|
Irradiation posted:The only redeeming thing about Pullman is it isn't the tricities. The only redeeming thing about the tricities is this guy: http://www.youtu.be/ZaQyilizgU8
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
According to a poll, Richardson 55%, Kitzhaber 39%.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:According to a poll, Richardson 55%, Kitzhaber 39%. Meh - that's a pretty narrow demographic and small sample size. I'm not sure that I would give it much credence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 02:08
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:Meh - that's a pretty narrow demographic and small sample size. I'm not sure that I would give it much credence. Especially since their methodology was to take away people who weren't paying attention to the "scandal". So, amongst people who care about the "scandal", many are planning to vote for Richardson. Although it is still bad news for Kitzhaber.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 05:12
|
|
|
Earlier in the thread I had mentioned the controversy over the expansion of Eugene's EMX dedicated transit line out West 11th avenue, and I happened to be out there last week, and noticed this sign up outside a Chinese restaurant: LTD stands for Lane Transit District, and is the name of the bus system itself - EMX is just the half-assed light rail stand-in of LTD. I'm not sure when the opposition's signage took a turn for the insane, but they appear to be getting ever-more strident after losing in court.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Wait, so they're just against this thing because it may give public transport to drug dealers? Or is there some kind of pass subsidy thing in place?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
Faffel posted:Wait, so they're just against this thing because it may give public transport to drug dealers? Or is there some kind of pass subsidy thing in place? No, the real arguments against the expansion are pretty reasonable. This just appears to be the opposition getting desperate and just making poo poo up, and possibly is a dig against the city of Springfield. EMX currently connects downtown Springfield to downtown Eugene, so perhaps they are arguing that the undesirables from Springfield will roam further into Eugene if they can ride EMX. There is a fairly vague Wikipedia article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_Express_%28EmX%29
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
That specific restaurant owner has a long-lasting grudge against LTD in all its forms. They've always got signs up against any bus system anything, and have for years and years. That said, there's definitely a persistent opposition against LTD expanding into 11th, because that area is basically Eugene's dalliance with Big Box stores along a big long strip accessible only by cars. And the people who like that kind of place pretty much abhor socially-conscious anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
Kaal posted:That specific restaurant owner has a long-lasting grudge against LTD in all its forms. They've always got signs up against any bus system anything, and have for years and years. That said, there's definitely a persistent opposition against LTD expanding into 11th, because that area is basically Eugene's dalliance with Big Box stores along a big long strip accessible only by cars. That particular part of West 11th reminds me of Lancaster Drive in Salem, although not quite as bad yet. Sacrificing lanes in that part of West 11th doesn't strike me as a great idea. Maybe farther out it could be workable, but not in the part closer to downtown.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:No, the real arguments against the expansion are pretty reasonable. This just appears to be the opposition getting desperate and just making poo poo up, and possibly is a dig against the city of Springfield. EMX currently connects downtown Springfield to downtown Eugene, so perhaps they are arguing that the undesirables from Springfield will roam further into Eugene if they can ride EMX. The 2014 lawsuit ruling (PDF) is an interesting read. Before moving down here to Eugene, I lived in the northern suburbs of Seattle. They did the same express bus thing up there to highway 99, between Seattle and Everett. It was a giant rolling construction project that took years and years to finish, and it moderately inconvenienced areas for about a year at a time. I can't remember seeing a single person -- nutjob or otherwise -- complain about the end result. Such a weird argument against bus service... e: The nutters have a website. Golly gee, it stopped being updated before the summary judgement against them. I wonder why. McGlockenshire fucked around with this message at 08:24 on Oct 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 08:22
|
|
|
I have to admit that one of my personal qualms with adding EMX service out West 11th is that it will probably drive more traffic to Wal-Mart. Essentially subsidizing them to bleed more money from the community is not real high on my list of civic improvements.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 09:40
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:I have to admit that one of my personal qualms with adding EMX service out West 11th is that it will probably drive more traffic to Wal-Mart. Essentially subsidizing them to bleed more money from the community is not real high on my list of civic improvements. Ultimately, it really doesn't make sense not to have good mass transit in that area though, and it is a bit late trying to get rid of big box stores.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 09:50
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:EMX currently connects downtown Springfield to downtown Eugene, so perhaps they are arguing that the undesirables from Springfield will roam further into Eugene if they can ride EMX. This is a perennial favorite among the shitheads in Vancouver; they're afraid that
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
There was a school shooting today at Marysville Pilchuck HS in Snohomish County.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
King5 has a live stream: http://www.king5.com/videos/news/local/2014/08/19/14311751/
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
High wind warning for tonight in the Seattle area. Be careful out there, gusts up to 60 mph.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Also windy in Portland, god drat. stay safe, unicycle guy
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:17
|
|
precious
|
It's been windy as hell down here in Eugene, although it seems calmer now. Trees down, very gusty, had to chase the drat garbage can out of the street. I'm guessing the weather we were having this afternoon is starting to hit you guys.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
Has anyone in Seattle area found a good source of information regarding the measures on the upcoming ballot? I've read through endorsements, the explanations of the measure, the Attorney General's commentary, etc, but I was hoping for something that would look at the issues in an extremely thorough way. For example there's a measure http://tinyurl.com/kz62tat to reduce class sizes in Washington. Most articles against paint it as some enormous expense without putting it in the context of the state budget, most articles for don't speak to -how much- they might expect it to help our education system (I know that cross-state comparisons have issues with demographics etc but an attempt could at least be made).
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:18
|
|
|
Nocts posted:Has anyone in Seattle area found a good source of information regarding the measures on the upcoming ballot? I've read through endorsements, the explanations of the measure, the Attorney General's commentary, etc, but I was hoping for something that would look at the issues in an extremely thorough way. For example there's a measure http://tinyurl.com/kz62tat to reduce class sizes in Washington. Most articles against paint it as some enormous expense without putting it in the context of the state budget, most articles for don't speak to -how much- they might expect it to help our education system (I know that cross-state comparisons have issues with demographics etc but an attempt could at least be made). The stranger has decent summaries, but if you want the original text the wa.gov pages are probably your best bet. http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/our-endorsements-for-the-november-general-election-plus-cheat-sheet/Content?oid=20809703
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
I-1351 is a pretty easy one. On one side you have, "A reduction in class size is pretty widely accepted as a method to improve the quality of early education, especially in poor and disadvantaged children." On the other side you have, "But it's expensive! "
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
Our education is already so underfunded it's literally illegal. There's no reason to not run the bill higher.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:03
|
|
|
High winds in the Tri-Cities tonight, too. My cat wanted out, ran out and took a look around, then ran right back in. Can anyone summarize what the Advisory Votes #8 and #9 are about on the WA Ballot? The voter's pamphlet has very little information about them and it is not very clear at all. No statements for, against, no details or budgetary impact. Just a nebulous summary about some leftover of Eyman's super-majority initiative from a few years back. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Before voting for position 7 judge, make sure you read a bit more into the race between Debra Stephens and John "Zamboni" Scannell. short story: Scannell was an attorney, got disbarred because of trying to stop courts from investigating relationships with his clients. He gets his name from being the zamboni driver at Seattle Center. He's running for judge so he can try and get his disbarment removed. In reality, if somehow elected he could be deemed unfit for the position. He also looks like this:  Washington State politics.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
I-594 seems like a nice idea, but it goes to far in my opinion. If me and a friend went to a range and I let him shoot a few bullets from one of my guns, i'd be breaking the law. I'd be breaking the law if i gave a gun as a gift without spending money to transfer it through a FFL. They can require background checks for gun shows without having to go that far.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 10:24
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:I-594 seems like a nice idea, but it goes to far in my opinion. If me and a friend went to a range and I let him shoot a few bullets from one of my guns, i'd be breaking the law. I'd be breaking the law if i gave a gun as a gift without spending money to transfer it through a FFL. They can require background checks for gun shows without having to go that far. Good news (because polling suggests it'll pass)! Those are fine. Section 3, subsection 4, contains exemptions (PDF). A gifted gun is only exempted for family, though, which here means, "spouses, domestic partners, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles."
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:25
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:I-594 seems like a nice idea, but it goes to far in my opinion. If me and a friend went to a range and I let him shoot a few bullets from one of my guns, i'd be breaking the law. I'd be breaking the law if i gave a gun as a gift without spending money to transfer it through a FFL. They can require background checks for gun shows without having to go that far. No it doesn't. The situation you describe is very far from the intent of the initiative, easily corrected with a single sentence, and its enforcement wouldn't stand up in court. The intent, and the wording of the exemptions, is loans where the legal owner is not present. If gun enthusiasts want better gun laws, they should write and support better gun laws. Instead they write poo poo like I-591.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
These degenerates will regret the day that they decided to restrict the freedom to purchase guns in the parking lot of Fred Meyer. In other news, my power has been out since about 8 o'clock last night.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
ElBrak posted:I-594 seems like a nice idea, but it goes to far in my opinion. If me and a friend went to a range and I let him shoot a few bullets from one of my guns, i'd be breaking the law. I'd be breaking the law if i gave a gun as a gift without spending money to transfer it through a FFL. They can require background checks for gun shows without having to go that far. There is a specific section that addresses use of someone else's firearms who must be present while at a range
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:There is a specific section that addresses use of someone else's firearms who must be present while at a range Way to ignore the rest of the post. Sure, disdainfully and ignorantly impose restrictions on rural types. There can never be consequences! King county scolds will gleefully vote and ride bicycles, scoffing to one another "what's a gun for anyway?" Then cut themselves clumsily trying to open a package with child-safe scissors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Way to ignore the rest of the post. Sure, disdainfully and ignorantly impose restrictions on rural types. There can never be consequences! King county scolds will gleefully vote and ride bicycles, scoffing to one another "what's a gun for anyway?" Then cut themselves clumsily trying to open a package with child-safe scissors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
oxbrain posted:I-1351 is a pretty easy one. On one side you have, "A reduction in class size is pretty widely accepted as a method to improve the quality of early education, especially in poor and disadvantaged children." On the other side you have, "But it's expensive! No, on the other side you have "you're enacting laws without funding". I'd love to vote for an initiative that says unicorns are totally rad and we should all have one, but without something in the bill to actually pay for the unicorns it's all just talk.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Xylorjax posted:No, on the other side you have "you're enacting laws without funding". I'd love to vote for an initiative that says unicorns are totally rad and we should all have one, but without something in the bill to actually pay for the unicorns it's all just talk. Good thing its a law about education rather than unicorns then! If the Washington constitution required the state to provide unicorns, that analogy would sound much less duplicitous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Xylorjax posted:No, on the other side you have "you're enacting laws without funding". I'd love to vote for an initiative that says unicorns are totally rad and we should all have one, but without something in the bill to actually pay for the unicorns it's all just talk. As has been mentioned, the state legislature is in contempt of court for not adequately funding education. They need to spend more money on education anyways. What this does is make sure that they don't spend it all on dumb bullshit, but rather on things that are proven as effective at improving educational results.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
I-1351 just makes smaller classrooms a priority over other projects. It isn't new spending.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
Do you honestly believe that adding further requirements for money those fucknuts aren't finding will make it better? "Yes, we don't provide enough now, but if you ask for more it will suddenly happen".
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 10:04
|
|
|
It's not asking for more on top of the funding gap that already exists. It basically just clarifies how they should start filling the hole -- a clear outline of where to start. "You aren't spending enough on education" is already an illegal thing congress is doing, but it's easier to get away with ignoring a vague mandate. I-1351 is meant to clarify a very specific thing they should do, which falls within that existing mandate. (Importantly, this makes it easier for the courts to take them to task if they don't act). Ditocoaf fucked around with this message at 11:09 on Oct 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 11:03
|
|
|
By the way, is there still any income-tax activism? I'd happily man a phone bank or seal envelopes for 6 hours to help get that done. I moved here to WA from MA and this no-income tax thing is a joke. Note how heavily WA leans on Sales & Gross Receipts, and how much of that MA shunts off to the income tax: code:And then look at how that plays out in terms of % income eaten at varying income levels:   All you Washingtonians are doing is taxing the poo poo out of yourselves to give the rich a break. Furthermore, from 2012: Massachusetts Tax Revenue: $22,805,644,000 Washington Tax Revenue: $17,624,715,000 And google says: Massachusetts population: 6.693 million (2013) Washington population: 6.971 million (2013) So you'd even increase the budget.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
A large chunk of 'liberals' in Washington are actually anti-tax dipshits. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Mrit posted:A large chunk of 'liberals' in Washington are actually anti-tax dipshits. This is why we need income-tax propaganda. If in June 2004, the libertarian magazine Reason could send each of their 40,000 subscribers a magazine whose cover had a satellite image of their neighborhood, house circled, then assuredly in 2014 we could send everyone one of those folded-over post cards showing the amount of money they'd save under an income tax regime.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 16:16
|
|