Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Boatless Member :(
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I think it seems like a "Yes" vote for me. However, I'm getting a lot of "No" mail that just seems completely contradicting to what the proposition is actually proposing. Am I missing something?

Also, I got mail from the D's that left out Prop 39 on purpose and put 40 as a yes so people who accidently vote 39 yes and then go oh well it's just a proposition instead of getting a new ballot when they follow it line by line.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
25,975 Posts
I think it seems like a "Yes" vote for me. However, I'm getting a lot of "No" mail that just seems completely contradicting to what the proposition is actually proposing. Am I missing something?

Also, I got mail from the D's that left out Prop 39 on purpose and put 40 as a yes so people who accidently vote 39 yes and then go oh well it's just a proposition instead of getting a new ballot when they follow it line by line.
Heres how I look at it. First, the key word in the prop is "allows" it does not mandate anything. When you see a prop that has a mandate, you can assume its from the "party of control" specially if it controls a company or corporation and even more so if its a industry or market with a huge cash flow.

Second, the prop "allows" rewards to responsible people, and presumably at the expense of irresponsible people. This will usually result in a spin to mean, rewarding the rich at the expense of the poor. I'll let you decide who would spin it in that direction, which party is the party of irresponsible people.

3rd, the party of slackers will have you believe that this is counter to getting irresponible people to get insurance due to the increase costs of insurance if the bill is passed. The insurance companies are not going to give away rewards without offsetting the cost on the other side(probably true) but WE the resposible are already paying more for insurance because the cars tend to be fully insured, for more money, with a higher PL & PD coverage, AND we tend to buy Under Insured and Un Insured coverage that never even entered their "only the bare minimum coverage" mind. The spin doctors will tell you this hurts the poor, and makes getting insurance even harder and more expensive. I can spin it the other way. Thats true ONLY if the "poor person" was already running around uninsured PRIOR to the bill passing. The loser POS was already driving uninsured before the bill. So how the fuck does this bill effect a loser POS like that?
They will say it discriminates againt those that don't currently have insurance. WELL DUH! Thats the point!
You want a reduction on you insurance, get some, and maintain coverage for 5 years and you too can have a discount like all the other RESPONSIBLE people in the state and stop acting like a freek'n criminal illegal immigrant!!!!

Heres how I decide a prop like that. Who is most likley to vote for a bill like that?

THIS GUY?


OR THIS GUY? And which do you wish to be aligned with.




100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top