|
Post by Steve Rosenow on Feb 5, 2013 0:19:31 GMT -8
And for what it's worth, the video that KOMO was talking about. I had to do a bit of searching:
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on Feb 5, 2013 0:22:15 GMT -8
That being said, I can't recall any discussion surrounding low-quality products from WA shipyards sailing in WA waters since the Issaquah-class gong show. So I think as long as the state is able to keep costs competitive, or at least within the range of economic benefit, I think building at home is a wise choice. One thing that often gets forgotten is that the Issaquah-class was built by a shipyard who had absolutely zero experience in building anything *that* big and as complex as the they were. By the time the Jumbos were entering their first decade of service, Todd had far more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2013 8:30:37 GMT -8
The Interstate highways should go to federal government just like Trans Canada Highways are federal founded. Though this doesn't have anything to do with ferries, I'll just say this: No, just no! There are so many more Interstate highways and it would be too costly to have them be maintained by the federal government. I say the states do a fine job of maintaining them anyway. They're already sticking their nose in our faces enough, and we have $16 trillion in debt and growing, $1 trillion in budget deficit and growing, and a president that sucks more than Bush did (Bush was okay, but Obama is a complete fail). He's taken over the healthcare system in an extremely unpopular law called "Obamacare," which will be a massive expansion of federal government and will decrease the quality of our healthcare system. You Canadians have socialized healthcare and it sucks, so much so that when you're denied care by your gov't, you come across the border to America to get much better healthcare. You can tell that I'm a conservative, living in the liberal (left-wing) city of Seattle . I think WSF needs to increase its efficiency, starting by replacing the gas-guzzling engines in the KdTs with more efficient ones as "lifc" has suggested multiple times. To my annoyance, David Moseley doesn't want to do this, and he thinks that the 6000hp engines are justified, even though such engines are more powerful than the ones on the larger Evergreen State class AND the Issaquah class! Moseley is a typical government bureaucrat, who fits the mold of the typical government agency leader, which is to increase inefficiency of your agency and drive up costs for taxpayers. I HATE that mentality of bureaucrats!!!! Canadians pay about 50$-$60 a month directly for health care, even lower in Quebec ($200 a year flat fee). Where you are getting "denied health care from our government" from...? That's unheard of in Canada. We have made our own independant choice in Canada to commonly help pay for healthcare so the best health care doesn't go to only those who can pay for it. Try living in Canada, I bet you've never been to a hospital without pulling out your wallet.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 5, 2013 8:39:29 GMT -8
Though this doesn't have anything to do with ferries, I'll just say this: No, just no! There are so many more Interstate highways and it would be too costly to have them be maintained by the federal government. I say the states do a fine job of maintaining them anyway. They're already sticking their nose in our faces enough, and we have $16 trillion in debt and growing, $1 trillion in budget deficit and growing, and a president that sucks more than Bush did (Bush was okay, but Obama is a complete fail). He's taken over the healthcare system in an extremely unpopular law called "Obamacare," which will be a massive expansion of federal government and will decrease the quality of our healthcare system. You Canadians have socialized healthcare and it sucks, so much so that when you're denied care by your gov't, you come across the border to America to get much better healthcare. You can tell that I'm a conservative, living in the liberal (left-wing) city of Seattle . I think WSF needs to increase its efficiency, starting by replacing the gas-guzzling engines in the KdTs with more efficient ones as "lifc" has suggested multiple times. To my annoyance, David Moseley doesn't want to do this, and he thinks that the 6000hp engines are justified, even though such engines are more powerful than the ones on the larger Evergreen State class AND the Issaquah class! Moseley is a typical government bureaucrat, who fits the mold of the typical government agency leader, which is to increase inefficiency of your agency and drive up costs for taxpayers. I HATE that mentality of bureaucrats!!!! Canadians pay about 50$-$60 a month directly for health care, even lower in Quebec ($200 a year flat fee). Where you are getting "denied health care from our government" from...? That's unheard of in Canada. We have made our own independant choice in Canada to commonly help pay for healthcare so the best health care doesn't go to only those who can pay for it. Try living in Canada, I bet you've never been to a hospital without pulling out your wallet. Really? Is that not the case after all? That's what i've heard but if you say that's not true, fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 5, 2013 8:48:33 GMT -8
That being said, I can't recall any discussion surrounding low-quality products from WA shipyards sailing in WA waters since the Issaquah-class gong show. So I think as long as the state is able to keep costs competitive, or at least within the range of economic benefit, I think building at home is a wise choice. One thing that often gets forgotten is that the Issaquah-class was built by a shipyard who had absolutely zero experience in building anything *that* big and as complex as the they were. By the time the Jumbos were entering their first decade of service, Todd had far more. Yes, it should be noted that the legislature chose Marine Power & Equipment to build the Issaquahs because several legislators owed the company lots of $$ in private boat repairs. There was another bid from a shipyard in Texas but their design looked so much less modern, and had more-open cardecks. That's the other reason why MP&E got the contract. Even so, MP&E failed miserably at building the Issaquah class, but now they are some of the most reliable and sturdy boats in the fleet.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 5, 2013 9:07:12 GMT -8
Wait, I thought liberals would not want such a thing. Liberals, (aka "left-wingers" or "the Left") at least in America, can be extremely radical as to desire socialism, and not have free-markets and private companies running things. Thus, having WSF become semi-private would go against the views of the Left, which predominates politics in Seattle, which has the most influence in Olympia and silences all the more conservative voices outside of Seattle. My Government teacher told us that Seattle is like a political bubble; as soon as you step outside the Seattle city limits, people become more conservative in their political views. As a Liberal, I take offense to this. I've lived in cities and I currently live in a very rural setting outside of Shelton. And I happen to be Liberal. The word "Liberal" comes from the Latin word "Liberalis" which is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Most Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property. We totally believe in the free-market philosophy, however what we don't believe in - is an *unregulated* free market philosophy (aka Laissez-faire) where there are no rules. Regulation of the various markets is necessary to eliminate fraud and other means of deceptive business and market practices. Most Liberals also don't believe in not having private enterprise. You'll be amazed to find most of us support it. We just don't see how it's effective to privatize certain aspects of government (roadway maintenance, government healthcare, etc.) Also, Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty and homelessness. Liberals also ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things...every one! We also believe workers should have fair rights and fair pay. Conservatives oppose it. Also, every single technological feat, every historical milestone, every single major achievement in this country, be they social, economic, or political, has always happened under Liberal leadership. The rest, can be held off for another thread or another discussion, but I take offense to Liberals being bad for the country. I guess I get liberals confused with left-wingers. Are they not the same? I thought liberal=left-wing while conservative=right-wing. Personally, as a conservative I believe in some progressive philosophies, such as business regulation, as that's the only way the free market can really work. But then again, you can't have too much regulation as that would cripple businesses. It's a fine line. As a conservative I also support the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Some conservatives opposed it back in the day because they thought it was an overreach of government influence into their lives. Some things that liberals created I am opposed to because they are a significant expansion of government influence into our lives, like Social Security and Medicare. Both programs are expensive and are gonna go broke in 10 years. I don't trust the government with this stuff! I don't get the point of Social Security; how is it any different than creating a savings account? And why must I worry about my bank going under when my money is insured by the FDIC (an FDR New Deal program I support)? So I share some views with you, and it is clear that just like liberals, conservatives are all over the place in their views of government. Remember that I agree w/ you liberals on somethings, like freedom, voting rights, and the free market, but I do not support a huge government. I believe that "as government expands, liberty contracts." I believe that there are some things that government has the complete responsibility to take care of, including providing funding for ferries. But don't increase taxes to do so; take money from less-important programs like health-care (people can provide for that themselves) and put it towards roads and ferries! People don't like taxes, yet they like all the goodies the government gives them. Makes absolutely no sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 5, 2013 9:16:34 GMT -8
Washington State used to receive federal funding. Several of our ferries were paid for by U.S. Housing and Urban Development grants. The most prominent examples are the E-State class, Supers and Jumbos. To my knowledge, currently, present laws and regulations forbid it, though. I think it's 'cause of the Build-in-Washington law.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 5, 2013 9:42:29 GMT -8
I guess I get liberals confused with left-wingers. Are they not the same? They are the same in that they are both people. Members of the human race, along with the rest of us. Labels usually mean different things to different people, so I try to avoid using them. They only cause division and misunderstanding.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Feb 5, 2013 10:06:57 GMT -8
Just to confuse you all south of the 49th, the BC Liberal Party should actually be called the BC Tea Bag Party. They are not 'liberals'. And no, you do not want to follow our semi-privatization experiment. It has been a failure. I expect it to be undone after the May BC election. And, lastly, keep on with building your boats at home. Keep American skilled ship yard workers working, but by all means do what you can to control costs. WCK, I am going to have to strongly disagree with you. Right now with Washington State, we are currently in a budget deficit of $1.5 billion for the next biennium. The state by not permitting competition has effectively created a monopoly. Part of the issue with the KDTs was the numerous change orders which to me signals that the project was rushed too quickly and not planned very well. However, for double the cost of the Island Home, we need to permit competition in order to provide the taxpayer a better deal. My father works for Vigor and like any corporation now of days, they have made progress in diversifying. They should have to compete instead of being given a monopoly because taxpayers want the best bang for the buck right now. Telecom has a monopoly where there is only one phone provider and one cable provider. Effectively meaning that each provider can raise their prices and not innovate. If for say someone could also use the same cable lines to provide service at a better price and provide better service, consumers would go to that service. So why not allow the same in ship building? Did you think my use of the word 'home' meant Washington State exclusively? That was not what I intended. In fact I believe that local yards should be favoured, but not at any cost. You could for instance say that the best Washington State bid must not exceed the best out-of-state bid by more than 5 or 10% in overall total cost. This would show preference to local yards, while also helping to put a lid on costs.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Feb 5, 2013 10:15:29 GMT -8
I don't agree with any assessment a new boat be built out of Washington waters. A recent news story on KOMO News stated that the construction of the KDTs and the Olympic Class provided a $15 million economic boost annually to the economy of Whidbey Island alone. I would much rather prefer the shipbuilding jobs be kept here and provide a local economic boost, than see our taxpayer dollars be sent elsewhere. The state should reign in on cost overruns, but IMO I don't see the need to build elsewhere. And the KDTs aside, Vigor (formerly Todd Shipyards), builds damn fine ferries for WSF. Okay, 15 million dollars to Whidbey Island net benefits? If the cost could be cut by half, then we still spent more than what we could have gotten in savings as taxpayers in general or could have invested the dollars in more vessels. BC Ferries purchased 3 365 vehicle vessels of very high quality for $290 million CAD in March of 2006. With inflation, calculated here and exchange rate to US dollars calculated here. The Cost today for 3 vessels would be $332,265,789.98 For each vessel, that rounds up to around $111 million per vessel. What do we get in Washington for that price? We are paying $146 million for the first Olympic class vessel alone, and $132.5 million for the second vessel. When BC Ferries can get more for less, there is a serious issue with cost control. I feel based on these facts as a taxpayer that I am being ripped off. Honestly if you wanted to generate economic activity, you would have been better off relocating the slip at Keystone to where the Issaquahs could get in no problem, expanded Port Townsend, and Keystone all for the same price as the 3 KDTs. If it wasn't for Haugen's politicing, we would never have had the issues with the KDTs, a poorly rushed project and wasted millions of taxpayer dollars. Building the newer 144s would have not led to the Salish being on the Bremerton route, Port Townsend-Keystone could handle the summer loads better. The only winners I see are the workers of Nichol Bros. and Whidbey Island along with the NIMBYs.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on Feb 5, 2013 10:17:02 GMT -8
As a Liberal, I take offense to this. I've lived in cities and I currently live in a very rural setting outside of Shelton. And I happen to be Liberal. The word "Liberal" comes from the Latin word "Liberalis" which is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Most Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property. We totally believe in the free-market philosophy, however what we don't believe in - is an *unregulated* free market philosophy (aka Laissez-faire) where there are no rules. Regulation of the various markets is necessary to eliminate fraud and other means of deceptive business and market practices. Most Liberals also don't believe in not having private enterprise. You'll be amazed to find most of us support it. We just don't see how it's effective to privatize certain aspects of government (roadway maintenance, government healthcare, etc.) Also, Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty and homelessness. Liberals also ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things...every one! We also believe workers should have fair rights and fair pay. Conservatives oppose it. Also, every single technological feat, every historical milestone, every single major achievement in this country, be they social, economic, or political, has always happened under Liberal leadership. The rest, can be held off for another thread or another discussion, but I take offense to Liberals being bad for the country. I guess I get liberals confused with left-wingers. Are they not the same? I thought liberal=left-wing while conservative=right-wing. Personally, as a conservative I believe in some progressive philosophies, such as business regulation, as that's the only way the free market can really work. But then again, you can't have too much regulation as that would cripple businesses. It's a fine line. As a conservative I also support the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Some conservatives opposed it back in the day because they thought it was an overreach of government influence into their lives. Some things that liberals created I am opposed to because they are a significant expansion of government influence into our lives, like Social Security and Medicare. Both programs are expensive and are gonna go broke in 10 years. I don't trust the government with this stuff! I don't get the point of Social Security; how is it any different than creating a savings account? And why must I worry about my bank going under when my money is insured by the FDIC (an FDR New Deal program I support)? So I share some views with you, and it is clear that just like liberals, conservatives are all over the place in their views of government. Remember that I agree w/ you liberals on somethings, like freedom, voting rights, and the free market, but I do not support a huge government. I believe that "as government expands, liberty contracts." I believe that there are some things that government has the complete responsibility to take care of, including providing funding for ferries. But don't increase taxes to do so; take money from less-important programs like health-care (people can provide for that themselves) and put it towards roads and ferries! People don't like taxes, yet they like all the goodies the government gives them. Makes absolutely no sense to me. I have problems with your assessment. First off, not everyone has the financial wherewithal to provide their own healthcare. My mother, grandparents, and even myself, are financially unable to. If I end up in the ER right now, that is an out-of-pocket expense I cannot afford. Even when I was working, I couldn't afford it. Same should I end up with cancer or some other long-term illness. Universal health care is found in every other civilized 1st-world nation on the planet, and no country is bankrupt because of it. Secondly, Social Security is not nor was ever designed to be an outreach of government. It was designed to be a means to lift up poor working adults out of the brink of poverty when they reach retirement age. It is not in any danger of going broke, either. It is completely solvent and will have the financial resources to pay out the demands of current and future retirees until 2036. If the payroll tax was increased just two percent and the income cap raised five percent, Social Security would be financially set for eternity. Those are cold hard and irrefutable facts. Right now, millionaires and billionaires don't pay into it (which wasn't the case when it was founded). If they paid just one or two percent into it, it would never go broke. Same goes for Medicare or Medicaid. This country was never founded on a "Everybody for themselves" mentality. The Constitution specifically states in the Preamble that the government has an obligation to provide for the general welfare of its population. Social Security was also modeled after a highly successful similar program in Germany and other countries in Europe. With regards to ferry funding, I am not sure you understand history. Prior to I-695 (a statewide initiave that repealed the MVET) the state received $1.2 BILLION in annual revenue from what was then known as the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (or MVET). That tax was a 10% tax on the assessed value of the car due at licensing registration and the entire time it was in effect, never saw a budget shortfall. 40 percent of the MVET revenue, or roughly $150 Million annually, went to funding the state ferry system. There, again, was never any budget shortfall. The Steel Electric debacle was a prime example of I-695's impact. The Hyak's lack of a MLU is a prime example of I-695. Our woefully inadequate fleet size is a prime example of I-695's impact. To properly fund one program, you do not close down another and raid its funds. You raise taxes to meet financial and economic responsibility. That is how government is properly ran.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on Feb 5, 2013 10:28:07 GMT -8
I don't agree with any assessment a new boat be built out of Washington waters. A recent news story on KOMO News stated that the construction of the KDTs and the Olympic Class provided a $15 million economic boost annually to the economy of Whidbey Island alone. I would much rather prefer the shipbuilding jobs be kept here and provide a local economic boost, than see our taxpayer dollars be sent elsewhere. The state should reign in on cost overruns, but IMO I don't see the need to build elsewhere. And the KDTs aside, Vigor (formerly Todd Shipyards), builds damn fine ferries for WSF. Okay, 15 million dollars to Whidbey Island net benefits? If the cost could be cut by half, then we still spent more than what we could have gotten in savings as taxpayers in general or could have invested the dollars in more vessels. BC Ferries purchased 3 365 vehicle vessels of very high quality for $290 million CAD in March of 2006. With inflation, calculated here and exchange rate to US dollars calculated here. The Cost today for 3 vessels would be $332,265,789.98 For each vessel, that rounds up to around $111 million per vessel. What do we get in Washington for that price? We are paying $146 million for the first Olympic class vessel alone, and $132.5 million for the second vessel. When BC Ferries can get more for less, there is a serious issue with cost control. I feel based on these facts as a taxpayer that I am being ripped off. Honestly if you wanted to generate economic activity, you would have been better off relocating the slip at Keystone to where the Issaquahs could get in no problem, expanded Port Townsend, and Keystone all for the same price as the 3 KDTs. If it wasn't for Haugen's politicing, we would never have had the issues with the KDTs, a poorly rushed project and wasted millions of taxpayer dollars. Building the newer 144s would have not led to the Salish being on the Bremerton route, Port Townsend-Keystone could handle the summer loads better. The only winners I see are the workers of Nichol Bros. and Whidbey Island along with the NIMBYs. Okay, blaming the Salish's presence in Bremerton on the 144-car Olympic class is factually incorrect. The sole and only reason the Salish was ever put in Bremerton was due to an unforeseen and unknown circumstance during the maintenance of the M.V. Walla Walla that knocked it out of service. The Walla Walla was originally scheduled to enter service not long after the drive motor meltdown fiasco. That factor, ontop of the fact the state ferry system had several other vessels in for annual maintenance, led to a fleet shortage. It had nothing to do with the Olympic class. As far as moving the Keystone slip, I agree, but what's done is done. You can't blame the positive economic impact of building the KDTs or the Olympic Class elements in Freeland to Whidbey Island on the bad decisions of one politician. $15 million annually is $15 million annually, and quite frankly I would support that sort of economic boost anywhere in the state. Denying that, just because you disagree with how a boat was built, where it was built, or where a ferry slip is located (or should be located) makes absolutely zero sense. The bottom line is that Whidbey Island received an economic boost in the end. That is not an inexcusable side effect of having ferries built here. It makes no sense. I agree that we should look into why our boats are costing so much (and I agree that those costs could be reigned in to a certain degree), but the fact stands that as a taxpayer living in the state of Washington, I expect my taxes to go towards building a boat in the state of Washington if it sails on Washington waters.
|
|
|
Post by Political Incorrectness on Feb 5, 2013 12:26:25 GMT -8
If the KDTs were not built, that would have been $200 million that could have been spent elsewhere. So in a ways of having proper vessels to run on routes in the case of unforseen circumstances, decisions made to building these specialized ferries instead of the 144 car vessels, the assumption could be made that we would have had the necessary vessels needed in case something like this occurred.
I am blaming Haugen because she was the one that did not provide the necessary funds to relocate Keystone. If that could have occurred, we would not have needed the KDTs and since she was the head of the Transportation Committee, she was the one that directed that decision and would not permit a sensible solution to occur. Wouldn't Whidbey Island receive an economic boost from more people being able to travel on the island such as Oak Harbor? Economic boosts make sense but there needs to be benefits that are seen. Sure we could expand Interstate 5 between Blaine and before Bellingham and that would provide an x amount of dollars in an economic boost, but there is no point in expanding that section if it is not even close to reaching capacity. I am not sure what you are implying by denial. If we are going to provide an economic boost to an area, there should be some sort of external benefits that are noticed by taxpayers. Currently, I do not see them, especially when BC Ferries is able to build much larger vessels for a cheaper price. That to me says we need to change our practices when it comes to building ferries and permit competition.
The economic impact argument leads to projects such as BART to San Jose, VTA Light Rail, e-BART to Antioch, and more. These projects have in common that the solution to the problem does not make sense and is more expensive than it needs to be. The utility of these projects are never going to materialize for the investment placed in them but they are going ahead with them anyways. VTA Light Rail has the worst ridership of all light rail systems in the nation. BART is saying it can garner ridership at a suburban rail station on the amount of exits at Embarcadero in San Francisco.
Also, how was the statistic gathered? We will have to agree to disagree on the matter of we have different interests as taxpayers within the state. I want to see the biggest bang for the buck and cut unnecessary regulations that increase the cost of doing that sort of business.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Feb 5, 2013 12:45:29 GMT -8
As a Liberal, I take offense to this. I've lived in cities and I currently live in a very rural setting outside of Shelton. And I happen to be Liberal. The word "Liberal" comes from the Latin word "Liberalis" which is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality. Most Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but generally they support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and private property. We totally believe in the free-market philosophy, however what we don't believe in - is an *unregulated* free market philosophy (aka Laissez-faire) where there are no rules. Regulation of the various markets is necessary to eliminate fraud and other means of deceptive business and market practices. Most Liberals also don't believe in not having private enterprise. You'll be amazed to find most of us support it. We just don't see how it's effective to privatize certain aspects of government (roadway maintenance, government healthcare, etc.) Also, Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty and homelessness. Liberals also ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, and the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things...every one! We also believe workers should have fair rights and fair pay. Conservatives oppose it. Also, every single technological feat, every historical milestone, every single major achievement in this country, be they social, economic, or political, has always happened under Liberal leadership. The rest, can be held off for another thread or another discussion, but I take offense to Liberals being bad for the country. I guess I get liberals confused with left-wingers. Are they not the same? I thought liberal=left-wing while conservative=right-wing. Personally, as a conservative I believe in some progressive philosophies, such as business regulation, as that's the only way the free market can really work. But then again, you can't have too much regulation as that would cripple businesses. It's a fine line. As a conservative I also support the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Some conservatives opposed it back in the day because they thought it was an overreach of government influence into their lives. Some things that liberals created I am opposed to because they are a significant expansion of government influence into our lives, like Social Security and Medicare. Both programs are expensive and are gonna go broke in 10 years. I don't trust the government with this stuff! I don't get the point of Social Security; how is it any different than creating a savings account? And why must I worry about my bank going under when my money is insured by the FDIC (an FDR New Deal program I support)? So I share some views with you, and it is clear that just like liberals, conservatives are all over the place in their views of government. Remember that I agree w/ you liberals on somethings, like freedom, voting rights, and the free market, but I do not support a huge government. I believe that "as government expands, liberty contracts." I believe that there are some things that government has the complete responsibility to take care of, including providing funding for ferries. But don't increase taxes to do so; take money from less-important programs like health-care (people can provide for that themselves) and put it towards roads and ferries! People don't like taxes, yet they like all the goodies the government gives them. Makes absolutely no sense to me. Compdude787, You have embodied almost every factually untrue stereotype of Canadians in the past week, I find this mildly offensive. You have embraced many, many misconceptions about operations of transportation infrastructure, this is pretty ignorant. And your interpretation of the political spectrum must have been a steep learning curve for you. I strongly suggest that you seriously consider doing some research before making your next post surrounding these issues. BTW it's a good thing my government was able to provide me with speedy, reliable, socialized (oh no!) healthcare, or else I wouldn't be alive to make this post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2013 16:07:33 GMT -8
Where would Washington State Ferries get the funding from? What would the funding do for all the routes?
I have an idea, increase taxes by 3%, the cost of taking the ferries by three percent and put the money into a ferry only fund. Which would solve the ferry funding because the ferries would be getting the founding which would make schedules with more frequent sailing in the San Juan Islands, Port Townsend to Keystone harbour route, Seattle to Bremerton route, Fauntleroy/Vashon Island/Southworth routes.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on Feb 5, 2013 16:18:01 GMT -8
Where would Washington State Ferries get the funding from? What would the funding do for all the routes?
I have an idea, increase taxes by 3%, the cost of taking the ferries by three percent and put the money into a ferry only found. Which would solve the ferry funding because the ferries would be getting the founding which would make schedules with more frequent sailing in the San Juan Islands, Port Townsend to Keystone harbour route, Seattle to Bremerton route, Fauntleroy/Vashon Island/Southworth routes. You clearly didn't read the article I posted. The state's muling a 5% tax on vehicle licenses (basically reinstating the MVET at half its original tax rate), to make up for it, which in turn would go directly to WSF. And it's not "Founding", it's "funding".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2013 16:28:20 GMT -8
Where would Washington State Ferries get the funding from? What would the funding do for all the routes?
I have an idea, increase taxes by 3%, the cost of taking the ferries by three percent and put the money into a ferry only found. Which would solve the ferry funding because the ferries would be getting the founding which would make schedules with more frequent sailing in the San Juan Islands, Port Townsend to Keystone harbour route, Seattle to Bremerton route, Fauntleroy/Vashon Island/Southworth routes. You clearly didn't read the article I posted. The state's muling a 5% tax on vehicle licenses (basically reinstating the MVET at half its original tax rate), to make up for it, which in turn would go directly to WSF. I meant on everything. But, 5% tax on your vehicle licenses could work. The state could also increase gas price for the funding of the ferries. The only way, for funding to go back to its normal level in the past is to raise fares and taxes.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 5, 2013 18:01:53 GMT -8
I guess I get liberals confused with left-wingers. Are they not the same? I thought liberal=left-wing while conservative=right-wing. Personally, as a conservative I believe in some progressive philosophies, such as business regulation, as that's the only way the free market can really work. But then again, you can't have too much regulation as that would cripple businesses. It's a fine line. As a conservative I also support the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Some conservatives opposed it back in the day because they thought it was an overreach of government influence into their lives. Some things that liberals created I am opposed to because they are a significant expansion of government influence into our lives, like Social Security and Medicare. Both programs are expensive and are gonna go broke in 10 years. I don't trust the government with this stuff! I don't get the point of Social Security; how is it any different than creating a savings account? And why must I worry about my bank going under when my money is insured by the FDIC (an FDR New Deal program I support)? So I share some views with you, and it is clear that just like liberals, conservatives are all over the place in their views of government. Remember that I agree w/ you liberals on somethings, like freedom, voting rights, and the free market, but I do not support a huge government. I believe that "as government expands, liberty contracts." I believe that there are some things that government has the complete responsibility to take care of, including providing funding for ferries. But don't increase taxes to do so; take money from less-important programs like health-care (people can provide for that themselves) and put it towards roads and ferries! People don't like taxes, yet they like all the goodies the government gives them. Makes absolutely no sense to me. Compdude787, You have embodied almost every factually untrue stereotype of Canadians in the past week, I find this mildly offensive. You have embraced many, many misconceptions about operations of transportation infrastructure, this is pretty ignorant. And your interpretation of the political spectrum must have been a steep learning curve for you. I strongly suggest that you seriously consider doing some research before making your next post surrounding these issues. BTW it's a good thing my government was able to provide me with speedy, reliable, socialized (oh no!) healthcare, or else I wouldn't be alive to make this post. Hmmm, well okay... You can have your own opinions on that stuff; I don't care. Actually, I did do some research into your politics but come on, don't expect me to know everything about your political environment! I understand the political spectrum and the views of the left and the right pretty well. I never intend to offend anyone, I am merely just stating my opinions on things.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 5, 2013 18:44:59 GMT -8
I guess I get liberals confused with left-wingers. Are they not the same? I thought liberal=left-wing while conservative=right-wing. Personally, as a conservative I believe in some progressive philosophies, such as business regulation, as that's the only way the free market can really work. But then again, you can't have too much regulation as that would cripple businesses. It's a fine line. As a conservative I also support the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. Some conservatives opposed it back in the day because they thought it was an overreach of government influence into their lives. Some things that liberals created I am opposed to because they are a significant expansion of government influence into our lives, like Social Security and Medicare. Both programs are expensive and are gonna go broke in 10 years. I don't trust the government with this stuff! I don't get the point of Social Security; how is it any different than creating a savings account? And why must I worry about my bank going under when my money is insured by the FDIC (an FDR New Deal program I support)? So I share some views with you, and it is clear that just like liberals, conservatives are all over the place in their views of government. Remember that I agree w/ you liberals on somethings, like freedom, voting rights, and the free market, but I do not support a huge government. I believe that "as government expands, liberty contracts." I believe that there are some things that government has the complete responsibility to take care of, including providing funding for ferries. But don't increase taxes to do so; take money from less-important programs like health-care (people can provide for that themselves) and put it towards roads and ferries! People don't like taxes, yet they like all the goodies the government gives them. Makes absolutely no sense to me. I have problems with your assessment. First off, not everyone has the financial wherewithal to provide their own healthcare. My mother, grandparents, and even myself, are financially unable to. If I end up in the ER right now, that is an out-of-pocket expense I cannot afford. Even when I was working, I couldn't afford it. Same should I end up with cancer or some other long-term illness. Universal health care is found in every other civilized 1st-world nation on the planet, and no country is bankrupt because of it. Secondly, Social Security is not nor was ever designed to be an outreach of government. It was designed to be a means to lift up poor working adults out of the brink of poverty when they reach retirement age. It is not in any danger of going broke, either. It is completely solvent and will have the financial resources to pay out the demands of current and future retirees until 2036. If the payroll tax was increased just two percent and the income cap raised five percent, Social Security would be financially set for eternity. Those are cold hard and irrefutable facts. Right now, millionaires and billionaires don't pay into it (which wasn't the case when it was founded). If they paid just one or two percent into it, it would never go broke. Same goes for Medicare or Medicaid. This country was never founded on a "Everybody for themselves" mentality. The Constitution specifically states in the Preamble that the government has an obligation to provide for the general welfare of its population. Social Security was also modeled after a highly successful similar program in Germany and other countries in Europe. With regards to ferry funding, I am not sure you understand history. Prior to I-695 (a statewide initiave that repealed the MVET) the state received $1.2 BILLION in annual revenue from what was then known as the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (or MVET). That tax was a 10% tax on the assessed value of the car due at licensing registration and the entire time it was in effect, never saw a budget shortfall. 40 percent of the MVET revenue, or roughly $150 Million annually, went to funding the state ferry system. There, again, was never any budget shortfall. The Steel Electric debacle was a prime example of I-695's impact. The Hyak's lack of a MLU is a prime example of I-695. Our woefully inadequate fleet size is a prime example of I-695's impact. To properly fund one program, you do not close down another and raid its funds. You raise taxes to meet financial and economic responsibility. That is how government is properly ran. Steve, you don't understand: I DO support adequate ferry funding!!!! I know what I-695 was, and I think I-695 was stupid since it completely raided money for the ferries. But it's proof that people don't like to pay lots of taxes. Because of that, government needs to spend our money wisely. That means setting priorities for what are the most important things to fund. Government cannot fund everything, so it needs to pick and choose what is the most important thing to get money. So do normal people. When you receive a paycheck, you have a bunch of things you could spend the money on. You only have a limited amount of money so you have to spend it on the things you absolutely need first (i.e. food, clothing, bills, gas for your car, etc.), and then whatever you have left, you spend it on things you want to get but aren't absolutely necessary (i.e. going to a movie or restaurant, buying a new TV or videogame, going on vacation, etc.). Government has to do this too, and they need to have priorities of what's the most important things to fund. Adequate funding for highways (and ferries), as well as education are things that I strongly agree are absolutely essential for the state government to fund, among other things. Unfortunately, the government doesn't have their priorities straight because neither of the two things I mentioned are getting adequately funded. This is really annoying to me, especially considering that the state's constitution says that the state has the paramount responsibility to provide for education! What's even more annoying is that during hard economic times, education and transportation funding are the first things cut by the legislature! Why can't they cut funding for other, less-important things? I don't have the slightest clue...
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 6, 2013 7:59:17 GMT -8
Wait, I thought liberals would not want such a thing. Liberals, (aka "left-wingers" or "the Left") at least in America, can be extremely radical as to desire socialism, and not have free-markets and private companies running things. Thus, having WSF become semi-private would go against the views of the Left, which predominates politics in Seattle, which has the most influence in Olympia and silences all the more conservative voices outside of Seattle. My Government teacher told us that Seattle is like a political bubble; as soon as you step outside the Seattle city limits, people become more conservative in their political views. Having done a little research on your liberal party, I find the BC Liberals are center to center-right on the political spectrum, as opposed to left-wing as they are here in the US! The term 'Liberals' here in Canada refers to a centrist political party on the national level, and a center-right political party at the BC provincial level. I knew that already! Didn't you read the last sentence of my comment? Maybe if you read it you wouldn't have thought I was so ignorant. Please read comments fully before making any judgements on the commenter, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 6, 2013 8:55:43 GMT -8
Question to member CompDude787:
What is your purpose in your ferry forum participation? What are your expectations for people in their reactions and responses to your posts?
Please give us some background on these items, so that it will be easier for people to know how they should respond to your posts.
Your posts seem loud and asking for some sort of reaction. So I think it would be good for all of us to know what your motivations and expectations are, regarding your forum participation in this and in other threads.
ie. in your "Canadians are so weird" post, a few weeks back, for example.
What are you trying to accomplish here? - If it is just to sound-off and provoke, then you've probably come to the wrong place. But if you are wanting to engage in discussion, then you need to make it easier for people to not misunderstand you and you need to make it easier for people to not be offended by your brashness.
And if you think that is "just the reader's problem", then that's another indication that you might be in the wrong place here.
Please clarify. You've obviously got lots of peoples' attention lately here, so you owe us an explanation of your intentions.
Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rosenow on Feb 6, 2013 9:05:53 GMT -8
Question to member CompDude787: What is your purpose in your ferry forum participation? What are your expectations for people in their reactions and responses to your posts? Please give us some background on these items, so that it will be easier for people to know how they should respond to your posts. Your posts seem loud and asking for some sort of reaction. So I think it would be good for all of us to know what your motivations and expectations are, regarding your forum participation in this and in other threads. ie. in your "Canadians are so weird" post, a few weeks back, for example. What are you trying to accomplish here? - If it is just to sound-off and provoke, then you've probably come to the wrong place. But if you are wanting to engage in discussion, then you need to make it easier for people to not misunderstand you and you need to make it easier for people to not be offended by your brashness. And if you think that is "just the reader's problem", then that's another indication that you might be in the wrong place here. Please clarify. You've obviously got lots of peoples' attention lately here, so you owe us an explanation of your intentions. Thank you. I'll second those remarks, Mr. Horn. I for one, find his remarks about Liberals (as in, American Liberals) to be extremely offensive and entirely untrue.
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 6, 2013 14:34:52 GMT -8
Question to member CompDude787: What is your purpose in your ferry forum participation? What are your expectations for people in their reactions and responses to your posts? Please give us some background on these items, so that it will be easier for people to know how they should respond to your posts. Your posts seem loud and asking for some sort of reaction. So I think it would be good for all of us to know what your motivations and expectations are, regarding your forum participation in this and in other threads. ie. in your "Canadians are so weird" post, a few weeks back, for example. What are you trying to accomplish here? - If it is just to sound-off and provoke, then you've probably come to the wrong place. But if you are wanting to engage in discussion, then you need to make it easier for people to not misunderstand you and you need to make it easier for people to not be offended by your brashness. And if you think that is "just the reader's problem", then that's another indication that you might be in the wrong place here. Please clarify. You've obviously got lots of peoples' attention lately here, so you owe us an explanation of your intentions. Thank you. I'll second those remarks, Mr. Horn. I for one, find his remarks about Liberals (as in, American Liberals) to be extremely offensive and entirely untrue. steve, Flugel horn and everyone else: I'm really sorry for posting some things that tipped you off/ offended. I really shouldn't have posted that silly "Canadians are so weird" post, first of all. And secondly, I apologize about my remarks about liberals and their beliefs; I realize I was completely wrong about how liberals really think and act. I apologize for assuming that all liberals are the same and have the same beliefs, I know better than that. As a conservative, I don't share all the beliefs that other conservatives have; clearly I have got to realize that liberals are the same way. Same can be said about Christians, or followers of all other religions (i.e. not all Muslims are terrorists ). I know my views on things may be different from a lot of others, but I will try my best to state them in a concise, polite and respectful way. Thanks, Flugel Horn, for politely and calmly pointing out what you don't like about what I'm saying in my posts that you don't like. I hope you all accept my apology.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Feb 6, 2013 14:51:48 GMT -8
Thanks, Flugel Horn, for politely and calmly pointing out what you don't like about what I'm saying in my posts that you don't like. I hope you all accept my apology. Thanks for your response. Much appreciated. In the interests of getting to know our fellow discussers better, we created this thread for new-member introductions. Please consider introducing yourself there, in that thread. - when we know a few things about each other, it usually makes it easier (and more fun) for these various discussions. ferriesbc.proboards.com/thread/3465/new-members?page=18
|
|
|
Post by compdude787 on Feb 6, 2013 17:43:18 GMT -8
Thanks, Flugel Horn, for politely and calmly pointing out what you don't like about what I'm saying in my posts that you don't like. I hope you all accept my apology. Thanks for your response. Much appreciated. In the interests of getting to know our fellow discussers better, we created this thread for new-member introductions. Please consider introducing yourself there, in that thread. - when we know a few things about each other, it usually makes it easier (and more fun) for these various discussions. ferriesbc.proboards.com/thread/3465/new-members?page=18 I didn't know of a get-to-know-you thread before, but now I've posted a belated introduction of myself. Thanks for telling me about it.
|
|