Chicago Mayor Tries to Poach Oregon Companies because of Measure 66

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Illinois is a big state, but state taxes are presumably levied equally throughout the state. I wasn't addressing how companies are treated, that's a different subject. I certainly wouldn't deny Chicago has various benefits to offer a company - as does Portland.

barfo

I'm saying that Springfield and Chicago City Hall give huge tax breaks to companies willing to move to the state. Ask Boeing how they're taxed.
 
I look at roughly equivalent neighborhoods and try to price them.

Lake Oswego/West Linn = Evanston/Winnetka/Lake Forest

Schaumburg = Beaverton

Gold Coast = Pearl

Northwest 23rd = Lincoln Park/Wrigleyville

In every case, the equivalent home is more expensive in Chicagoland. If you're willing to live far, far out, you can have a nice house on a nice piece of land for a reasonable price.

:crazy:
 
CHICAGO

The median income for a household in the city was $38,625, and the median income for a family was $42,724. Males had a median income of $35,907 versus $30,536 for females. The per capita income for the city was $20,175. Below the poverty line were 19.6% of the population and 16.6% of the families. Of the total population, 28.1% of those under the age of 18 and 15.5% of those 65 and older were living below the poverty line.

vs. Portland

The median income for a household in the city is $40,146, and the median income for a family is $50,271. Males have a reported median income of $35,279 versus $29,344 reported for females. The per capita income for the city is $22,643. 13.1% of the population and 8.5% of families are below the poverty line. Out of the total population, 15.7% of those under the age of 18 and 10.4% of those 65 and older are living below the poverty line. Figures delineating the income levels based on race are not available at this time.

via Wikipedia!
 
I'm saying that Springfield and Chicago City Hall give huge tax breaks to companies willing to move to the state. Ask Boeing how they're taxed.

I could, but I'm not sure they'd answer. Anyway, the subject here is personal taxes, not corporate taxes - Daley specifically said he was going to raid Oregon because of the personal tax.

Not sure the corporate tax is all that critical for Boeing in IL anyway - they didn't move manufacturing to IL, just the corporate staff. I doubt a large fraction of their income is attributed to IL.

barfo
 
If you're making $125k in Chicago, I think its pretty comparable to making $125k in Portland. There are probably more people making 125k in Chicago though.
 
I could, but I'm not sure they'd answer. Anyway, the subject here is personal taxes, not corporate taxes - Daley specifically said he was going to raid Oregon because of the personal tax.

Not sure the corporate tax is all that critical for Boeing in IL anyway - they didn't move manufacturing to IL, just the corporate staff. I doubt a large fraction of their income is attributed to IL.

barfo

“What happened in Oregon is not good news for Oregon. They believe that anybody who makes $125,000 or more [annually] or businesses or anyone who makes $250,000 — they’re gonna start taxing them. They call them ‘rich people,’ ” the mayor said.

He was talking about raiding corporations too. As for taxes paid by Boeing, they still have pretty significant HQ costs, regardless of where they produce their goods. Dallas and Chi-town went neck and neck to give Boeing incentives to move.
 

Interesting. I wonder how locationally they decided what constituted "Chicago" and "Portland". If it's metro area, the burbs are really cheap. Chicago also has to blend in a wider variance of economic areas. I could buy a three bedroom, two bath house in Chicago close to an El stop for under $50K. Of course, it would be in a neighborhood that looked more like Beirut than a US City.

My point is that I've made that amount in both towns and lived much better in Portland than Chicago. My buddy who just bought that place in Lakeview was transferred by Intel out of Portland and he'd arrive at the same conclusion.

It's a neat tool, but it seems to be a pretty blunt instrument.
 
Interesting. I wonder how locationally they decided what constituted "Chicago" and "Portland". If it's metro area, the burbs are really cheap. Chicago also has to blend in a wider variance of economic areas. I could buy a three bedroom, two bath house in Chicago close to an El stop for under $50K. Of course, it would be in a neighborhood that looked more like Beirut than a US City.

My point is that I've made that amount in both towns and lived much better in Portland than Chicago. My buddy who just bought that place in Lakeview was transferred by Intel out of Portland and he'd arrive at the same conclusion.

It's a neat tool, but it seems to be a pretty blunt instrument.

You probably had more entertainment expenses in Chicago as there is more to do. I felt that both cities seemed comparable in cost of living versus San Fran, LA, etc. As large a city as Chicago is, it seems fairly affordable on the outside looking in. The chicagoland area is vast and the suburbs just go on forever. Its a different feeling, almost hellish to me. The suburbs are so depressing out there.

I'm sure its easier to make more money in Chicago though than in Portland, therefore you can probably buy more valuable real estate if you wanted to, but it seems that people won't get "priced out" of the city. In portland its a matter of small space of valuable real estate with less people with high incomes to afford.
 
Last edited:
Interesting. I wonder how locationally they decided what constituted "Chicago" and "Portland". If it's metro area, the burbs are really cheap. Chicago also has to blend in a wider variance of economic areas.

I think that's it exactly. They are probably using either the median or average home price, and that's going to be skewed by the demographics.

barfo
 
I wonder how many Nike employees have purchased second homes in Beautiful Central Oregon?

I've never met any here, but I'm sure there's a few. One is too many. No one with a conscience could work for Nike.

We don't really want people who made their fortune from illegal child-labor camps to buy anything here. We'd rather they didn't come here at all. We don't want their blood money.

Beautiful Central Oregon is full of good people, and good people from all over the world visit to marvel at the beauty, and buy homes and move here.

Nike should move to Chicago to keep things in balance. :cheers:
 
You probably had more entertainment expenses in Chicago as there is more to do. I felt that both cities seemed comparable in cost of living versus San Fran, LA, etc. As large a city as Chicago is, it seems fairly affordable on the outside looking in. The chicagoland area is vast and the suburbs just go on forever. Its a different feeling, almost hellish to me. The suburbs are so depressing out there.

Sure, I occasionally would hit Gibson's or Charlie Trotter's, but more often I would go to Zaiqa, Reza's or some dive in Greektown or Little Italy. You can actually drink and eat really cheaply in Chicago. The big difference is things like parking and rent/mortgage.
 
He was talking about raiding corporations too. As for taxes paid by Boeing, they still have pretty significant HQ costs, regardless of where they produce their goods. Dallas and Chi-town went neck and neck to give Boeing incentives to move.

Eh, well, that's my second case of bad reading comprehension today. I agree, he did say businesses, I didn't notice that. Possibly because it doesn't make much sense in the sentence as constructed.

barfo
 
I've never met any here, but I'm sure there's a few. One is too many. No one with a conscience could work for Nike.

We don't really want people who made their fortune from illegal child-labor camps to buy anything here. We'd rather they didn't come here at all. We don't want their blood money.

Beautiful Central Oregon is full of good people, and good people from all over the world visit to marvel at the beauty, and buy homes and move here.

Nike should move to Chicago to keep things in balance. :cheers:

I wonder how many commissions you've collected from people who have engaged in business practices from which you'd disapprove? Since you're pure as the driven snow, I expect you to return those monies immediately.
 
Eh, well, that's my second case of bad reading comprehension today. I agree, he did say businesses, I didn't notice that. Possibly because it doesn't make much sense in the sentence as constructed.

barfo

Trying to figure out what the hell Mayor Daley is saying has frustrated many people. His father was even worse.
 
I've never met any here, but I'm sure there's a few. One is too many. No one with a conscience could work for Nike.

We don't really want people who made their fortune from illegal child-labor camps to buy anything here. We'd rather they didn't come here at all. We don't want their blood money.

Beautiful Central Oregon is full of good people, and good people from all over the world visit to marvel at the beauty, and buy homes and move here.

Nike should move to Chicago to keep things in balance. :cheers:

So you envision sustainable economy for Oregon? Great in a small community, but if you want a large populace, you need evil corporations running things to provide real jobs, not Wheatgrass juicers.
 
C'mon. It's ridiculous to think that Chicago could ever poach the headquarters of a company based in the Northwest...just ask Seattle.

Yes, Boeing HQ fled Seattle because the executives were tired of paying that incredibly burdensome 0% WA income tax. So they moved to Chicago, where they now pay 3% income tax on their very large salaries. I could be wrong, but I think this might suggest that they moved for reasons other than taxes.

Not sure the corporate tax is all that critical for Boeing in IL anyway - they didn't move manufacturing to IL, just the corporate staff. I doubt a large fraction of their income is attributed to IL.

As for taxes paid by Boeing, they still have pretty significant HQ costs, regardless of where they produce their goods. Dallas and Chi-town went neck and neck to give Boeing incentives to move.

Boeing (headquarters only) moved to Chicago after buying up their competitors in the defense industry, because the middle of the country is where to be to get that defense business. The Boeing Military Company division of Boeing was always trying hard to expand, so they had their headquarters in Kansas City. The reason BMC was centered in the Midwest was that they wanted to be where the competition's factories were (to siphon off contracts and employees). A few years later, Boeing bought up the defense competition (Lockheed, etc.) and suddenly felt the need to consider moving after 60 years in Seattle. Boeing held a fake competition of cities for its HQ. Chicago won, what a coincidence. With the new base of operations assisting the new direction, Boeing has changed from being mostly commercial airplanes to mostly military business.

Another reason for Chicago was that the top guys spend half their time traveling. So basing themselves in the middle of the country, vs. at the edge, meant less travel time. (The company must have almost 20,000 business air trips per month by now.) Just the travel (centered in Chicago vs. Seattle) alone saves the company a couple hundred million dollars per year. So "significant HQ costs" are indeed a reason, but separately from the HQ tax costs.

The point is that taxes had nothing to do with Boeing HQ "leaving" Seattle. ("leaving"? 90% of Boeing employees who were stationed in Seattle before, still are.)
 
Eh, well, that's my second case of bad reading comprehension today. I agree, he did say businesses, I didn't notice that. Possibly because it doesn't make much sense in the sentence as constructed.

barfo

Mad Cow.
 
Yes, Boeing HQ fled Seattle because the executives were tired of paying that incredibly burdensome 0% WA income tax.

So they moved to Chicago, where they now pay 3% income tax on their very large salaries.

I could be wrong, but I think this might suggest that they moved for reasons other than taxes.

barfo

http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/index.php/Kellogg/article/tax_incentives_and_the_city

http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsider/incentive/ti0106.htm

$63MM for 500 jobs. The original reason to move wasn't tax-based; Boeing is going to transform itself from a manufacturing company to an assembly company, which means they're going to lay off tens of thousands of employees in Washington. You want to make those kinds of moves living out of state. However, once the decision was made, it was a race to the bottom among Denver, the Metroplex and Chicago. Chicago gave up the most.
 
Where? I lived in Hyde Park, Lincoln Park and Rogers Park. Seriously, my buddy just bought a place Lakeview in a six-flat in the rear, two bedrooms, $887,400. The equivalent location and type of condo would cost $200K in Portland.

To imply there is somewhere a person could live in Chicago that is "comparable" to living in Portland suggests you've never visited either. Chicago is a an ugly, decrepit and crumbling city in a boring state in an umassively polluted region of the country.
 
I'm saying that Springfield and Chicago City Hall give huge tax breaks to companies willing to move to the state. Ask Boeing how they're taxed.

Which is why their infrastructure is 50 years behind in maintenance.

I guess their grandchildren will have to pay that debt.
 
To imply there is somewhere a person could live in Chicago that is "comparable" to living in Portland suggests you've never visited either.

Care to make a wager? I'll bet I've lived in both metro Portland and the Chicagoland area. How much would you like to bet?

Once again, I applaud your willingness to expose your idiocy for all to see.
 
I've lived in both. There are plenty of places in Chicago to live "comparable" to Portland. I doubt I would ever move back to Chicago, but there's not a lot about Portland I think is better than Chicago. Got tired of the winters there. Until I discovered ours suck here, too. I suppose the TrailBlazers are the main thing holding me to Portland.
 
My point is that I've made that amount in both towns and lived much better in Portland than Chicago. My buddy who just bought that place in Lakeview was transferred by Intel out of Portland and he'd arrive at the same conclusion.

Another reason why a company would prefer to be in Portland, where talented employees would prefer to live.
 
Another reason why a company would prefer to be in Portland, where talented employees would prefer to live.

Hmm, the numbers don't bear that out.

Chicago has more Fortune 500 headquarters than Portland and a higher population. You and I may prefer Portland to Chicago, but I know plenty of people who believe the opposite. See, people are different in all kinds of ways beyond your understanding.
 
I've lived in both. There are plenty of places in Chicago to live "comparable" to Portland. I doubt I would ever move back to Chicago, but there's not a lot about Portland I think is better than Chicago. Got tired of the winters there. Until I discovered ours suck here, too. I suppose the TrailBlazers are the main thing holding me to Portland.

It's apples and oranges. Chicago is a real city, with all the rough edges intact. It's big, it's dirty and industrial, there are dangerous areas, there's racial tension and ethnic neighborhoods. Portland is Mayberry with 2 million people.

I prefer Portland, but I know a lot of people who think differently.
 
It's apples and oranges. Chicago is a real city, with all the rough edges intact. It's big, it's dirty and industrial, there are dangerous areas, there's racial tension and ethnic neighborhoods. Portland is Mayberry with 2 million people.

I prefer Portland, but I know a lot of people who think differently.

Oh, I agree. I like a lot of parts of both, and wish there was a way to combine the two, or meld the two somehow. I know if work doesn't ever take me away, I will likely stay in Portland most of my adult life. And will be plenty happy here. It's just so small to me. I love the size of Chicago. I love the first class nature of a lot of things about chicago. I like the events it puts on. I like that things it does don't generally feel second rate. I like that its residents accept that they are a big city, as opposed to whining about californians moving in and pushing them away from being a mulberry. I hate the cold. I hate traffic, but like the L. For some reason, as ugly as it can be, I love flying into Chicago and seeing the sprawl. Of course, I love flying in to Portland, and actually seeing trees. Flying into Chicago in the winter feels like you're looking at ablack and white picture. Really dreary and ugly looking. The streets are miserable because of the cold. Freezing the roads, breaking apart, and causing miserable pot-holes. I like they have two baseball teams. And a football team. And hockey. Nice to have options.
I like not having bad neigborhoods in Portland. I like when people consider parts of NE "the ghetto" and have no idea what an actual ghetto can be like, instead of just being an area of town where black people live. I like the ease of getting downtown without taking the highway, and it not taking forever. I like the urban growth boundry keeping Portland from sprawling. I hate the small mindedness of the area. The inability AND lack of desire to attract big businesses. The thought that somehow we can get by with everyone working in or owning their own small business. That any sort of expansion and forward thinking is evil, against what Portland stands for, and is obviously driven by those from california.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top