Why?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : I-695 Thirty Dollar License Tab Initiative : One Thread

What has happened to this forum? At a time, in the not too distant past there were actually some good points on both side of the issue. Now, it seems to have become a name calling, foul language, pointless site.

I listen daily to ads against I-695 with a plaintive female voice telling us that life as we know it will end if I-695 should pass. Is this true? Or will in fact the state have to reevaluate its spending and make adjustments? I do not know the answers, but I do have a problem with "the sky is falling " attitude with the NO side.

Is this the right way to express our disgust with state spending and taxing? Again, I don't know, but I do know that this is the first time in my fifty some years in Wa. that I feel the people of the state are banding together to attempt to get the attention of state government.

What are the people of the state trying to say? Are they saying that our MVET is too high? Are they saying to taxes are too high in general? Are they saying that the state spends money mindlessly? I am going to take a chance and say that I believe they are saying yes to these questions and I can not disagree with them on this point.

Are the people of the state saying that they want to hurt essential services? Are they saying that they want the cities, counties, jr. taxing districts, transit and others to do without? Are they saying they want the sky to fall? I think not. But, I do believe the people are saying its time for the state to pay attention to our money just as we must do in our daily lives.

Should I-695 pass, must the little people( cities, counties, transit, jr. taxing districts) endure the wrath of the state, or should it be shared with all segments of govenrment? I don't know the answer to this either, but I do suspect that the state will inflict as much pain as they can at the lowest level of government that they can.

Could the state government have derailed I-695, but interjecting some common sense into their taxing and spending? I will not attempt to answer this one, but maybe some of our elected officials should look back and wonder.

-- rons (ron1@televar.com), October 13, 1999

Answers

Ron,

I definitly agree with your statement. Continually talking to friends, family, and others about the pros and cons of I-695, and seeing constant letters to the editors of my home town of Longview, I strongly feel that your statement are right on the point. I feel this proposition will pass with remarkly high numbers. The public can only see the truth, and that is the sky is not and will not fall. I too believe the mud slinging is going too far, but it will only be to the advantage of the passing of I-695.

-- Mr. Bill (bspencer@kalama.com), October 13, 1999.


Ron:

True, these threads are getting boring. I think it is because we have hammered at just about every issue brought forth. If you look back a very early posts you will see this. As for the name calling, I'm afraid that as long as the same people reply to messages (guilty) they will make it a point to name call them because they know the "tone" of these people.

Each time an issue has comes up, each side has spoke their mind about it and usually in the end there doesn't seem to be an answer either way of the original question sometimes.

I also believe that most people will be voting Yes on I-695 at the last minute if they haven't already decided. To me it would almost be common sense to vote Yes when I see these types of words on the election ballot: "Shall all license tab fees be $30 per year for motor vehicles, regardless of year, value, make, or model, beginning January 1, 2000." and "Shall any tax increase imposed by the state require voter approval?"

I predict a landslide Yes vote on I-695. I also predict a bunch of lawyers from the opposition trying to stop its implementation if it does pass (Remember Prop 103 in CA). Though I read on some other board that intitatives must take effect after a certain number of days according to our state constitution.

"May fortune favor the foolish."

-- Sandy D (sandy_d1@yahoo.com), October 13, 1999.


rons:

I have to agree with much of what you wrote, particularly about the reduced value of the recent posts. Just a point to consider. If you believe the state will attempt to inflict as much damage as possible to punish voters for the initiative, doesn't that mean that some of the concern that the sky may fall are accurate? Or at least valid concerns?

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 13, 1999.


d

Damn d agreeing with you again.

But if they do inflict the damage on us for wanting to keep some of our money maybe more people will wake up to the fact that the government today is in the business of getting re-elected, not doing the will of the people.

Ed - keeping it on a professional level

-- Ed (ed_brigdes@yahoo.com), October 14, 1999.


dbvz....

Please tell me that you do not believe what you wrote in the post above, or that I misunderstood it.

I think one can look back in history, to the beginning to time and see how long a country existed when the people lived in fear of their government. NOT LONG, and I hope that we don't have to live in fear of retaliation from our elected officials.

If fear of retaliation is a reason to vote no, we have bigger problems than being over or unfairly taxed.

-- rons (ron1@televar.com), October 14, 1999.



rons:

rons wrote, "Should I-695 pass, must the little people( cities, counties, transit, jr. taxing districts) endure the wrath of the state, or should it be shared with all segments of govenrment? I don't know the answer to this either, but I do suspect that the state will inflict as much pain as they can at the lowest level of government that they can."

I don't believe this will happen, but I thought I understood you to say YOU did. I was asking about the consistency of the above comment, with your "sky is" not falling position.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 14, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ