Re: Not tax debt in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20446366 en Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:35:27 EDT Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:35:27 EDT Re: Not tax debt http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20446366 Austinloop : Matt, I guess that you could say that they are 1.1 million ahead, but given that it is the government, I would look at it as 1.1 million less in the hole, so the taxpayers, in theory, get a 1.1 million break on their taxes, think I will hide and wait on that one.

Just semantics, really.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20446366 Wed, 07 May 2008 14:58:40 EDT Re: Not tax debt http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20446061 MattE :
said by soothsayer15 See Profile :

said by MattE See Profile :

The main argument of most anti-muni pundits is that if these projects fail, the citizens will be on the hook for a huge tax burden.

This is proof that is not the case as they earned a cool $1.1 million off the deal.
They didn't turn a profit. If they had they wouldn't be selling it. It costs them $39.5 million to start it. They were on pace to lose $10 million dollars from 2005 to this year, and that's after adding another $1.2 Million in taxes. I can understand muni-broadband when there are no other options or just one competitor, but in a multi-competitor environment it doesn't make business sense. That's what free spending politicians don't understand. The same way they think giving kids computers will automatically make them smarter.
Governments don't exist to make a profit. If they do, they must reinvest those profits back for the public good.

The fact they are coming out $1.1 million ahead I think speaks volumes.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20446061 Wed, 07 May 2008 14:04:23 EDT Re: Not tax debt http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20445881 soothsayer15 :
said by MattE See Profile :

The main argument of most anti-muni pundits is that if these projects fail, the citizens will be on the hook for a huge tax burden.

This is proof that is not the case as they earned a cool $1.1 million off the deal.
They didn't turn a profit. If they had they wouldn't be selling it. It costs them $39.5 million to start it. They were on pace to lose $10 million dollars from 2005 to this year, and that's after adding another $1.2 Million in taxes. I can understand muni-broadband when there are no other options or just one competitor, but in a multi-competitor environment it doesn't make business sense. That's what free spending politicians don't understand. The same way they think giving kids computers will automatically make them smarter.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20445881 Wed, 07 May 2008 13:30:44 EDT Not tax debt http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20445671 MattE : The main argument of most anti-muni pundits is that if these projects fail, the citizens will be on the hook for a huge tax burden.

This is proof that is not the case as they earned a cool $1.1 million off the deal.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20445671 Wed, 07 May 2008 13:00:49 EDT