Questions? You Answer! Game

[jamarquez]

Originally Posted by Steven

A: I need to post less so that I have time to study more.

Q: How will voting no on 68 cause the state to "cool off"?

A: NO NO NO, the the "cool off" one is Prop 1a........ I'm saying that IF prop 68 passes and 1A fails then the state can then take Majority of the money made in the city......... These Props are two whole different things.
68 means for NON-Indian casinos to come into the CA

1A - Limits the amount of money State Gov't can take away from Local Gov't.


Q: Now did I help you understand these two Props?

[Steven]

Originally Posted by jamarquez

A: NO NO NO, the the "cool off" one is Prop 1a........ I'm saying that IF prop 68 passes and 1A fails then the state can then take Majority of the money made in the city......... These Props are two whole different things.
68 means for NON-Indian casinos to come into the CA

1A - Limits the amount of money State Gov't can take away from Local Gov't.


Q: Now did I help understand these two Props?

A: If 68 doesn't pass the local government won't make the money anyway.

Q: If 68 passes and the state government takes the majority of the money, why is that bad?

[jamarquez]

Originally Posted by Steven

A: If 68 doesn't pass the local government won't make the money anyway.

Q: If 68 passes and the state government takes the majority of the money, why is that bad?

A: Cause then Local gov't will then mean NOTHING....then why have city managers and City Councilmembers and Mayors? Then the State will tell these cities how to spend "their" (if you will) money. Every city will then just be given money and thats that. No if and's or but's. I believe that local gov't will better KNOW how to spend then money then state Gov't since local gov't KNOWS it's own problems and not the state.

Originally Posted by Steven

A: If 68 doesn't pass the local government won't make the money anyway.

Local Gov't WILL aways make money....I don't support 68



Q : ANything else? I got to go in a little bit.

[Steven]

Originally Posted by jamarquez

A: Cause then Local gov't will then mean NOTHING....then why have city managers and City Councilmembers and Mayors? Then the State will tell these cities how to spead "their" (if you will) money. Every city then just be given money and thats that. No if and's or but's. I believe that local gov't will better KNOW how to speand then money then state Gov't since local gov't KNOWS it's own problems and not the state.



Local Gov't WILL aways make money....I don't support 68



Q : ANything else? I got to go in a little bit.

A: You have not said much about 68. You seem to keep talking about 1A. Let us ignore that one for now.

Q: Why is 68 bad in and of itself assuming the state government takes money either way?

[jamarquez]

Originally Posted by Steven

A: You have not said much about 68. You seem to keep talking about 1A. Let us ignore that one for now.

Q: Why is 68 bad in and of itself, asuming state government takes money either way?

OK....

A: Here is why I think 68 is bad.

- More Traffic on the freeways.....
- More Drunks out on the street.....Gambling + drinking = DON't Mix
- Gaming Revenue Act of 2004 (prop 68)has nothing to do with improving public education in California, although it is being promoted as a measure that would help our schools.
- It's just a public safety risk

Q OK or no?

[Steven]

Originally Posted by jamarquez

OK....

A: Here is why I think 68 is bad.

- More Traffic on the freeways.....
- More Drunks out on the street.....Gambling + drinking = DON't Mix
- Gaming Revenue Act of 2004 (prop 68)has nothing to do with improving public education in California, although it is being promoted as a measure that would help our schools.
- It's just a public safety risk

Q OK or no?

A: I will have to read more.

Q: If this is the case, why didn't you mention it earlier instead of talking about state government?

[jamarquez]

Originally Posted by Steven

A: I will have to read more.

Q: If this is the case, why didn't you mention it earlier instead of talking about state government?

a: lol.....Cause Then we will be going around and around like you and I normally do in our little chats...
TRUST ME on these 2 issues STEVE, you can disagree with me on some other things but please trust me on these 2.....Vote NO on 68 and vote YES on 1A

Q: Good night then I'm going NOW...(my question)....Are you tired too?

[Trader]

A: I'm tired, it has been a long day at school.

Q: "Vote NO on 68 and vote YES on 1A" ....how do we know you are right?

[Keng]

I am all for state government getting more money to help with their budget...

[PandaMoOo]

Originally Posted by Keng

I am all for state government getting more money to help with their budget...

A: Prop 1A:

A YES vote of this measure means:
State authority over local government finances would be significantly restricted.

Prop 68:

A NO vote of this measure means:
The state's current authority over local government finances would not be affected.

http://www.smartvoter.org/2004/11/02/ca/state/prop/68/
http://www.smartvoter.org/2004/11/02/ca/state/prop/1A/

Q: Did you see the vice presidential debates? What did you think if you did?

[zoedragon]

A: Didn't catch that. I would imagine not many people care that much about the vice presidents. Though they should since they could easily become president.

Q: What if we vote yes on 68 and yes on 1a, then wouldn't the local governments have a lot more revenue to fix their local problems? Or would there be more problems caused than the extra money would fix?

(BTW thanks for the links Panda, I prefer to read about both sides of the issue myself before deciding.)

[Admin]

A: (I have not read on Proposition 68 in its entirety so I'll answer PandaMoOo's question) I started watching the 1st debate on foxnews.com last night. I have to say that Senator John Kerry made a great impression in the debate and I think he won (favorite) in the first debate imo. And the minutes given to each speaker feels very limited for certain questions. Hahaha and President Bush with his extension.

Q: Will there be a debate between the Vice President and the running candidate, John Edwards?

[zoedragon]

A: I think there was a debate between them, wasn't that what PandaMoOo was asking about? It appears to have been yesterday. Here's a site covering it: http://www.case.edu/vpdebate/

Q: Do students seem to be fairly aware of major issues, or are most of them apathetic?

[PandaMoOo]

A: Most everyone I know, is mostly apathetic. I'd estimate... 1 in 15 follow politics a reasonable amount. While 1 in 3 get just enough info to make limited decision or opinon. Although I'm talking 1st or 2nd year college folk, so they might not be warmed up to how politics effects their lives.

Q: What do you think of the following quote from last night's Vice Presidential Debates?

One of the best lines of the night was when Dick Cheney addressed John Edwards, “Now, in my capacity as vice president, I am the president of Senate, the presiding officer. I'm up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they're in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight.”

(http://www.washingtondispat ch.com/page2/archives/000631.html)

[zoedragon]

A: The quote is out of context, so I went to the link you provided. That article has a VERY heavy Republican slant to it. It's too bad that differering viewpoints like those offered by the LA Times require you to have an account to view the article. Anyway, what's funny is that the two men actually DID meet at a prior occasion, but neither of them remembered it.

Q: Are there actually ANY objective websites that present both sides of an issue or person equally?

[jayandbutton]

Originally Posted by Steven

A: If 68 doesn't pass the local government won't make the money anyway.

Q: If 68 passes and the state government takes the majority of the money, why is that bad?

ISN'T 68 THE ONE THAT WILL REQUIRE THOSE GREEDY TRIBES TO COUGH UP 25 PER CENT OF THEIR REVENUES TO THE STATE???
ISN'T THAT GOOD FOR EVERYBODY ELSE???

[Steven]

Originally Posted by jayandbutton

ISN'T 68 THE ONE THAT WILL REQUIRE THOSE GREEDY TRIBES TO COUGH UP 25 PER CENT OF THEIR REVENUES TO THE STATE???
ISN'T THAT GOOD FOR EVERYBODY ELSE???

Why are you asking me? I'm the one that asked the question.

[zoedragon]

Originally Posted by jayandbutton

ISN'T 68 THE ONE THAT WILL REQUIRE THOSE GREEDY TRIBES TO COUGH UP 25 PER CENT OF THEIR REVENUES TO THE STATE???
ISN'T THAT GOOD FOR EVERYBODY ELSE???

Please refer to the Prop 68 thread and feel free to comment on it.

[jamarquez]

Originally Posted by zoedragon

Q: Are there actually ANY objective websites that present both sides of an issue or person equally?

A: I WISH.....Every media outlet is either Left or Right.

Q: Does anyone else think otherwise?

[Admin]

A: I agree as most authors will be biased. But there might be a few website that do present both sides of an issue or person equally, although hard to find.

Q: What do you want for christmas? (time to cool off a bit...)