4 ms·

Sure -- you noticed that like ~46% of voters choosing on the issue opposed it though right? I mean maybe that's typical to have something like this win by a 4%

Sure -- you noticed that like ~46% of voters choosing on the issue opposed it though right? I mean maybe that's typical to have something like this win by a 4% margin but I'd have to say it's far from a general majority saying, "yep, let's do it." Then you've got the people who probably didn't even vote and found out about it when their car registration fee went up a couple hundred bucks. BTW, I voted for it so I'm aware, I just find it hard to believe it's so borderline and there's folks who seem really angry they need to contribute to the community's well-being. But hey, I guess as someone else said, no one likes to pay taxes.

seanmcdirmid 8y ago
Many issues pass like that. A 4% margin is considered a landslide in presidential politics, we are just that divided as a nation, the Seattle area isn’t immune.
jimbobimbo 8y ago
I voted "no", because I did the math, and I don't think that this project will not be mismanaged, like other projects of this kind of magnitude. Boston's big dig, and California's high-speed train system with ever-increasing costs do not instill a lot of confidence in "this time it'll be different".
mrep 8y ago
> there's folks who seem really angry they need to contribute to the community's well-being I don't think many people are trying to negatively impact the community. They just don't think it is a good investment considering how expensive rail is at being almost a billion dollars a mile and it will take up to 20 years to finish if it all goes according to schedule. One guy I talked to made the argument that in 20 years, we should have self driving busses and if each one costs a million (current busses are like 300,000-600,000 from a quick google search), we could buy 53,800 busses with that money which would service a lot more people in a lot more unique routes which I thought was a pretty decent argument if you believe we will get self driving busses that soon. I would rather have an oversupply of transportation so I say let's do both, but I can see their arguments for balancing taxes to pay for transportation with how much supply is needed.

seanmcdirmid 8y ago

Many issues pass like that. A 4% margin is considered a landslide in presidential politics, we are just that divided as a nation, the Seattle area isn’t immune.

jimbobimbo 8y ago

I voted "no", because I did the math, and I don't think that this project will not be mismanaged, like other projects of this kind of magnitude. Boston's big dig, and California's high-speed train system with ever-increasing costs do not instill a lot of confidence in "this time it'll be different".

mrep 8y ago

> there's folks who seem really angry they need to contribute to the community's well-being I don't think many people are trying to negatively impact the community. They just don't think it is a good investment considering how expensive rail is at being almost a billion dollars a mile and it will take up to 20 years to finish if it all goes according to schedule. One guy I talked to made the argument that in 20 years, we should have self driving busses and if each one costs a million (current busses are like 300,000-600,000 from a quick google search), we could buy 53,800 busses with that money which would service a lot more people in a lot more unique routes which I thought was a pretty decent argument if you believe we will get self driving busses that soon. I would rather have an oversupply of transportation so I say let's do both, but I can see their arguments for balancing taxes to pay for transportation with how much supply is needed.