3 ms·
That’s a typical California politician’s comment. If someone else doesn’t provide something free or heavily subsidized, they pretend it doesn’t exist. Pretty d
by djrogers 9y ago
That’s a typical California politician’s comment. If someone else doesn’t provide something free or heavily subsidized, they pretend it doesn’t exist.
Pretty dumb to ignore the fact tha buy cutting back on a few $12 beverages at the game one could either drive home or afford a Lyft...
- jdale27 9y agoOr maybe it's just a reflection of the reality that there are probably a lot of people who don't want to go to a football game and not get drunk.
- rconti 9y agoActually it's an anti-regulatory stance.
- org3432 9y agoIt's dumb to ignore data and try to solve problems from one's hypicrital and confused view.
- phil248 9y agoThis isn't about costs, it's about incentives. You may have money to get a ride home, but prefer to drive drunk. An incentive will change the minds of some percentage of those people, resulting in less drunk drivers.
- s73ver_ 9y agoI mean, you could do that. Or you could awaken yourself to reality, where that does not happen. And the politicians here are looking at a potential solution to not having so many drunks on the road, where they can potentially kill someone.