I always vote "no" on any bonds. They just lead to deferred taxes that should have been utilized in the here and now. It frustrates me when you hear politicians say that they did this and that without raising taxes yet they sponsor bond issue after bond issue.
2006-09-19 20:05:13 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I am only referring to public bonds. What bothers me is that when no tax-obtained money pegged for a project the politician's answer bond measures instead of answering it with "new taxes" which, risks losing at re-election. Public bond eventually have to be paid through tax funds---and those though future generations.
The CA governor is a good example of a politician who paints himself as a hero in the funding of education when all he did is successfully promote bond issues. I think Grey Davis' car tax was a great answer because we don't have to buy new cars but then he goes and gets recalled. Man, I hate politics---just one big popularity contest at a hugh cost to all.
2006-09-20 06:23:59 · update #1
no. they are instruments to raise funds for school-based projects. the kids may have to pay for them as adults in subsequent taxes. as for your remark that "They just lead to differed taxes that should have been utilized in the here and now" i think you are confused. Bonds are instruments that are sold on the market. At a point in the future they must be repaid with some interest and this will be raised from taxes - however, the are in no way taxes that could have been spent in the "here and now" as this money is not available. the lack of funds is the reason for the bond in the first place.
2006-09-19 20:09:26 · answer #1 · answered by bambam 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bonds don't always lead to higher taxes--sometimes they save the taxpayers money. They are a cheap way for a school district to borrow money for big capital projects. School often require pretty big construction efforts and it is much cheaper for a district to issue a bond (because it gets a really low rate due to the tax exemption) than to get the funding on the private market. So you may think you are saving yourself tax dollars by voting no, but in some cases you might actually be costing yourself more money by forcing the district to use a more expensive mechanism to borrow cash.
2006-09-20 03:18:12 · answer #2 · answered by SFDHSBudget 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
bonds are one of the ONLY means of making money available for such things as building new schools, building roads, fixing streets, adding improvements to large projects and other capital expenses.
bonds can be payed off through several methods, such as taxes, fees, tolls, etc. the defferred taxes you are talking about are not an option for paying off this type debt.
bonds are utilized and the method of paying them off are easily determined by reading the propasal. it is public information. you may be the one paying them off, or you may not, depending on the method of repayment. most are by taxes, but you may not be the one paying the tax, unless you utilize the service that is being taxed such as a hotel/motel tax to pay for additional street lighting in a residential area, or new police equipment.
many bonds are sold through investment houses and almost always for the best available rate available for the type of bond and the rating that the seller has. it is no different than you having a mortgage or car payment. you had to borrow the money and pay interest for the period you agreed to in paying it off.
investors like them because they are income tax free and have almost never had one not be paid off , but the interest rate paid is lower than many other taxable investments are. even large corporations borrow money and they have corporate bonds with fair interest rates. junk bonds, or high risk bonds, are also sold by companies, but they are forced to pay high interest rate due to the lack of guaranteed pay-off. they often don't make it and the company fails, thus not paying off the bonds.
check into the proposal before rejecting it. you may find them very necessary for both economic and developemental reasons. if you have any questions about a proposal, ask for the information from whoever is issueing the bonds.
2006-09-20 03:33:20 · answer #3 · answered by de bossy one 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
bonds seem like aw ate to me, get taxed on the peddly amount of intrest 5% a year what a laugh! Rich people don't get rich on that! They have mush better secrets, they love lying to you about saving money.
2006-09-20 03:07:28 · answer #4 · answered by double v 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
series I bonds are for educational purposes and tax is exempt if used for education
2006-09-20 03:11:11 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋