VOL. LIV, NO. 47
California State University, Long Beach November 19, 2003
.
ADVERTISEMENT


     
 
 
 


Editorial Staff

Rachelle Youngman
Editor in Chief

Miguel A. Lopez
Managing Editor

Tina Page
News Editor

Jamie Oye
Assistant News Editor

Sonya Smith
City Editor

Jack Scheneider
Assistant City Editor

Monica L. Pardee
Opinion Editor

Monica L. Clark
Diversions Editor

Karl Peterson
Sports Editor

Jennifer Camacho
Photo Editor

Beverly Munson
Advertising/Business Manager

Janet Gutierrez-Tostado
Floria Myung

Advertising Representatives

Marcela Juarez
Esther Song

Business Staff

J. M. Eggleston
Production Manager

Kari Schneider
Assistant Production Manager

Lego Hartanto
Production Staff

Carlo Dayrit
Justin Smith

Circulation Staff

 

. News  
 

Letter to the editor

Foggy information

While I am not a financial expert, I do try to pay attention to what people who are financial experts say. Not everyone in the know thinks borrowing money is a bad idea for California. Two months ago I heard an expert recommend precisely the same course of action based upon the low interest rates. The expert explained that by borrowing now at the lowest interest rate that California will benefit from future increases in the interest rate. The fact that the interest rate cannot stay low long means that it will cost less to borrow the money today than in the future. Borrowing money at 1 percent is more economical than borrowing through bonds from the public which would require at least four to five times in interest paid.

The government regularly borrows to operate. All bonds are borrowing. This type of borrowing is questioned procedurally by the people with a vote, because the people repay the bond. If the state government were to borrow without a vote, using a debt instrument to a lending institution instead of through public bonds, it is possible that the people might not be directly liable for repayment in the event of default. This could be a great advantage to the people in the event that the state went bankrupt in the future.

This rate would be lower than the average consumer interest-rate, and if loaned to qualified recipients to minimize bad debt, the government could actually make some profit on borrowing that money while simultaneously helping businesses grow and create jobs. That, in turn, would likely deliver additional tax revenue to the state.

While I am not convinced either way yet as to what is the best course of action for California, I think as editors of a college paper you owe the subject more investigation and consideration before you take any positions on the governor's proposals. You don't have to leave the campus to try interviewing some economic or political science experts to get some facts before you jump to what seem to be premature and unsubstantiated conclusions. Our students deserve to have facts and information presented for their consideration, not merely your unfounded personal opinion forced down their throat.

-- Ed Ober
Political science major

 

 


Calendar

Display Ads

Front Page

univmag

 

ADVERTISEMENT


.
©2003 Daily Forty-Niner. All rights reserved