ossito16
join:2004-07-31
Whiting, IN
 ·RCN CABLE
1 edit | actions?
Nothing makes me madder than to see a community being told what to do by corporations. Corp america, the so-called hidden 4th branch of govt, must be stopped. If a community wants to take care of itself then let it, anything interfering with communities should be dealt with directly at the source. i.e. CEO's, board of directors, etc. |
|
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| said by ossito16  :Nothing makes me madder than to see a community being told what to do by corporations. Corp america, the so-called hidden 4th branch of govt, must be stopped. If a community wants to take care of itself then let it, anything interfering with communities should be dealt with directly at the source. i.e. CEO's, board of directors, etc. I agree.
For many years, communities had their own water companies, sewer companies, electric companies, etc. Did the regional power concern stop Anytown, USA from hooking up its own power grid 100 years ago? I didn't think so.
Yeah, the local company got bought out by the conglomorate, but did it not serve its purpose by rolling out service to those who needed it, but weren't getting it?
What a world we live in where any corporation can dictate its own market, even if it is above the wishes of the local people/government. |
|
zitch
join:2002-07-08
Lafayette, LA
| And that's the crux of the issue. If the municipality wishes to risk taxpayer money for a project (with the backing of those taxpayers), then why should someone from another city care? I would agree with many of the naysayers if this was a Federal or a State plan, but a municipality is much closer to the people it serves. It's easier to hold the city council responsible for their actions then it is for the higher levels of government.
Telecommunications is getting to the point of water, sewage, and electricity in modern times. It is not a "nice to have" as much as a "need to have" to stay afloat in these times. Roads and electricity were much the same at one point. They were "nice to have", but became "required" and needed communities to pitch in to bring those needs to everyone.
What's sad is the costs of this project is not increased by technicalities, but by *legal* costs before it can even get off the ground.
Just imagine the repercussions if this does work out. |
|
gatzdon
join:2002-10-25
Lake Zurich, IL
| Re: Taxpayer's money???
I see people still have trouble differentiating between general issue and revenue bonds.
Revenue bonds
• Principal and interest payments for revenue bonds are secured by revenues from the project being financed. Because revenue bonds are not backed by the issuer's taxing authority they are generally considered more risky than general obligation bonds, and therefore tend to offer higher interest rates.
If the project fails, the taxpayer's do not foot the bill. Rather the investors lose their investment.
For Reference: »personal.fidelity.com/products/f···ni.shtml |
|
