California voters: Do you support prop 57 and 58? - Page 3

Lawrence of Arabia · February 12, 2004, 04:32

Im voting no on both.

Ted Striker · February 15, 2004, 04:33

I don't even know what the hell these two props are for

Ted Striker, Concerned Citizen

Az · February 15, 2004, 05:31

why oppose the re-financing? seems like a good idea.

Oerdin · February 15, 2004, 11:15

Refinancing debt at a lower interest rate is a no brainer. It's free money.

Sava · February 15, 2004, 12:51

Quote:

I do support both of them because they will be the only way to stabilize the budget. What is your take on this for those who are California voters?

even though I'm not a california voter (thank god), I shall put in my two cents...

I agree with the idea that budgets should be balanced (funny how Fez's cry for balanced budgets is silent in terms of Dubya). However, I think Arnold's motivation is simply to cut programs for the poor. In which case, I would not support the measure.

I do think government has a lot of wastage and lost revenue... in particular: subsidies to business, pork projects, and tax evasion by corporations. The problem is, one side (the Demoncrats) will tax more and probably pay for what they spend... however they will still not cut out the corporate fat. The other problem is the Repukes will still give corporations free money, cut taxes to not pay for what they spend, and cut every social program they can. Given the two horrendous choices, I choose the Demoncrats because at least we will help some people instead of making things worse (under Repuke plans). I just wish we had more alternatives.

Politicians are like dirty diapers. They need to be changed because they are full of ****.

Imran Siddiqui · February 15, 2004, 19:55

Quote:

So terrorism is okay as long as you support it's goals?

I do support the Palestinians after all

.

Hueij · February 15, 2004, 20:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

So terrorism is okay as long as you support it's goals?

I do support the Palestinians after all

.

Imran, seriously now. I do support the Palestinian goals but I don't support the methods some of them use.

About blowing up the Rainbow Warrior, I see several people here cheering for it that at the same time ***** about Palestinian terror acts. Is there a difference I don't get? If so, please explain so I can explain it to the widow of the photographer that got killed.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 15, 2004, 20:39

uh none of these props are about refinancing. prop 55 is gonna ncrease money to education. i go to to apublic college and Im against it. Prop 56 will allow politicians to increase votes with a 55% majority. the only thing that may make me change my mind about prop 56 is that it will increase the sanctions if they dont pass the budget on time. in other words, its a bad thing well packaged. so id have to vote against it. id rather have a late budget, then have my money taken away more easily.

Giancarlo · February 15, 2004, 21:09

This is a B.S post...

Quote:

Originally posted by Sava
I agree with the idea that budgets should be balanced (funny how Fez's cry for balanced budgets is silent in terms of Dubya).

The federal government has a good credit rating so it doesn't need to balance the budget. In fact deficit spending during a recession or era of slow growth is good for the economy.

Quote:

However, I think Arnold's motivation is simply to cut programs for the poor. In which case, I would not support the measure.

Who gives a damn about the poor? There isn't money to begin with!

Quote:

I do think government has a lot of wastage and lost revenue... in particular: subsidies to business, pork projects, and tax evasion by corporations.

Again you ignore the reality. The California state government has a lot of waste. But it has to do with stupid overbloated socialist welfare systems. Subsidies to businesses improve the economy!

Quote:

The problem is, one side (the Demoncrats) will tax more and probably pay for what they spend...

No... they are the morons who got us into this mess.

Quote:

The other problem is the Repukes will still give corporations free money, cut taxes to not pay for what they spend, and cut every social program they can.

Again crap. We only want to cut what is not needed.

You know nothing about Californian government at all.

Giancarlo · February 15, 2004, 21:10

Quote:

prop 55 is gonna ncrease money to education. i go to to apublic college and Im against it. Prop 56 will allow politicians to increase votes with a 55% majority.

Dude, I am not talking about prop 55 or prop 56. Both I'd vote against because they mean higher taxes on cash strapped businesses which is stupid. I am talking about prop 57 and prop 58. Prop 56 is perhaps the worst because it will crush the people and businesses with outrageous taxes.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 15, 2004, 21:21

hmm i cant find prop 57 or 58 in my voter handbook for March 2nd. When are these props up for vote?

Giancarlo · February 15, 2004, 21:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
hmm i cant find prop 57 or 58 in my voter handbook for March 2nd. When are these props up for vote?

http://www.yes57and58.org/

Odd... right on the bottom of that site they have a sentence saying "Vote Yes on 57 and 58 on March 2nd"

Lawrence of Arabia · February 15, 2004, 21:57

hmm the libertarian party is against 55, 56, 57, and 58.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 15, 2004, 21:59

it seems that if 58 or 57 fails, so does 57 or 58.

http://www.ca.lp.org/

Giancarlo · February 15, 2004, 22:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
hmm the libertarian party is against 55, 56, 57, and 58.

Well the libertarian party is a joke.. and is against financial austerity and restructuring as highlighted by 57 and 58. What nuts.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 15, 2004, 22:20

hook, line, and sinker

you better watch your mouth fezzie. its the only party which supports gay rights.

Giancarlo · February 15, 2004, 22:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
hook, line, and sinker

you better watch your mouth fezzie. its the only party which supports gay rights.

I don't like them and I do not endorse them for one social issue. I am not a single issue voter. Period. I wouldn't care because they do not speak for me, and they do not speak for almost any of my views.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 03:51

dont worry, they are also pro free market. so that wuld be two issues. and they are gaginst taxatioin, so thats three issues,. so if you dont endorse them for one social issues does that mean you are against gay marraige>?

Giancarlo · February 16, 2004, 04:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
dont worry, they are also pro free market. so that wuld be two issues. and they are gaginst taxatioin, so thats three issues,. so if you dont endorse them for one social issues does that mean you are against gay marraige>?

I don't think they are for pro-free market. The US Libertarian party right? They are far to the left man.

Me against gay marriage? That doesn't make much sense for one little reason. Maybe you can figure that one out.

Also because I don't endorse them, doesn't mean I am against gay marriage. I think the party itself is full of nuts.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 04:44

far to the left? are u shitting me? check out their site hahahahahahahha far to the left. hahahaah

www.lp.org

Giancarlo · February 16, 2004, 04:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
far to the left? are u shitting me? check out their site hahahahahahahha far to the left. hahahaah

www.lp.org

They are for drug legalization right? Well that is communist to me.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 04:48

why is that communist? and yes they are for drug legalisqation.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 04:49

communisty = command economy. drugs have nothing to do with economy.

Giancarlo · February 16, 2004, 04:50

Bottom line: The LP does not speak for me. They do not stand for what I believe.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 04:52

actually they do.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 04:53

they speak for free market (more then repugs) and pro gay marriage (more then rats) and for more everything.

Giancarlo · February 16, 2004, 04:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
actually they do.

No they don't. I'm against drugs and think draconian measures should be taken on offenders. I believe in the death penalty. I'm against abortion. Shall I go on?

Quote:

they speak for free market (more then repugs)

No true.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 05:00

yeah u should. why should u be agaisnt drugs and bbe for gays. its essentially the same ikssue. the arguemtsn are the same

and yes, they are for more of free market then the repugs. govt subsidies are not free market.

Giancarlo · February 16, 2004, 05:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
yeah u should. why should u be agaisnt drugs and bbe for gays. its essentially the same ikssue. the arguemtsn are the same

Are you drunk? Or is it late there? If it is late there I understand the abhorrent spelling.

But then again.. how are drugs and gay rights the same issue? What are you? Stupid? Drug addicts are not gay people. Are you calling me the same as a drug addict?

Quote:

and yes, they are for more of free market then the repugs. govt subsidies are not free market.

Nope the LP is not for free market. They are against what America stands for.

Lawrence of Arabia · February 16, 2004, 05:02

Quote:

Nope the LP is not for free market. They are against what America stands for

prove it.

and yea, im both druink, stoned and its late. not all people who use drugs are adddicts, such as myself.