In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1681
Online now 1176 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
So.. you're arguing that you're voting Yes on 6 so that taxpayers don't have to pay for the bridge, then post an article "supporting" your position that says taxpayers won't have to pay for it? Do you lack reading comprehension abilities?
get the new Nike MSU font: http://tinyurl.com/spartansfont
The state budget is about $48 billion annually, and zero of its expenditures need to be approved by a statewide vote. In addition, according to the article you yourself posted the NITC costs Michigan zero, so why would it need to be subject to a statewide vote anyway? Your argument makes no sense.
And Matty could still build another bridge if he wanted to regardless of what the state does. His proposed bridge was never going to work though because he didn't own land on the Canadian side to build it and Canada hates him so they would never give him a permit. However regardless of Prop 6 there is nothing in Michigan law that would prevent him from building another bridge if he can acquire the land and get the permits he needs.
How does a bridge get built if it is subject to a statewide vote? It's going to get delayed a year at least and Canada may build it in another state that isn't filled with morons like you that buy into Matty's propaganda.
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by Les Grossman 17 months ago
Let me get this down, $100 million. Oh wait, I have a better idea. Instead of $100 million, how about I send you a hobo's dick cheese?
I say yes. The poster just posted something that contradicted his/her viewpoint.
"I'm voting for Romney because I think gays should get married... here's a link saying Obama supports gay marriage!"
I don't use the word often, but yes, you are an idiot.
If taxpayers don't have to pay for it, then Prop 6 will be irrelevant...so if that article is true, then why do you care of prop 6 is passed? Sorry to make you think. Carry on with personal attacks; it's advancing your argument well.
First off, I couldn't care less about Matty. Secondly, there are trade reasons why Canada wants the bridge with Michgan so badly so they aren't just going to build a bridge to a different state because they can't build one to Michigan.
If Canada wants to finance the bridge and not hold Michigan taxpayers on the hook if the revenue doesn't pan out for them like they think it will, then I'm fine with it.
That's great that you think it's irrelevant. Are you a Michigan Supreme Court Justice? If no, then your opinion on that point doesn't mean shit.
Matty Moroun thinks it will be relevant, and he will spend millions of dollars litigating this to the supreme court to continue to cling onto his monopoly. And the bridge will get delayed further. And Canada may say "Fuck Michigan" and build the bridge in New York. That's the danger here, and that's why anyone with half a brain who is informed on this is voting no. And why every major newspaper, labor group, and business group in the state has all come out against Prop 6.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Les Grossman 17 months ago
How is it irrelevant? If Prop 6 passes, we will be forced to vote on whether they can build a bridge or not. If that happens, who's to say the bridge ever gets built? Even if it does pass and people plan to vote to OK the bridge, what if Matty manages to build another one first? What if Canada changes their mind as a result of a future vote?
Could it end up not mattering? of course! But there is literally NO negative to 6 failing, unless you have a vested interest in the profits of the Maroun fortune.
This post was edited by Nutz Interface 17 months ago
Way to be totally uninformed before casting your Yes vote
The bridge prop. was worded confusingly or unclearly I thought. If someone was to read it in the ballot box, I think they'd have a difficult time figuring out what they were voting for.
The tax prop. is probably one of the most ridiculous things I've seen on a ballot in a long time.
Okay, first of all, Canada does is not shopping a bridge around. They NEED a bridge in Michigan! That's why they cut the deal in the first place. They're trying to relieve a bottleneck in a major trade port. They are more likely just not going to build one at all than try and build somewhere else.
Second of all, Prop 6 passing would cost millions in "letting the people decide," which is equally laughable when they already decided by choosing to elect a Governor who would make this deal. The deal is profitable, it is necessary, and it shouldn't be sidetracked by one corrupt guy. If the people are deciding, why is maroun practically the sole bankroller behind the proposal?
Yeah Prop 5 is a joke...but I'm not sure it's the silliest one I've seen.
Living in Kentucky, I have to seriously laugh at the lone ballot proposal this year. They actually feel they need a constitutional amendment down here to prevent future legislators from outlawing hunting and fishing!
Actually I put you as Drain Commish
Just got done voting NO! on this proposal. They had some person peddling literature out front. I bet it was MichState04.
All right. We have a crazier one.
Thanks on the 3 Dick! I work on that project in the summers and they really do hire Michigan Residents, in fact the only reason the firm that I work for gets the work is because it is a michigan company.
Practically, nothing. He is the only one that put money into the proposition, which just goes to show you that if you have enough money you can possibly get the constitution of this state changed to benefit yourself and yourself alone.
I feel bad for folk who voted yes on 6. Misinformed would be the kindest thing I could say.
I was against the bridge at first. The more Matty tries to say "We're going to lose billions! Let me build it please please please!", the more I want the government bridge. If Matty wants it that bad, it has to be a good idea.
"As far as the downvotes. It's a gnat biting an lion"
-- A member of tRCMB Justice League, taking the internet WAY WAY too seriously.
Next time you talk to him tell him to drop dead.
"losing Caleb Benenoch is a blow that Dantonio will never recover from. Izzo has lost it as well. Hoke and Beilein own the state."
The project will be funded mostly by Canada, which would lend Michigan the money to pay for work on the U.S. side of the Detroit River. Michigan's debt would be repaid with bridge tolls.
Michigan should clear the final permit hurdles to building a bridge to Canada within six months, Gov. Rick Snyder said this morning at a media roundtable on Tuesdays election results.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports