Amendments 60 & 61, Proposition 101 (Denver, Colorado Springs, Pueblo: taxi, tax, live in)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been looking for information regarding these amendments and proposition in search for answers to help me vote this year. I won't deny I'm not an incredible fan of taxes, but they are one of those things that are an unfortunate necessity.
Considering our state, like all the rest, are having issues with closing the gap on budget short falls, I would've assumed it to be foolhardy to pass Amendment 60 (lowering property tax) and Proposition 101(vehicle taxes and liscensing reduction) for sure, but was mostly struggling with Amendment 61 (limitations on gov't borrowing). This particular ballot measure reads, to me, as a means of reducing the debt made by the state government to prevent creating a larger shortfall in the future.
Part of it states, "...requiring voter approval onf future borrowing by local government entities; limiting the form, term, and amount of total borrowing by each local governmental entity". Doesn't that leave borrowing up to us to reduce pork spending in the budget?
Um...I had a feeling this one wouldn't be a terrible amendment to pass. As the old addage goes, "Don't borrow what you can't pay back." Hence my reasoning for not going out and buying a car (it's less expensive, though not by too much anymore, to ride public transit).It seems to be something that won't dangerously effect the day to day necessities of the city, but would practically prevent the state government from spending monies on items that aren't necessary to running it.
But I am one of the people who are "bottom rung" as it were. I do depend on assistance from the state and am wholeheartedly trying to change that. I'd prefer going on my own steam. For the most part, I would hate to see any kind of cut to the states budget that would affect human services (because I understand the needs for those living a lower quality of life), public schools and higher education, in a way that can and will, essentially, cost more.
Hypothetically, as far as public schools are concerned, there could end up being a necessity to buy your child's own schoolbooks instead of them being provided free of charge to students; a higher cost for lunches (although I'm prepared to have my son "brown bag" his lunches to ensure it's healthier), and even the worst case (although highly unlikely) scenario of school's making it mandatory to provide one's own necessities to use facilities (ha!). This would, in effect, destroy public schools, which in turn privatizes education, leading to more "stoopid" people because of an inability to afford an education. (Mind you there's already a high drop-out rate besides).
Anyways, can anyone please explain to me, further and more indepth, how Amendment 61, will affect Colorado, positive and negative, if it's stopping borrowing. Isn't that half the reason we're in the hole we're in?
Borrowing isn't necessarily bad. When the government borrows money, it does so in the form of issuing bonds. These bonds are sold on the market and the money raised is used to build projects that are needed right now, but are too expensive to pay cash for. The bonds are then paid off (with interest) over 30 years.
For example, T-Rex expansion cost about $1.7 billion. If the state had to pay cash for this expansion, the project would have taken a large chunk of the state's annual $900 million budget for road construction (that's for the entire state). Meanwhile, while we bid out each parcel year by year, the price would keep going up.
Ultimately, if we paid cash for the project, it would have taken more than a decade to build and the price would escalate each year.
By issuing bonds, the project was finished in a matter of 5 years at a cost that is probably comparable to the cash price over time. Plus we have the opportunity to use the finished product sooner.
The common analogy is a home mortgage. If you get a mortgage, you can buy a $200k house now, and pay it off over 30 years while you live in it. If you wanted to pay cash for the house, and you managed to save $20k a year, you would have to wait 10 years before you would have $200k. By then, the price of the house would have increased to about $300k.
Many times, when bonds are issued, the public has to approve the debt, so this amendment would not be changing much. However, by limiting the payoff period to 10 years, the amount of money that could be borrowed and paid back would be severely limited. This would limit the number of projects the governments of Colorado could complete.
Also remember, when the government builds capital projects, it bids them out to private contractors. Fewer projects would mean fewer construction jobs. This slowdown could lead to construction business woes and higher unemployment of construction workers.
This amendment is trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. No government entity has ever had problems paying off bonds, and the present system has allowed governments the flexibility to build the projects needed by their citizens.
heck as a self employed person I will vote for all three ! make your own way lazy loosers! stop living off me I aint your mamma
There are a lot of people who rely on the government way too much, but please don't forget, there are people who are busting their butts actually trying to get an education, get a job, and let someone else who's in need have a turn.
I don't live in section 8 housing, but know several people who do, and they do quite a few things in their "homes" that break Section 8 laws, not to mention the fact that they waste utility service because for them, "it's free."
By calling all people who are recieving public assistance losers, you're saying that the people put into circumstances created by others (i.e. store closures causing the loss of jobs for hundreds and being unable to find a "real job" because they're competing with hundreds of others for the same position, or a single mother (who's single for whatever reason) is trying to take care of a young child/children and maintain a stable environment for their family, but are unable to work because they can't afford childcare and rent at the same time) are worth twaddle and should be left desolate.
BTW,congrats on your self employment. What exactly do you do? I'm working towards an education, will be finishing at least 3 months early while taking care of my three year old son because I don't want to starve the system or be in the way of someone else needing help.
Originally Posted by parfleche I am voting for getting the Gov off My back and My neighbors backs.stop taking our money and giving it to idiots that dont work
Not all who seek help are completely helpless and are working for their own betterment, and then there are those who'd rather live off of others and the government. If you want to get people back to work, quit complaining about it, DO something about it.
Last edited by normalantipathy; 10-19-2010 at 11:38 PM..
Reason: Bad URL
This amendment is trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. No government entity has ever had problems paying off bonds, and the present system has allowed governments the flexibility to build the projects needed by their citizens.
Thank you btw...that's the information I was looking for.
There are a lot of people who rely on the government way too much, but please don't forget, there are people who are busting their butts actually trying to get an education, get a job, and let someone else who's in need have a turn.
I don't live in section 8 housing, but know several people who do, and they do quite a few things in their "homes" that break Section 8 laws, not to mention the fact that they waste utility service because for them, "it's free."
By calling all people who are recieving public assistance losers, you're saying that the people put into circumstances created by others (i.e. store closures causing the loss of jobs for hundreds and being unable to find a "real job" because they're competing with hundreds of others for the same position, or a single mother (who's single for whatever reason) is trying to take care of a young child/children and maintain a stable environment for their family, but are unable to work because they can't afford childcare and rent at the same time) are worth twaddle and should be left desolate.
BTW,congrats on your self employment. What exactly do you do? I'm working towards an education, will be finishing at least 3 months early while taking care of my three year old son because I don't want to starve the system or be in the way of someone else needing help.
Originally Posted by parfleche I am voting for getting the Gov off My back and My neighbors backs.stop taking our money and giving it to idiots that dont work
Not all who seek help are completely helpless and are working for their own betterment, and then there are those who'd rather live off of others and the government. If you want to get people back to work, quit complaining about it, DO something about it.
I am a self employed Carpenter. I create my own work and all is well. the American dream is alive and well for Me the leeches should move to France
There are a lot of people who rely on the government way too much, but please don't forget, there are people who are busting their butts actually trying to get an education, get a job, and let someone else who's in need have a turn.
I appreciate your sentiment, being fiscally conservative, but I think the point we are missing: the vast majority of public spending goes into programs that benefit us all, not programs like Section 8, which is a federal program anyway. The State of Colorado's affordable housign fund had been a "placeholder" of almost 0 for many years.
The programs I speak of: decent public education, as my family despite working hard would not have been able to afford private schools; public universities that benefit not only the people who are educated but society as these folks tend to earn more, pay more taxes, be less unemployed, be healthier and use social services less; financial aid for those busting their butt to go to college - both looking at the people I know and the statistics, few people who try to finish college while working 25 or more hours succeed; small business assistance, for what it's worth; roads, bicycle trails and public transit (some of us use one, two or all three of these, but anyway they are all means of moving people, workers and freight); pollution prevention (we all breathe the air and drink the water); parks and other quality-of-life measures which not only enhance our lives but keep up our residential roperty values and in the long term make our communities places where business wants to invest and people want to live.
As for welfare programs, they consume a small but not insignfiicant portion of our budget (for the federal budget, I know it is like 20%). But on the broader scale, many welfare measures benefit the middle class. The child tax credit and the mortgage tax deduction are the two major ones, that mean most middle class families with children pay little or no income tax, while continuing to benefit from what our govt. provides. I don't mean to say that these are bad programs per se, but rather that they are welfare programs and need to be considered as such.
Then there are programs that to me provide security. If I should lose my job or my business fail, I don't want my family to live in a shelter - hence unemployment insurance. To be honest, as I contemplate starting a family AND becoming self-employed in a small business, we are thinking more about the attractiveness of universal health insurance. Several of my small-business owning friends feel the same way, including Republicans.
I don't belive 60, 61, and 101 will take government off our backs - Americans IMO have a love for regulation and telling their neighbors what to do, born out of a fear of "those people." Witness everything from prohibition to zoning codes that forbid home-businesses, on-farm wine production, or renting your basement out. I wish this were otherwise, frankly.
What I think 60, 61 and 101 will do is cripple those things government does that benefit all of us.
Not all who seek help are completely helpless and are working for their own betterment, and then there are those who'd rather live off of others and the government. If you want to get people back to work, quit complaining about it, DO something about it.
I certainly, along with many others I know, will be doing "something" about it. It's right on my ballot.
I certainly, along with many others I know, will be doing "something" about it. It's right on my ballot.
I hear you, and I am in favor of limiting welfare / stop the leeches too (FYI: Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton ended 75% of welfare in the 1990's) but there is nothing on our ballots that deals with welfare or other safety net programs. Anyone who thinks that voting 'yes' on these 3 ballot items will have any effect on the leeches is totally mistaken and is about to make life worse for everyone BUT the leeches.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
Anyone who thinks that voting 'yes' on these 3 ballot items will have any effect on the leeches is totally mistaken and is about to make life worse for everyone BUT the leeches.
There's a whole field of research into the politics of why many so-called conservatives actually vote AGAINST their own best interests. During the 2008 election season, a City-Data Moderator sent me a DM to tell me how amazed they were at the local folks in his/her southern state. The locals were dirt poor, thought that making $9.50 an hour without benefits was great money, and were damned if they'd ever vote in favor of certain things, like health care or union membership or most any other topic that would improve their lot in life.
It seems these working stiffs have been so brainwashed by the 'big lies' that they actually vote FOR the corporatists who pay dirt wages and no benefits. It's this sort of voter that comes to mind when I hear people say they want to destroy Colorado's government, Colorado's school systems and Colorado's infrastructure in the totally bogus belief that it somehow solves totally unrelated issues at the Federal level (illegal immigration, etc). It makes no sense at all.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
During the 2008 election season, a City-Data Moderator sent me a DM to tell me how amazed they were at the local folks in his/her southern state. The locals were dirt poor, thought that making $9.50 an hour without benefits was great money, and were damned if they'd ever vote in favor of certain things, like health care or union membership or most any other topic that would improve their lot in life.
I do love it when liberals lecture the "little people" on what's good for them. Maybe they prefer low paying jobs to no jobs. Ask working class folks in those heavily democratic, pro-union states how things are working out for them right now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
