If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 2:39:51 PM UTC-8, The Real Bev wrote:
On 11/05/2014 10:11 AM, wrote: On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:59:59 AM UTC-6, lal_truckee wrote: On 11/5/14 8:35 AM, wrote: Ob-ski content: With government mandated costs removed from ski areas, you could expect to see a 10 to 20% reduction in the cost of your lift tickets. What "government mandated costs" are you planning to remove? Lift inspections? Payments for commercial use of publicly owned property i.e. Forest Service land owned by you and me equally? (PS If you did happen to get elected I'd like you to legislate to the effect it's a federal crime to deny public backcountry access anywhere a resort abuts Forest Service land.) Let's see ... most environmental restrictions, most OSHA requirements, most employment restrictions, for starters. I'm not well-versed on the subject but I'm confident that with a copy of the Federal budget and a few weeks to search I could come up with a huge stack of Federal cuts. What about liability insurance. Back in the dark ages a friend of the guy who owned Mt. Waterman said that liability insurance accounted for half the price of a lift ticket. Ob-ski content -- with the current storm traversing Texas, we're seeing snow accumulations greater than 18 inches at elevations above 8500 feet. Do you actually have anything that high? A friend from Florida said that the highest point in the state was a freeway overpass. -- Cheers, Bev ========================================== "Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority." -- U.S. Supreme Court, McIntyre v Ohio Elections,1995 At the southern end of a ridge of high peaks that loops down out of New Mexico north of El Paso. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
On Wednesday, 5 November 2014 12:58:51 UTC-8, Alan Baker wrote:
He was perfectly clear, Lieutenant Liar. Just because you can't read what is written and understand it doesn't make the problem his. Mmmm, I sense someone is missing his favourite chew toy... easy there, fella. ;-) |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:46:24 AM UTC-7, wrote:
wrote: The election night vote counts released by the Texas Secretary of State and posted at https://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_175_state.htm show James Arthur Strohm polling 38,592 votes, or 20.02% in Texas Senate District 14. Those numbers may shift slightly as absentee and provisional ballots are counted. Multiply Strohm's total by 4 to get Kirk Watson's approximate total. It's more compelling to consider how much was spent per vote by the two gentlemen on the ballot. Neither candidate did diddley-squat as far as actual campaigning. If anything, Strohm was the more active candidate because he responded to more surveys and questionnaires than Watson, his incumbent opponent. The following figures include all reports filed in 2014, but not reports for expenditures through election day. Some 2013 expenses are included; the Texas Senate has a four-year term so all expenses for this election cycle are not included. Only reports filed by both candidates are compared. Watson's total expenditures for 2014 reporting to date exceed half a million dollars. Strohm spent $6.31. For his whole campaign, start to finish. That is $0.000164 spent per vote. Watson spent somewhere north of $3.25 per vote, or about 20,000 times more per vote. Final financial reports will be available online in a few weeks from the Texas Ethics Commission http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/ . If you wonder why Libertarians scare the other parties so much, this is a perfect example of why. We do so much more for so much less, if we were to come into power, all the political consultants and other parasites would be out of a job. And we'd run our offices like we run our campaigns, with saving our constituents' money at every step. We wouldn't just drown big government in the bathtub (thank you, Grover Norquist, for that wonderful image), we'd also bury the remains in the compost heap to grow our non-Monsanto organic heirloom tomatoes next year. Ob-ski content: With government mandated costs removed from ski areas, you could expect to see a 10 to 20% reduction in the cost of your lift tickets. P.S. That vote total is the same as having 38,592 people "like" you on a social network in just 12 hours. I will tell you one thing, you will never be elected for stating that Charles Manson was right about "Helter Skelter", and it is no surprise that there 38,592 idiots who voted for a guy, who stated many of the crazy libertarian ideas that don't work in a nation with over 300 million people, and is modern complex OECD nation. If you want to be elected, you need to disavowed many of the racist ideas and people that surround the Libertarian Movement in the US. Oh oh. Someone seems upset that the Senate is going to start sending out legislation. Is the prospect of investigation bothersome as well? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 3:41:55 PM UTC-8, pigo wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:46:24 AM UTC-7, wrote: wrote: The election night vote counts released by the Texas Secretary of State and posted at https://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_175_state.htm show James Arthur Strohm polling 38,592 votes, or 20.02% in Texas Senate District 14. Those numbers may shift slightly as absentee and provisional ballots are counted. Multiply Strohm's total by 4 to get Kirk Watson's approximate total. It's more compelling to consider how much was spent per vote by the two gentlemen on the ballot. Neither candidate did diddley-squat as far as actual campaigning. If anything, Strohm was the more active candidate because he responded to more surveys and questionnaires than Watson, his incumbent opponent. The following figures include all reports filed in 2014, but not reports for expenditures through election day. Some 2013 expenses are included; the Texas Senate has a four-year term so all expenses for this election cycle are not included. Only reports filed by both candidates are compared. Watson's total expenditures for 2014 reporting to date exceed half a million dollars. Strohm spent $6.31. For his whole campaign, start to finish. That is $0.000164 spent per vote. Watson spent somewhere north of $3.25 per vote, or about 20,000 times more per vote. Final financial reports will be available online in a few weeks from the Texas Ethics Commission http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/ . If you wonder why Libertarians scare the other parties so much, this is a perfect example of why. We do so much more for so much less, if we were to come into power, all the political consultants and other parasites would be out of a job. And we'd run our offices like we run our campaigns, with saving our constituents' money at every step. We wouldn't just drown big government in the bathtub (thank you, Grover Norquist, for that wonderful image), we'd also bury the remains in the compost heap to grow our non-Monsanto organic heirloom tomatoes next year. Ob-ski content: With government mandated costs removed from ski areas, you could expect to see a 10 to 20% reduction in the cost of your lift tickets. P.S. That vote total is the same as having 38,592 people "like" you on a social network in just 12 hours. I will tell you one thing, you will never be elected for stating that Charles Manson was right about "Helter Skelter", and it is no surprise that there 38,592 idiots who voted for a guy, who stated many of the crazy libertarian ideas that don't work in a nation with over 300 million people, and is modern complex OECD nation. If you want to be elected, you need to disavowed many of the racist ideas and people that surround the Libertarian Movement in the US. Oh oh. Someone seems upset that the Senate is going to start sending out legislation. Is the prospect of investigation bothersome as well? The filibuster stick just got passed across the aisle. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 5:55:04 PM UTC-7, Richard Henry wrote:
On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 3:41:55 PM UTC-8, pigo wrote: On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:46:24 AM UTC-7, wrote: wrote: The election night vote counts released by the Texas Secretary of State and posted at https://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_175_state.htm show James Arthur Strohm polling 38,592 votes, or 20.02% in Texas Senate District 14. Those numbers may shift slightly as absentee and provisional ballots are counted. Multiply Strohm's total by 4 to get Kirk Watson's approximate total. It's more compelling to consider how much was spent per vote by the two gentlemen on the ballot. Neither candidate did diddley-squat as far as actual campaigning. If anything, Strohm was the more active candidate because he responded to more surveys and questionnaires than Watson, his incumbent opponent. The following figures include all reports filed in 2014, but not reports for expenditures through election day. Some 2013 expenses are included; the Texas Senate has a four-year term so all expenses for this election cycle are not included. Only reports filed by both candidates are compared. Watson's total expenditures for 2014 reporting to date exceed half a million dollars. Strohm spent $6.31. For his whole campaign, start to finish. That is $0.000164 spent per vote. Watson spent somewhere north of $3.25 per vote, or about 20,000 times more per vote. Final financial reports will be available online in a few weeks from the Texas Ethics Commission http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/ . If you wonder why Libertarians scare the other parties so much, this is a perfect example of why. We do so much more for so much less, if we were to come into power, all the political consultants and other parasites would be out of a job. And we'd run our offices like we run our campaigns, with saving our constituents' money at every step. We wouldn't just drown big government in the bathtub (thank you, Grover Norquist, for that wonderful image), we'd also bury the remains in the compost heap to grow our non-Monsanto organic heirloom tomatoes next year. Ob-ski content: With government mandated costs removed from ski areas, you could expect to see a 10 to 20% reduction in the cost of your lift tickets. P.S. That vote total is the same as having 38,592 people "like" you on a social network in just 12 hours. I will tell you one thing, you will never be elected for stating that Charles Manson was right about "Helter Skelter", and it is no surprise that there 38,592 idiots who voted for a guy, who stated many of the crazy libertarian ideas that don't work in a nation with over 300 million people, and is modern complex OECD nation. If you want to be elected, you need to disavowed many of the racist ideas and people that surround the Libertarian Movement in the US. Oh oh. Someone seems upset that the Senate is going to start sending out legislation. Is the prospect of investigation bothersome as well? The filibuster stick just got passed across the aisle. Do you think that they'll complain about operating under the rule change now? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
On Wed, 05 Nov 2014 14:39:49 -0800, The Real Bev
wrote this crap: On 11/05/2014 10:11 AM, wrote: On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 11:59:59 AM UTC-6, lal_truckee wrote: On 11/5/14 8:35 AM, wrote: Ob-ski content: With government mandated costs removed from ski areas, you could expect to see a 10 to 20% reduction in the cost of your lift tickets. What "government mandated costs" are you planning to remove? Lift inspections? Payments for commercial use of publicly owned property i.e. Forest Service land owned by you and me equally? (PS If you did happen to get elected I'd like you to legislate to the effect it's a federal crime to deny public backcountry access anywhere a resort abuts Forest Service land.) Let's see ... most environmental restrictions, most OSHA requirements, most employment restrictions, for starters. I'm not well-versed on the subject but I'm confident that with a copy of the Federal budget and a few weeks to search I could come up with a huge stack of Federal cuts. What about liability insurance. Back in the dark ages a friend of the guy who owned Mt. Waterman said that liability insurance accounted for half the price of a lift ticket. Ob-ski content -- with the current storm traversing Texas, we're seeing snow accumulations greater than 18 inches at elevations above 8500 feet. Do you actually have anything that high? A friend from Florida said that the highest point in the state was a freeway overpass. The highest point in Florida was Space Mountain. Now it's the Matterhorn. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Election results --no skiing content
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:26:47 -0800, Alan Baker
wrote this crap: make the problem his. Mmmm, I sense someone is missing his favourite chew toy... easy there, fella. ;-) Naah. The Lieutenant is known to me from other groups... ...and he lies constantly. :-) Name one lie. This signature is now the ultimate power in the universe |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
actual skiing content!!! | VtSkier[_6_] | Alpine Skiing | 6 | November 1st 13 01:26 AM |
caution, skiing content | VtSkier | Alpine Skiing | 4 | November 2nd 10 02:06 PM |
OT -- election results | [email protected] | Alpine Skiing (moderated) | 0 | November 8th 08 02:36 AM |
looking for content: rec.skiing.announce | Brian Edmonds | Snowboarding | 5 | September 19th 03 09:07 PM |
looking for content: rec.skiing.announce | Brian Edmonds | Nordic Skiing | 5 | September 19th 03 09:07 PM |