"The governor's proposal is not to borrow from the lottery," Schwarzenegger press secretary Aaron McLear said Wednesday. "The proposal is to sell, outright, a portion of future lottery profits. This is a big difference."
To make it payoff, California residents will have to spend a lot more on the lottery - attracted by larger prize payouts - than they do now. If they don’t, the state could hike the sales tax.
Schwarzenegger’s plan calls for the state to sell $15 billion in bonds that would be paid off with the increase in state lottery revenue. Unlike general obligation bonds, which carry the full backing of the state, California would not be required to pay off the lottery bonds.
—
The Indians aren’t the only ones running gambling ops. in this state these days.
2 posted on
05/14/2008 7:13:24 PM PDT by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Godspeed ... ICE toll-free tip hotline—1-866-DHS-2-ICE ... 9/11 .. Never FoRget!!!)
To: NormsRevenge
I’ll bet this is something to separate me from my money.
3 posted on
05/14/2008 7:13:31 PM PDT by
Drango
(A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
To: NormsRevenge
Sounds like a good reason to throw him out of the California GOP.
5 posted on
05/14/2008 7:22:35 PM PDT by
dr_who
To: NormsRevenge
I knew it! haha! Called this weeks ago. No freaking way was Schwartzeneger cutting spending.
Almost jokingly and dead seriously we declared that so what if California is 30-billion dollars in debt. They’ll just borrow it again! Just like the cloning money!
Perhaps California is really betting on that global warming research and said cloning to just spill money all over the state coffers?
This is ridiculous. How does the most beautiful state in the union get over-run with such freaking lugheads?
(And for those who think I was “bragging” about calling this, don’t. I’m rather much a fan of the absurd—sadly, it seems to predict what happens in California all too well. :(
To: NormsRevenge
Schwarzenegger's lottery bond proposal leaves many questionsThe most disturbing of which is: How the hell is it that in a state of 30 million people we always have to choose between 2 or 3 dunderheads for Governor?
Of course that goes for the Assembly and Senate also.
7 posted on
05/14/2008 7:42:43 PM PDT by
Texas Eagle
(Could pacifists exist if there weren't people brave enough to go to war for their right to exist?)
To: NormsRevenge
Time to put RINOLD out to pasture:

10 posted on
05/14/2008 8:20:35 PM PDT by
Extremely Extreme Extremist
(Bipartisanship: Two wolves and the American people deciding what's for dinner)
To: NormsRevenge
No sane investor would go for such a deal. I can't get a loan in this economic climate for investment property even though I can put a down payment on it. Gambling is a lot riskier than investment property and the only decent thing a responsible lender can do is greet what is basically unsecured borrowing with a contemptuous rejection. Mind you, the loan I sought was secured with physical collateral and it didn't fly. Why should the Governor believe lenders are going to hand out money for revenue that doesn't yet exist. No lender does it, period.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
15 posted on
05/14/2008 10:45:05 PM PDT by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
To: NormsRevenge
I don't see what the problem is! Just do like they do with the bridges, where they raise the tolls (the bridges were paid off long ago, but the state likes spending the money)!
If they raise the price of the Lotto tickets to $10 each, that will solve our budget woes. If not, maybe $15 each? After all, millions of people throw their bucks at the Lotto without getting anything back. Now they can smile knowing they rescued state gooberment.
17 posted on
05/14/2008 11:15:34 PM PDT by
roadcat
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson