Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Washington] Politics

2456765

Posts

  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    JihadJesus wrote:
    [code:lime]Why am I not shocked that Eyman's from the Yakima Valley? It's the forgotten birthplace of everything evil and shortsighted. [/code]

    How do I lime for fuckin' truth?

    steam_sig.png
  • big lbig l Registered User regular
    edited July 2011
    Hacksaw wrote:
    big l wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    So, what's the prevailing opinion here on the tunnel?

    Are you with The Stranger, or the Seattle Times?

    KcwyH.png

    VHD stands for "vehicle hours of delay". These numbers are from the state's final environmental impact statement. Traffic will be just as bad with the tunnel as it would be with the surface/transit plan, which will be much cheaper and will serve more people. At least the elevated replacement would have downtown exits - the tunnel won't even have that.
    The last thing Seattle needs is more downtown congestion due to a massive over-land transit system.

    I agree about downtown congestion - that's why I oppose the tunnel. The State Department of Transportation's numbers show that there would be less congestion in the downtown core with the surface/transit/I-5 plan than the tunnel plan. The numbers are right there in the chart - fewer vehicle hours of delay for surface/transit/I-5 than tunnel.

    big l on
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    I had to visit Seattle this weekend and while I remember the traffic being bad years ago, traffic jams at 12 noon on a Saturday and 9 am on a Sunday boggle my mind. Really Seattle? Really?

    steam_sig.png
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote:
    I had to visit Seattle this weekend and while I remember the traffic being bad years ago, traffic jams at 12 noon on a Saturday and 9 am on a Sunday boggle my mind. Really Seattle? Really?
    Our traffic patterns are pretty ridiculous. We'd be much better off improving transit and surface streets than building a tunnel that doesn't actually help anyone going into or out of Seattle.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    When I lived in Spokane and would drive to Bellingham to visit my girlfriend I would always leave at bizarre hours so I could get through Seattle and up i5 at the best times.

    sig.jpg
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    DoctorArch wrote:
    I had to visit Seattle this weekend and while I remember the traffic being bad years ago, traffic jams at 12 noon on a Saturday and 9 am on a Sunday boggle my mind. Really Seattle? Really?
    Our traffic patterns are pretty ridiculous. We'd be much better off improving transit and surface streets than building a tunnel that doesn't actually help anyone going into or out of Seattle.

    IMHO, one of the biggest problems is that I-5 goes from a four lane down to a two lane as it cuts through downtown Seattle. Have they proposed anything that can reasonably fix that example of "Oh yeah, this will always be enough for traffic" lack of forethought?

    steam_sig.png
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    When I lived in Spokane and would drive to Bellingham to visit my girlfriend I would always leave at bizarre hours so I could get through Seattle and up i5 at the best times.

    Why would you even do that? You could take 90 up to 405 and then 405 connects to 5 around lynnwood thus skipping seattle altogether.

  • big lbig l Registered User regular
    edited July 2011
    DoctorArch wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    DoctorArch wrote:
    I had to visit Seattle this weekend and while I remember the traffic being bad years ago, traffic jams at 12 noon on a Saturday and 9 am on a Sunday boggle my mind. Really Seattle? Really?
    Our traffic patterns are pretty ridiculous. We'd be much better off improving transit and surface streets than building a tunnel that doesn't actually help anyone going into or out of Seattle.

    IMHO, one of the biggest problems is that I-5 goes from a four lane down to a two lane as it cuts through downtown Seattle. Have they proposed anything that can reasonably fix that example of "Oh yeah, this will always be enough for traffic" lack of forethought?

    They think they can maybe add another lane, probably going Northbound. It's tough because I-5 goes through the Washington State Convention Center so there are limits to how wide it can be. The other, probably better idea is to close some of the exits. Particularly the Seneca St exit, which is on the left side. Getting into or out of that exit lane means a lot of people have to make lane changes which leads to a lot of slow down, and if the exit is closed then people don't need to make so many lane changes. But reconfiguring can only do so much - eventually we are going to have to get people out of their cars. There is only so much space on the road and the number of cars is increasing more than the space is or can. Light rail on the east side of Seattle (Rainier Valley- Downtown - U District - Northgate) will be completed in the next ~10-15 years but ridership so far on what has been completed hasn't be as high as hoped, and there are no good ideas for light rail on the west side - West Seattle light rail involves going up a VERY high slope, over one of the most polluted rivers in America, and Ballard light rail will either need a very high bridge ala Aurora or will need a draw bridge to let ships under, which defeats the whole point of fast, reliable transit. So there are some challenges.

    Edit:
    Preacher wrote:
    When I lived in Spokane and would drive to Bellingham to visit my girlfriend I would always leave at bizarre hours so I could get through Seattle and up i5 at the best times.

    Why would you even do that? You could take 90 up to 405 and then 405 connects to 5 around lynnwood thus skipping seattle altogether.

    Lol at ever driving on 405. 405 between I-90 and 520 is even more congested than I-5.

    big l on
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    Ugh, sounds ridiculous. Portland and Seattle are good flip side of the coin examples of what happens when you don't start early on building public transportation infrastructure.

    steam_sig.png
  • big lbig l Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote:
    Ugh, sounds ridiculous. Portland and Seattle are good flip side of the coin examples of what happens when you don't start early on building public transportation infrastructure.

    And in the late 60s, Seattle was offered a deal from the federal government to build a rapid transit system. 2/3rds federal money, 1/3rd local. In 1970, voters voted it down, so the Feds took the money to Atlanta and built MARTA instead. Whoops. And we've regretted it ever since.

  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    Syrdon wrote:
    Hacksaw wrote:
    Slider wrote:
    I don't like red light cameras.

    There's one in Ballard. It freaks me out.
    Can you at least acknowledge that they're a good idea and serve a purpose that is beneficial to the community at large?
    Last I checked (its been a bit, so I may be out of date), there was still open debate on them causing more accidents than they stopped. Also debate with respect to what happens to yellow light timing and what sort of things should be penalized. They serve a nice theory, but assuming the research still pans out the way it used to, its one of the nice on paper/poor in practice theories. Like I said earlier, I last checked the research a while ago, so if there's a study more recent than about a year or two ago, feel free to prove me all sorts of wrong.

    There were a few instances of cities putting them in, and then in a bid to raise revenue (because tax hikes are way too obvious apparently), they'd cut the yellow light timers, which is dangerous as fuck.

    That said, red light cameras are not inherently bad, they just lack oversight. They're in theory heartless methods of enforcing a very important traffic rule that people break a lot.

    They're also an awesome example of why ballot initiatives are terrible: they're something everyone can get their hate on against, but still should exist. We'd likely vote away speed limits and traffic tickets if we could, even if it would be a terrible idea. Because we vote in our short term interest, and damn the consequences.

  • UrcbubUrcbub Registered User
    DoctorArch wrote:
    IMHO, one of the biggest problems is that I-5 goes from a four lane down to a two lane as it cuts through downtown Seattle. Have they proposed anything that can reasonably fix that example of "Oh yeah, this will always be enough for traffic" lack of forethought?

    Extra lanes is not going to solve the traffic jams. The 480 outside Cleveland, Ohio is four lanes all the way and constantly backed up. Better driving skills would solve the problem far better. If everyone kept 2-3 car lengths between themselves and the car in front of them almost all congestion would go away as people now have enough room to shift lanes and enter the highway without causing complete stops. And at normal driving speeds, every car that goes into your lane in front of you (forcing you to slow down a bit to grow the distance) would only slow your total travel time by a second or so, making the 'cost' rather irrelevant.

    But I have no faith in people's ability to actually drive like that.

  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    I would vote for anything if it meant improving the I-5 corridor...from Olympia to Seattle...and beyond.

  • HacksawHacksaw J Duggan Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    big l wrote:
    DoctorArch wrote:
    Ugh, sounds ridiculous. Portland and Seattle are good flip side of the coin examples of what happens when you don't start early on building public transportation infrastructure.

    And in the late 60s, Seattle was offered a deal from the federal government to build a rapid transit system. 2/3rds federal money, 1/3rd local. In 1970, voters voted it down, so the Feds took the money to Atlanta and built MARTA instead. Whoops. And we've regretted it ever since.
    Another reason why Washington state voters can't be trusted to not make stupid decisions.

  • JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    big l wrote:
    DoctorArch wrote:
    Ugh, sounds ridiculous. Portland and Seattle are good flip side of the coin examples of what happens when you don't start early on building public transportation infrastructure.

    And in the late 60s, Seattle was offered a deal from the federal government to build a rapid transit system. 2/3rds federal money, 1/3rd local. In 1970, voters voted it down, so the Feds took the money to Atlanta and built MARTA instead. Whoops. And we've regretted it ever since.
    Ah, look at that. Voters being stupidly shortsighted and cheap. I am shocked by this.

    SHOCKED.

    Tired of getting reamed by Gamestop? Sign up for Goozex!
  • Man in the MistsMan in the Mists Registered User regular
    DoctorArch wrote:
    JihadJesus wrote:
    Why am I not shocked that Eyman's from the Yakima Valley? It's the forgotten birthplace of everything evil and shortsighted.

    How do I lime for fuckin' truth?

    Ah, changing "code:lime" to "color=lime" does the trick.

    On topic, I just got a petition form in the mail for the red light camera initiative. It promptly went into the recycling.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    So, today, the Seattle Times came out against the $20 car tab fee to fund King County Metro.

    That paper is a goddamn abomination. I swear to god, they make a point of being on the wrong fucking side of every possible issue. If you haven't looked at what they're talking about cutting without that fee, you should take a gander. All of the night owl buses to north Seattle are on the chopping block (hope you like drunk drivers), as are a metric fuckton of other buses.

    Odds are, most Seattle drivers will spend less on the $20 car tab than they'll spend in increased costs due to higher traffic congestion and/or having to drive places they previously could have ridden a goddamn bus to. Fucking idiots.

  • HacksawHacksaw J Duggan Wrestler at LawRegistered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    So, today, the Seattle Times came out against the $20 car tab fee to fund King County Metro.

    That paper is a goddamn abomination. I swear to god, they make a point of being on the wrong fucking side of every possible issue. If you haven't looked at what they're talking about cutting without that fee, you should take a gander. All of the night owl buses to north Seattle are on the chopping block (hope you like drunk drivers), as are a metric fuckton of other buses.

    Odds are, most Seattle drivers will spend less on the $20 car tab than they'll spend in increased costs due to higher traffic congestion and/or having to drive places they previously could have ridden a goddamn bus to. Fucking idiots.
    This would be a whole lot less painless if we just unfucked Eyman's license tab fee bullshit. Then we could fund things like Transportation again.

  • LionLion Registered User regular
    The Seattle Times wants Rob McKenna to be governor so fuck them.

    RE: The Tunnel

    I don't know how to go on that. Downtown traffic is expected to be worse but overall traffic
    is supposed to get better. Selfishly, I want to be for anything that makes the back and forth from Eastside easier. Obviously that means I want Eyman and Freeman to diaf.

    PSN: WingedLion | XBL: Winged Lion
  • kildykildy Registered User regular
    Eliminating late night mass transit is a stupid idea. I hate that Boston's late night busses got mauled over some idiotic taxi fare dispute or something. It's late, the people out at that hour have a high chance of having been drinking. Let's save everyone a lot of heartache and help them get home without driving.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Mckenna man I didn't have a problem with him until he went party before country and went against the governors wishes signing on the republican derp against healthcare reform. Fuck you buddy! My only hope is that Rossi being a damn idiot runs again for governor and the democrats find someone whos a bit better than a wet towel to defeat him again.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote:
    Mckenna man I didn't have a problem with him until he went party before country and went against the governors wishes signing on the republican derp against healthcare reform. Fuck you buddy! My only hope is that Rossi being a damn idiot runs again for governor and the democrats find someone whos a bit better than a wet towel to defeat him again.
    Inslee is almost certainly going to be our next governor.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    Mckenna man I didn't have a problem with him until he went party before country and went against the governors wishes signing on the republican derp against healthcare reform. Fuck you buddy! My only hope is that Rossi being a damn idiot runs again for governor and the democrats find someone whos a bit better than a wet towel to defeat him again.
    Inslee is almost certainly going to be our next governor.

    Don't really see a downside to Inslee, his congress seat is pretty safe right?

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    Preacher wrote:
    Mckenna man I didn't have a problem with him until he went party before country and went against the governors wishes signing on the republican derp against healthcare reform. Fuck you buddy! My only hope is that Rossi being a damn idiot runs again for governor and the democrats find someone whos a bit better than a wet towel to defeat him again.
    Inslee is almost certainly going to be our next governor.
    Don't really see a downside to Inslee, his congress seat is pretty safe right?
    Safe-ish. I'd say 60-80% chance of going dem, depending on who the candidate is. Kucinich is talking about running for it, which I think would drop the odds considerably.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    Safe-ish. I'd say 60-80% chance of going dem, depending on who the candidate is. Kucinich is talking about running for it, which I think would drop the odds considerably.

    Ahh so that was the seat he was going to run for? Awesome. I think I'm in Inslee's district if I remember right. I'd say I wish I could vote out riechert but honestly thats not going to happen and I'd hate for that clown to represent me.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    Safe-ish. I'd say 60-80% chance of going dem, depending on who the candidate is. Kucinich is talking about running for it, which I think would drop the odds considerably.
    Ahh so that was the seat he was going to run for? Awesome. I think I'm in Inslee's district if I remember right. I'd say I wish I could vote out riechert but honestly thats not going to happen and I'd hate for that clown to represent me.
    I dunno about him; there's been a lot of talk of him having gone off the deep end, lately.

    I think a decent candidate has a shot; not a great one, but a shot.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    I dunno about him; there's been a lot of talk of him having gone off the deep end, lately.

    I think a decent candidate has a shot; not a great one, but a shot.

    I want to say Riecherts district covers places like Duvall, which aside from some liberal white flight is mainly rural dirt farmers who aren't exactly well known for their super intelligence. Its the only reason he keeps being reelected.

  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    I take it all of you are diehard Democrats.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    Slider wrote:
    I take it all of you are diehard Democrats.
    Yes, but I really don't think you need to be a diehard Democrat to recognize the fact that telling your legislature that they can raise spending with a simple majority, but require a 2/3rds majority to raise taxes is a fucking retarded idea.

  • PotatoNinjaPotatoNinja Fake Gamer Goat Registered User regular
    Slider wrote:
    I take it all of you are diehard Democrats.

    I cynically vote my own interests in every election.

    As a middle class white man, that's Democrat every time. If the Republican party had anything worthwhile to offer me I'd vote for them, but they don't.

    Two goats enter, one car leaves
  • big lbig l Registered User regular
    Pam Roach introduced a bill requiring all teachers to carry pistols in the classroom in case of emergency. Yeah, I'm a Democrat.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    I'm someone who has had to go without health insurance at some points in my life.

    Rob McKenna is the Republican nominee for Governor in this state.

    So yes, I'm a Democrat.

  • RiemannLivesRiemannLives Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    Slider wrote:
    I take it all of you are diehard Democrats.
    Yes, but I really don't think you need to be a diehard Democrat to recognize the fact that telling your legislature that they can raise spending with a simple majority, but require a 2/3rds majority to raise taxes is a fucking retarded idea.

    Or that wanting to improve anything related to transportation (including the I-5 corridor as Slider claimed on this very page) is in direct opposition to supporting anything Tim Eyman has ever done (as Slider did on the last page).

  • LionLion Registered User regular
    On more mundane topics, how do you guys feel about the latest push by Costco to get liquor in grocery stores and about the push for expanded bar hours?

    PSN: WingedLion | XBL: Winged Lion
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    Lion wrote:
    On more mundane topics, how do you guys feel about the latest push by Costco to get liquor in grocery stores and about the push for expanded bar hours?
    God, it's about fucking time.

    I get so frustrated with the fucking NIMBYs in this state, though; before it was "if we pass this, every gas station will be selling vodka to teenagers!" So, Costco re-writes the law so that only large stores can do it. Then, everyone says "this is just the big-box stores trying to drive the little guys out of business!"

    I'm so tired of not being able to buy a goddamn bottle of whiskey at 9:00 at night, and having to plan my night around a goddamn liquor store run.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    Also, I despise the total lack of selection that the liquor stores in this state have.

    I can't wait until we have BevMo up here. Seriously, it's like a Toys R Us for adults; the happiest place on earth.

  • big lbig l Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    Lion wrote:
    On more mundane topics, how do you guys feel about the latest push by Costco to get liquor in grocery stores and about the push for expanded bar hours?
    God, it's about fucking time.

    I get so frustrated with the fucking NIMBYs in this state, though; before it was "if we pass this, every gas station will be selling vodka to teenagers!" So, Costco re-writes the law so that only large stores can do it. Then, everyone says "this is just the big-box stores trying to drive the little guys out of business!"

    I'm so tired of not being able to buy a goddamn bottle of whiskey at 9:00 at night, and having to plan my night around a goddamn liquor store run.

    I support liquor privatization, but I won't support any plan that isn't revenue neutral or positive. I believe the current plan on the table, like both last year's initiatives, reduces state revenue. In this time of historically low state revenues, I'm not giving up a dime. I don't know if a fiscal impact statement has yet been completed for it but I will be watching for that.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited July 2011
    big l wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    Lion wrote:
    On more mundane topics, how do you guys feel about the latest push by Costco to get liquor in grocery stores and about the push for expanded bar hours?
    God, it's about fucking time.

    I get so frustrated with the fucking NIMBYs in this state, though; before it was "if we pass this, every gas station will be selling vodka to teenagers!" So, Costco re-writes the law so that only large stores can do it. Then, everyone says "this is just the big-box stores trying to drive the little guys out of business!"

    I'm so tired of not being able to buy a goddamn bottle of whiskey at 9:00 at night, and having to plan my night around a goddamn liquor store run.
    I support liquor privatization, but I won't support any plan that isn't revenue neutral or positive. I believe the current plan on the table, like both last year's initiatives, reduces state revenue. In this time of historically low state revenues, I'm not giving up a dime. I don't know if a fiscal impact statement has yet been completed for it but I will be watching for that.
    Between the licensing and the taxes, I cannot imagine the state not pulling in more money from selling liquor 24/7 than they do with the current bankers hours that the liquor stores keep.

    Also, most of the revenue estimates you get from the state are just that: revenue estimates. They don't factor in the fact that the state will no longer be buying liquor, having to employ people to staff the liquor stores, paying rent on the liquor stores, etc.

    Thanatos on
  • SliderSlider Registered User regular
    Last time I was in California, I bought some liquor at a drug store.

    It was nice.

Sign In or Register to comment.