Thank you Michigan voters for defeating prop 6

[sdifox]

I don't understand how a company can own an International crossing nor how it can get a referendum on the ballot to block government decisions, but at least it was defeated. Thank you MI residents for being sensible.

Now we just need Obama to give the go ahead and we can start building the bridge.

http://www.freep.com/article/2012110...eep-six-Prop-6

I wonder if the state can order full audit on the bridge owner.

[Northern Lawn]

It should not have been defeated. The Americans are voting to get something for nothing, how do you think this 47% sort of people are going to vote?

I mean what the hell? Why is Canada spending 1 billion dollars to build a damn bridge? And the Yanks pay NOTHING?

I swear Harper is being bribed by some American Lobbyist. He'll probably move to the states after we kick him out next election and be sitting pretty down there somewhere.

[rudeguy]

Yes on Prop 1, no on the rest.

We don't need another bridge to the hat.

[Colt45]

Harper always forgets what team he's on.

[sdifox]

Originally Posted by Northern Lawn

It should not have been defeated. The Americans are voting to get something for nothing, how do you think this 47% sort of people are going to vote?

I mean what the hell? Why is Canada spending 1 billion dollars to build a damn bridge? And the Yanks pay NOTHING?

I swear Harper is being bribed by some American Lobbyist. He'll probably move to the states after we kick him out next election and be sitting pretty down there somewhere.

Because we want to get our goods to America to sell it to them?

[sdifox]

Originally Posted by rudeguy

Yes on Prop 1, no on the rest.

We don't need another bridge to the hat.

You know voting no on prop 6 means you want the bridge right?

[PottedMeat]

he should be happy he got to print money for 30 years

...25% of all US-Canada traffic...

Toll US$4.75 / CA$4.75
Daily traffic 10,000+ trucks per day, 4000+ autos per day

Moroun's committee spent more than $33 million on its Proposal 6 campaign, smashing the state record for the most spent by one side on a statewide ballot initiative.

[sdifox]

Originally Posted by Colt45

Harper always forgets what team he's on.

What do you mean? I don't like Harper, but we need the bridge.

[rudeguy]

Originally Posted by sdifox

You know voting no on prop 6 means you want the bridge right?

No. It means I don't think we should clutter up the courts with that crap. That's why we elect people to handle that stuff.

[Northern Lawn]

Originally Posted by sdifox

Because we want to get our goods to America to sell it to them?

The only goods we sell to America are oil and wood.

[sdifox]

Originally Posted by rudeguy

No. It means I don't think we should clutter up the courts with that crap. That's why we elect people to handle that stuff.

Ah, got ya. We are paying for the bridge and recouping the cost by toll. You got a sweet deal. Most truckers want this.

[sdifox]

Originally Posted by Northern Lawn

The only goods we sell to America are oil and wood.

...

[Agent11]

And comedians.

[Paul98]

Thankfully enough people saw through the BS. It's sad that one person can spend enough money to put this on the ballot just to protect their profits that they get from their own bridge. While trying to say this is to protect the tax payers or "let the people decide".

[Jimzz]

Originally Posted by Northern Lawn

The only goods we sell to America are oil and wood.

Actually Canada exports a lot more to the US than just "oil and wood".

"Sugar, zinc & precious metals are fastest growing Canadian exports to the U.S...."
http://suite101.com/article/canadas-...imports-a25174

Old numbers from 2006 but should still be close. Oil was #1 while Lumber was 6th. This is the reason Canada wants to build this bridge as it will pay for itself pretty quick. Let alone other companies may add jobs to Canada if they know their goods can get to the US quicker amd easier.

[sdifox]

Originally Posted by Paul98

Thankfully enough people saw through the BS. It's sad that one person can spend enough money to put this on the ballot just to protect their profits that they get from their own bridge. While trying to say this is to protect the tax payers or "let the people decide".

I don't even understand how he got the license in the first place. It's an international crossing, it should never be in private hands.

[rudeguy]

Originally Posted by sdifox

Ah, got ya. We are paying for the bridge and recouping the cost by toll. You got a sweet deal. Most truckers want this.

I really don't care about the bridge. I just don't want it to get to the point where I have to vote if those people want to take a dump. The prop was meant to turn people against each other. Turns out no one gives a damn

[Paul98]

Originally Posted by rudeguy

I really don't care about the bridge. I just don't want it to get to the point where I have to vote if those people want to take a dump. The prop was meant to turn people against each other. Turns out no one gives a damn

Actually it wasn't look at my above post and the article. It had nothing to do with the peoples vote or tax payers money. It only had to do with one person wanting to keep the profits they were getting from their bridge. Thus they portray it as something it isn't and confuse people like it confused you.

[sdifox]

CBC interview on the issue

http://www.cbc.ca/day6/mobile/touch/...ssador-bridge/

[Exterous]

Originally Posted by sdifox

You got a sweet deal.

There was so much retardation surrounding the proposal. I remember one commercial that had an out of work American decrying the proposal because it wouldn't use American workers to build the bridge. Yeah - no shit - thats because we aren't paying for it!

[rudeguy]

Originally Posted by Paul98

Actually it wasn't look at my above post and the article. It had nothing to do with the peoples vote or tax payers money. It only had to do with one person wanting to keep the profits they were getting from their bridge. Thus they portray it as something it isn't and confuse people like it confused you.

actually...no. I just don't care about the stupid bridge and don't want anyone messing with our constitution over something that stupid. The bridge is an East Side issue that the jerkoff politicians over there can deal with. That's why we elect those idiots.

[sdifox]

Originally Posted by Exterous

There was so much retardation surrounding the proposal. I remember one commercial that had an out of work American decrying the proposal because it wouldn't use American workers to build the bridge. Yeah - no shit - thats because we aren't paying for it!

I am sure the asshole will try more lawsuits. It's been ten years...

[Iron Woode]

Originally Posted by Exterous

There was so much retardation surrounding the proposal. I remember one commercial that had an out of work American decrying the proposal because it wouldn't use American workers to build the bridge. Yeah - no shit - thats because we aren't paying for it!

there will be many Michigan workers employed directly and indirectly in building the bridge.

[SheHateMe]

Cool, now we are going to have two bridges and a tunnel to Canada! If this makes International commerce better for us, I'm all for it. Also, I'm not a Michigan resident anymore..so I don't have to pay for it. But, it sounds nice...

[halik]

Originally Posted by rudeguy

Yes on Prop 1, no on the rest.

We don't need another bridge to the hat.

That's what I did. Prop 6 was an attempt of an old man to hold onto his monopoly. Prop 3, on the other hand, was a shameless union grab.