson then looks into the “claim” that “one can’t live on $8.25 an hour and that someone working full-time would be in poverty.”  Not true at all, he says — a full-time minimum wage worker earns $16,500 a year, a generous $1,000 above the federal poverty level for a two-person household.

Of course, if the full-time worker had two kids rather than one, the family would be at about 20 percent below the poverty level.  Which is not exactly quibbling.

But the reality is that only about one-third of minimum wage workers have full-time jobs.  That’s one of the reasons fast-food workers want a union — so they can negotiate over things like scheduling.

And the poverty level is widely discredited.  It was developed in the 1960s and is based on a moderate food budget, multiplied by three.  But since then other costs — particularly housing and health care — have grown at a much higher clip.

In 2009 the Social Impact Research Center of the Heartland Alliance estimated (pdf) that in order to meet basic needs in Illinois — housing, child care, food, transportation, and health care — using tax credits but not public benefits (with no allowance for leisure, travel, or emergencies), a single parent of two children would have to earn $23 an hour.

WBEZ recently profiled a part-time Macy’s worker who earns minimum wage plus commissions.  She also works second part-time for minimum wage as a telemarketer.  She’s got four children and a partner who also works a minimum wage job.  She’s also on food stamps and Medicaid.

“At the end of the week, I still don’t have enough money to put food on the table and clothes on my children’s back,” she says.

Who pays?

A crucial question, Sanderson says, is who will end up paying for these wage increases.  Will it be stockholders with lower returns, or customers with higher prices?

We looked at this a couple weeks ago, when the Tribune asked whether customers would be willing to pay higher prices to cover higher wages — but failed to give any idea of what those prices might be.  You’d think an economist would be interested in this detail.

Economists Jeanette Wicks-Lim and Robert Pollin of the University of Massachusetts have indeed looked into this — they say a $15-an-hour wage for McDonald’s workers would raise the average  price of a Big Mac by 22 cents.  Ouch!

How about McDonald’s shareholders?  According to Paul Buchheit, the corporation’s profits average out to $18,200 per worker.  There’s certainly room to pay a little more without too much pain at the top.

But there’s another question that’s just as crucial, which never seems to get asked: who pays for the low-wage economy?  Besides Macy’s workers who can’t quite cover food and clothes, that is.

Who pays for the food stamps and Medicaid to supplement Macy’s minimum wage?  Who pays the $5,815 a year that an average Wal-Mart worker gets in public benefits?

First in line, of course, are taxpayers — which in Illinois disproportionately means individuals over corportions (the state leads in several outmoded tax loopholes for corporations, and two-thirds of corporations in the state pay no income tax), and with our regressive tax structure, it means moderate-income taxpayers bear a heavier burden.

Right after that come all the residents who don’t get the services they need — like the hundreds of thousands who’ve had their health care cut, including hundreds of medically-fragile children and many others shunted into nursing homes.  Or the thousands of Chicago schoolchildren who don’t have libraries or art teachers.

Because Macy’s and Wal-Mart need our tax assistance in order to keep their wages low.  (And please don’t ask them to pay more taxes!)  Why aren’t the deficit hawks at the Tribune screaming about that?

Beyond that, everyone who’s waiting for the economic tide to rise — all the unemployed, underemployed, and discouraged workers, all the small businesses that are barely hanging on — would be helped by the immediate boost to our economy of higher wages for a major sector of the workforce.  Workers with a little extra money will spend it, and that’s good for everyone.  The Center for Tax and Budget Accountability has estimated that a $2 boost to our minimum wage would inject $2.5 billion into the state economy and generate 20,000 jobs.

That could even help get more people shopping at places like McDonald’s, or at Macy’s and Wal-Mart — all reporting declining sales, all citing slack consumer demand.

Instead, our political and opinion leaders are forcing us into a downward spiral of growing low-wage work, anemic job creation, and increasing austerity in public services.

The members of the Workers Organizing Committee are displaying remarkable courage, standing up for themselves and their families in a threatening economic environment, with little besides their own solidarity and nerve to sustain them. In fact they are standing for a better economy for all of us.

Meanwhile the defenders of the status quo deploy every scare tactic they can to get them to back down.

My guess is that’s not going to work.

***

The invaluable Dirt Diggers Digest gives an overview of McDonald’s history in light of Thursday’s strike –including union resistance when the company initially tried to move into San Francisco and Detroit in the 1970s, McDonald’s role pushing for a lower minimum wage for teenagers, and its resistance to efforts to ensure that farmworkers picking its tomatoes are paid decently.

“More than any other restaurant operator, [McDonald’s] has worked to suppress pay rates, enforce harsh work procedures and prevent unionization. In other words, it epitomizes everything that the current strikes are trying to change.”

But “McDonald’s response to the farmworker campaign shows that, when put under enough pressure, it will make concessions.”

]]>
Fancy footwork on job numbers http://www.newstips.org/2012/12/rahm-job-creator-for-presiden/ Mon, 03 Dec 2012 01:21:24 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=6796 Mayor Emanuel’s op-ed in last Sunday’s Washington Post, framed as advice to the Democratic Party, may or may not be an attempt to get out in front of the 2016 presidential field.

Emanuel touts his infrastructure trust, introduction of competition for early education dollars, longer school day, and reorganization of City Colleges as the model for a national program.

As proof of the wisdom of his policies,  he cites Chicago’s latest employment figures, with 42,500 more people employed this October over October 2011 – stronger growth than any other city, he proclaims.  It’s a neat statistic, though it’s also an example of Emanuel’s proclivity for announcing results before initiatives have even been implemented.

Employment numbers vary from month to month – over the last year, monthly numbers for Chicago have ranged from a gain of 17,537 (in August) to a loss of 9,744 (in July) — so picking your data point can make a big difference in bragging rights.  But it does seem that for a few months at least, job growth has been stronger in Chicago than elsewhere, though it’s not due to anything Emanuel has done.

One statistic doesn’t tell the whole story, of course. It also turns out that while employment increased from September to October, unemployment also increased, rising a half point to reach 10 percent, according to World Business Chicago. But hey, that’s progress: it’s down 0.3 percent from two years ago.

Maybe it’s a good sign that more people are looking for work.  But unfortunately, too many are not finding it.

And in Emanuel’s Chicago, they’re far more likely to be out of work if they’re African American.  As the health department’s new database on socioeconomic indicators reveals, the distribution of unemployment is wildly uneven in Chicago.

Five community areas including the Loop, Lakeview, and Lincoln Park had unemployment rates below 5 percent.  In nine community areas, all on the South and West Side, unemployment was over 20 percent.  In West Englewood, it was over 34 percent.

Those statistics are from 2006 to 2010, but there’s nothing to indicate the disparties have decreased — and as we’ll see, Emanuel’s policies have almost certainly intensified the effect.

Black Chicago left behind

Last year Megan Cottrell reported that African Americans in Chicago had the highest unemployment rate of any big-city racial or ethnic group in the nation.  And looking at workforce participation, she determined that fully one half of African-American males in Chicago are not working.

In fact, a new study shows that while African-American unemployment rates have fallen in most cities, they’ve continued to rise in Chicago. Chicago is also near the top in the gap between employment rates for blacks and whites.

As we’ve noted, St. Louis, Atlanta, Memphis, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth, Washington and Richmond had black unemployment rates that were below the national average. Chicago’s is 6 points higher.

Emanuel is doing nothing to address this; indeed, his policies are making things worse.

He’s cutting middle-class city jobs by the hundreds, outsourcing city services to low-wage, no-benefit private providers and turning city contracts over to low-wage, nonunion contractors.   And the jobs he’s cutting belong overwhelming to people of color, particularly African Americans.

In the past year Emanuel has cut nearly 1,200 middle-class city jobs, according to Mick Dumke.  Setting aside the 400 positions eliminated in the police department, roughly half fell on majority-black areas of the South Side, with the rest mainly distributed among black and Hispanic areas of the West and Southwest Sides.

City services like homeless emergency transportation — and now the water department’s call center — are being outsourced to low-wage employers.  Recycling and public health services are also being outsourced.

Low-wage Chicago

More recently the city has been awarding contracts for janitorial services at O’Hare and city buildings to low-wage employers, including one contractor with a history of labor board violations.  At O’Hare, a contractor who paid $15.45 an hour and provided health and retirement benefits under a union contract is being replaced by a contractor offering $11.90 an hour, likely without benefits.

That doesn’t even save the city money, since the contracts are covered by airport fees paid by airlines.  It seems to purely reflect a preference for low-wage employers.

Meanwhile a majority of aldermen are supporting two measures, the Responsible Bidders Ordinance, which would protect workers when the city changes contractors, and the Stable Jobs, Stable Airports Ordinance, which would extend the city’s living wage requirement to airport contracts.

These would boost the city’s economy – and create jobs — by giving consumers more money to spend. They’d raise incomes for Chicago’s families, where nearly one in three children – and more than one in two black children – live in poverty, as Steve Bogira notes.

The mayor’s council allies have so far blocked consideration of either ordinance.

This takes place during a recovery where, as the Tribune has detailed, better-paying jobs are being replaced by low-wage jobs. Today one third of Chicago workers have low-wage jobs, not paid enough to cover basic necessities.  That’s up from 24 percent ten years ago.

The 42,500 jobs for which Emanuel falsely claims credit include a large number of retail and restaurant jobs; those are big sectors in Chicago, and they’re leading job growth nationally.  Those jobs generally pay little more than the minimum wage.

And where Emanuel has a chance to make a difference, he seems to opt for cutting workers’ wages every time.  The thrust of his approach is to turn Chicago from a union town to low-wage town.  Even his determination to replace neighborhood schools with charters has the effect of lowering living standards for teachers.

His economic development policy consists largely of press conferences where CEOs announce job shifts and praise the mayor – though as the Tribune has shown, about a fourth of the 20,000 jobs he claims to have shephered here are based on very uncertain projections, and of the rest, about half were transfers, not new openings for Chicagoans.

“The new jobs the mayor brags about are not being filled by people who live in the communities that need them most,” writes Ben Joravksy.  “Meanwhile, the mayor replaces union jobs that bring much-needed money to hard-hit communities with low-wage, part-tiime ones.”

Race to the bottom

“Emanuel does not seem to understand that one cannot achieve economic development by further immiserating working people and their communities, and by privatizing and cutting public services that working people depend on,” according to the Chicago Political Economy Group.

According to CPEG, Emanuel’s policies are basically the Republican “trickle down” approach.  “This has been the source of much of our current economic malaise.”

“A bottom-up, Harold Washington-type local economic development strategy would not lead to increasing African-American unemployment” – which they note is “much higher than New York’s and trending in the wrong direction over the last year” – and would be the best way to “achieve broad-based and sustainable prosperity.”

In his Washington Post piece, Emanuel proposes taking his austerity-and-privatization program national.  He repeats a common falacy of Clinton-era Rubinites, who think balancing the federal budget “lay the groundwork for a decade of prosperity,” as he puts it.  In fact, a boom fed by technology and stock bubbles was what brought the deficit down.  They’ve got it backwards.  Drawing the wrong lesson, they want to cut spending now – an approach mainstream economists recognize as a recipe for stagnation.

We need to restore progressive taxation, get the financial sector under control, and ramp up public-sector investments.  We need fair trade policies, not the NAFTA-style race-to-the-bottom deals Emanuel has pushed.  The mayor’s national program is a prescription for a “lost decade.”

Back home, with entrenched unemployment along with with a steady wave of low-wage jobs encouraged by city policies, and with job cuts targeting the areas that need jobs most desperately, that’s precisely what Emanuel seems determined to give Chicago.

 

A previous version of this post was revised, with a new headline.

]]>
Alternatives to cuts http://www.newstips.org/2011/10/alternatives-to-cuts/ http://www.newstips.org/2011/10/alternatives-to-cuts/#comments Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:49:57 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=4806 With Mayor Emanuel’s budget proposal expected to emphasize austerity with heavy cuts to city services, proposals to bolster revenues — and ensure that sacrifice is truly shared — are gaining traction.

“We’re afraid [the budget] is going to be heavy, heavy, heavy on cuts” including public safety and other city services, with the main impact “on working families and public sector workers,” said Amisha Patel of the Grassroots Collaborative, which is holding a “corporate welfare tour” Wednesday morning (see below).

The group’s initiative to return hundreds of millions of TIF funds to the city and other taxing bodies has the most momentum right now.  Seventeen aldermen cosponsored the Responsible Budget Ordinance – which would return 50 percent of surplus TIF dollars from all TIFs with balances over $5 million – and more have signed on since it was introduced last week.

Though the city hasn’t provided current figures, the measure could provide as much as $500 million to the city, schools, and other agencies, Patel said.  The bulk of the surplus is in 16 downtown TIFs, where subsidies have gone to highly profitable corporations, she said.

‘High-rent’ areas

Those are the “high-rent” areas where Emanuel said TIFs are inappropriate during his campaign.  His TIF reform panel, however, recommended criteria that would allow them to remain in place.  (It also recommended reviewing TIFs with the option of declaring a surplus.)

Emanuel has opposed using TIF surpluses, but he may be “coming around,” the Sun Times notes in an editorial backing the measure.

He should.  The reason he’s given – he’s against “one-time budget fixes” – doesn’t really apply.

It resonated with voters who’ve seen parking meter and Skyway privatization funds squandered.  But TIF accumulations are a different animal – taxpayer money sitting unused in a mayoral slush fund, to be handed out to politically favored developers and corporations.

Declaring a surplus would be sweeping the slate clean, a first step toward reform – and the TIFs will go on to accumulate new funds, taking in $500 million every year.

It’s a smart response to the recession, which is a big reason city revenues are down.  Freeing up the funds would also act as a stimulus to the city’s economy; heavy job cuts will add to the downward spiral of unemployment, foreclosures, disinvestment and destabilization.

Grassroots Collaborative will hold a press conference with supporters of the Responsible Budget Ordinance at City Hall on Wednesday morning (October 12, 9 a.m.) followed by a trolley tour of downtown corporations that have gotten TIF subsidies, including the Chicago Board of Trade, Miller Coors, the Willis Tower, and United Airlines.

Taxing traders

The campaign for a financial transaction tax got renewed impetus last week with a specific proposal from Stand Up Chicago and the Chicago Political Economy Group spelling out just how it would work here.

It would cover contracts sold on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Chicago Options Exchange, though the exchanges wouldn’t pay the fee.  Buyers and sellers would pay 25 cents per contract – a trivial amount on an average contract of $233,000, but with 12 million contracts a day, it would add up to $1.4 billion a year.

As we noted Friday, Bill Gates and, at one point, President Obama are among many prominent supporters of the concept; the New York Times just urged consideration of a national transaction fee.  In Chicago, 25 aldermen backed a related proposal last year.

Since Emanuel is a former CME board member, this could be his “Nixon goes to China” moment.  If not, it’s likely that support for the measure will grow, as discontent over corporate profiteering rises.

Commuters

Meanwhile there’s another huge pot of money that goes untouched.  As Inspector General Joe Ferguson noted in his report on budget options, there are 620,000 commuters earning a living in Chicago but paying their taxes elsewhere.  He estimates their earnings at $30 billion a year, based on the area median, but it’s likely much more, since they include many of the highest earners, economists say.

In a study done years ago, UIC economist Joseph Persky says he found that more than half of all earnings in the city went to suburban residents.  “I don’t see any reason that would have changed,” he said.

Indeed, the imbalance could well have increased – particularly because downtown development spurred by TIF seems to have benefited suburbanites far more than city residents, as the Chicago Reporter revealed earlier this year.

According to data supplied by the Reporter (thanks to Angela Caputo), residents of the collar counties held 23,824 more Loop jobs in 2008 than in 2002, while Chicago residents lost 21,057 Loop jobs in the same period.  (Suburban Cook residents lost about 1,900 Loop jobs.)

Nonresidents making a living in Chicago take advantage of all the city’s services and infrastructure; they just don’t pay for it.

One possibility for capturing a portion of that wealth is a commuter tax – an income tax on nonresidents working in the city.  Philadelphia and other cities have one, and New York City had one for two decades, before the state legislature abolished it in a bid for suburban votes.  (Mayor Michael Bloomburg has been pressing for its reinstatement.)

Ferguson estimates a 1 percent tax would generate at least $300 million; it could well be much more.  Several City Council members have spoken favorably of the idea, but politically it’s a tough climb, requiring approval from the state legislature.

Congestion pricing – a charge on vehicles entering the central district during business hours — would capture some of the revenue now being lost from out-of-towners, suggests Ron Baiman of CPEG.  The City Council could enact it.

The Center for Neighborhood Technology supports such a charge, said Maria Choca-Urban, the group’s director for transportation.   It would reduce congestion and auto emissions, she said – but revenue should be used to improve public transportation.  “If you’re going to put in place a deterrent to driving, you have to improve the alternatives,” she said.

With the CTA facing billions in unmet capital needs – and major portions of the city (notably the Far South Side) still unserved by rapid transit – there’s plenty of room for improvement, and those investments would mean badly-needed jobs.

[The Active Transportation Alliance points out that CTA service cuts and fare increases are expected in the forthcoming budget.  “Unfortunately, the threat of fare increases and service cuts have become an annual tradition in our region because our elected leaders have failed to adequately fund transit,” the group comments. “The consequences of service cuts and fare increases would be far-reaching, impacting our mobility, our economy, our quality of life, our environment and the congestion on our streets.”]

Ferguson envisions a complex collection system requiring electronic tolling sensors on every street leading downtown and transponders in every car.

London has a somewhat simpler system; commuters buy permits at shops, and a system of cameras identifies vehicles entering without paying.  Buses, cabs, and delivery vehicles are exempted, and residents of the central area can get a 90 percent discount on the charge.  In 2006, London’s congestion charge brought in nearly $400 million.

]]>
http://www.newstips.org/2011/10/alternatives-to-cuts/feed/ 1
This could be the start of something big http://www.newstips.org/2011/10/this-could-be-the-start-of-something-big/ http://www.newstips.org/2011/10/this-could-be-the-start-of-something-big/#comments Fri, 07 Oct 2011 19:57:14 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=4789 New and old strands of youth, community, labor and peace organizing – voicing growing anger over the state of our economy and our democracy – will come together in a series of events here over the next week, with thousands expected for a major Columbus Day demonstration.

Holding their ground outside the Federal Reserve on LaSalle Street, Occupy Chicago – one of many ongoing actions inspired by Occupy Wall Street, which is now backed by the AFL-CIO – has brought new momentum and visibility to concerns that labor-community coalitions have been pressing since the 2008 bank bailout.

The Tribune reports that Occupy Chicago’s numbers are growing; In These Times has the inside story. We Are The 99 Percent offers the demonstrators’ own pointed and poignant tales.

On Friday, October 7, Stand Up Chicago and the Chicago Political Economy Group are releasing a report analyzing unemployment in Chicago and proposing a Chicago Community Jobs Fund to create 40,000 jobs (more below).

Also Friday, Chicago Jobs With Justice (which celebrates its 20th anniversary Tuesday) is holding its monthly unemployment report event, pointing out that of 100,000 jobs added last month, half were striking Verizon workers returning to their jobs.  “The private sector cannot create jobs in a weak economy with little demand,” said Susan Hurley.  “We can only create jobs with major federal investment.”

On Saturday, October 8, Occupy Chicago will join scores of groups protesting the tenth anniversary of the war in Afghanistan.  They’ll rally at noon at Michigan and Congress; speakers include Alejandro Villatoro of Iraq Veterans Against the War, who recently returned from a deployment in Afghanistan; Mary Dean of Voices for Creative Nonviolence, who spent a month in Afghanistan this summer; and former Chicago activist, Black Agenda Report editor Bruce Dixon.

They’ll march past Obama 2012 campaign headquarters at the Prudential Building, where they’ve held a two-day vigil, and end up joining Occupy Chicago at the Federal Reserve building at Jackson and LaSalle.

The cost of the war is now approaching $500 billion, by one calculation.

On Monday, thousands of Chicagoans – people “fed up with big bank greed and Wall Street corrupting our democracy” — will protest at two financial industry conventions and converge for a mass rally at the Art Institute, sponsored by the Take Back Chicago coalition.  Their goal:  “To begin taking back the jobs, homes, and schools stolen from us by the greed of big banks and big business.”

Local groups belonging to National Peoples Action will protest outside the annual conference of the Mortgage Bankers of America at the Hyatt Regency, Wacker and Stetson, at 4 p.m.  MBA includes the nation’s largest banks along with independent mortgage companies.

Protestors will demand that banks reduce principals on all underwater mortgages in order to stop foreclosures and spur the economy (see Newstips, Communities to Banks: You can fix housing crisis, economy).

Also at 4 on Monday, college students will protest at the Futures and Options Expo (which includes the Chicago Mercantile Exchange) at the Chicago Hilton at Balbo and Michigan.  “We’re going to the source – to the people who have hurt us in this recession,” said Haley Leibovitz, a Roosevelt University student active in Next Up Chicago, a network of young labor activists.

At the same time, the Chicago Teachers Union will rally at the Chicago Board of Trade, where $15 million of TIF money was spent on remodeling, and labor groups will rally for jobs at the Daley Plaza and the Federal Plaza – all marching to the Art Institute at 5 p.m., where the Futures Expo holds its opening reception.

Further actions, focused on taking back jobs, homes, and schools, will continue through the week.

A new report analyzes unemployment in Chicago and proposes a plan to add 40,000 jobs here.  Chicago has been particularly hard hit by the jobs crisis, according to the report; unemployment is double what it was five years ago, and remains in double digits.  “Chicago is rapidly losing its jobs base” and the stability it brings to communities and families, according to the report.

Over 272,000 Chicagoans are unemployed, with strong negative ripple effects – foreclosures up, vacancies and crime up, property values and local government revenues down, and cuts to education and public safety.  Nearly two-thirds of unemployed workers come from the service sector.

Researchers interviewed 14,000 unemployed Chicagoans and found they identified lack of jobs, particularly youth jobs, as a root cause of many community problems.

The report proposes a series of Chicago job corps focused on the social infrastructure – schools, health care, child care, neighborhood improvement and youth.

They’d pay for it with a financial speculation fee of 25 cents for each futures or options contract sold on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange or the Chicago Options Exchange.

Since the average contract is valued at $233,000, a 25-cent charge would have no impact on trades – but since over 12 million such contracts are executed each day, it would generate nearly $1.4 billion a year, based on last year’s trading volume.

It would be paid by traders, not by the exchanges;  it would cover financial instruments licensed to Chicago exchanges, which cannot be traded elsewhere.  (See Newstips 6-12-11 re. CME’s ongoing threats to leave the state unless they get a tax break.)

The Tribune recently reported that Bill Gates now backs a financial transaction fee, and in his new book, Ron Susskind reports that President Obama originally favored such a fee, but was blocked by advisers.

Last year 25 aldermen backed a hearing on a proposal for a voter referendum on instituting a financial transaction tax, but it was never brought to the Council floor.  Ald. Richard Mell proposed such a fee in the ’90s.

“Our city is facing a massive jobs crisis, one that requires direct and targeted job creation for those groups and communities hit hardest by unemployment,” according to the report.

“Our jobs plan will not only provide 40,000 Chicagoans with living wage, full-time jobs that match their existing skills and experience, but will serve as an investment in our communities, making them safer, stronger and more vibrant.”

]]>
http://www.newstips.org/2011/10/this-could-be-the-start-of-something-big/feed/ 1