How would you vote on these five Missouri ballot measures?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:16:28 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  How would you vote on these five Missouri ballot measures?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: How would you vote on these ballot measures?
#1
Amendment 1 - Yes
 
#2
Amendment 1 - No
 
#3
Amendment 5 - Yes
 
#4
Amendment 5 - No
 
#5
Amendment 7 - Yes
 
#6
Amendment 7 - No
 
#7
Amendment 8 - Yes
 
#8
Amendment 8 - No
 
#9
Amendment 9 - Yes
 
#10
Amendment 9 - No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 58

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: How would you vote on these five Missouri ballot measures?  (Read 1675 times)
Sprouts Farmers Market ✘
Sprouts
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,749
Italy


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: 1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: August 07, 2014, 05:27:29 PM »

Strong yes on 5 and especially 9. No on the regressive taxation measures. Slight no on right to farm. That one is a bit concerning.
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: August 07, 2014, 05:39:19 PM »

Amendment 7: No. Roads should be funded by taxing the activities most immediately leading to the need for maintenance (fixing existing roads) and development (building new roads). Raise the gasoline tax; impose a tax on commercial trucks and tractor trailers; impose a development tax on improvements in exurban areas that disproportionately need new roads; institute or raise road tolls to ensure commuters bear the cost of their choice to live far away from their work.

People who don't drive still benefit from roads. If I walk to my local grocer, every good in the store was brought in by truck. Those trucks are also the cause of most maintenance, along with weather. How long is your life expectancy if you raise taxes on independent truckers? Are you planning to tax snow?

Excise tax is not designed to capture the economic benefit of the roads, thus, roads are constantly under-priced and under-funded. When services are underfunded, people demand more than than public budgets will allow. Gasoline excise is a political compromise from a bygone era. Don't cling. Sales tax is appropriate. Income tax at the federal level.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: August 07, 2014, 06:56:36 PM »

I will never understand the kind of people who would oppose 8. What a strange place their minds must be.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: August 07, 2014, 07:47:53 PM »

I will never understand the kind of people who would oppose 8. What a strange place their minds must be.

The idea that state-sponsored gambling creates perverse incentives is not difficult to wrap your head around.

No, but the concept of actually caring is.
Logged
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,610
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: August 07, 2014, 08:08:21 PM »

I will never understand the kind of people who would oppose 8. What a strange place their minds must be.

The idea that state-sponsored gambling creates perverse incentives is not difficult to wrap your head around.

No, but the concept of actually caring is.

What?

Forget it. To be perfectly honest I'm not really informed or intelligent enough for this section and should probably stick to the 2016 threads.
Logged
Mopsus
MOPolitico
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.71, S: -1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: August 07, 2014, 08:25:12 PM »
« Edited: August 07, 2014, 08:30:47 PM by MOP »

How I voted:

Amendment 1: No
Amendment 5: No
Amendment 7: No
Amendment 8: No
Amendment 9: Yes

What is the "right to farm" actually about? Is it something to do with land use and zoning? Or an anti-animal-welfare measure?

My understanding is that Amendment 1 was an attempt by farmers (both of the corporate and family-owned variety) to shield themselves from regulations that they think could be detrimental to their business. Specifically, they were alarmed by Proposition B, which in their view demonstrated the electorate's willingness to regulate businesses that deal with animals (such as farms).
Logged
Sopranos Republican
Matt from VT
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,175
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.03, S: -8.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: August 07, 2014, 11:29:14 PM »

Amendment 1: No
Amendment 5: Yes
Amendment 7: No
Amendment 8: No
Amendment 9: Yes

Amendment 8 I would be on the fence about, but ultimately voted no, as the lottery does have an adverse effect on the poor. I have no moral problem with gambling (normal) but I believe lottery tickets may only increase poverty. However if it was an increase in income or property tax used to fund veterans' programs, it'd have my staunch support.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: August 07, 2014, 11:32:57 PM »

1. Yes
5. Yes
7. Yes
8. No
9. Yes

I'd vote for all of them except the lottery one. I have nothing against funding veterans' programs, but the lottery is a scam where the state government tries to exploit the poor as much as possible.
Logged
Deus Naturae
Deus naturae
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,637
Croatia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: August 07, 2014, 11:36:53 PM »

Amendment 1: No
Amendment 5: Yes
Amendment 7: No
Amendment 8: No
Amendment 9: Yes

Amendment 8 I would be on the fence about, but ultimately voted no, as the lottery does have an adverse effect on the poor. I have no moral problem with gambling (normal) but I believe lottery tickets may only increase poverty. However if it was an increase in income or property tax used to fund veterans' programs, it'd have my staunch support.
Why? Property taxes are generally regressive.
Logged
Sopranos Republican
Matt from VT
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,175
United States


Political Matrix
E: 3.03, S: -8.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: August 08, 2014, 10:16:00 PM »

Amendment 1: No
Amendment 5: Yes
Amendment 7: No
Amendment 8: No
Amendment 9: Yes

Amendment 8 I would be on the fence about, but ultimately voted no, as the lottery does have an adverse effect on the poor. I have no moral problem with gambling (normal) but I believe lottery tickets may only increase poverty. However if it was an increase in income or property tax used to fund veterans' programs, it'd have my staunch support.
Why? Property taxes are generally regressive.

I should have phrased that better admittedly. I support a progressive property tax, which is what I was thinking about when I typed this.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,663
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: August 09, 2014, 10:51:48 AM »

Amendment 1: No
Amendment 5: Yes
Amendment 7: No
Amendment 8: No
Amendment 9: Yes

Amendment 8 I would be on the fence about, but ultimately voted no, as the lottery does have an adverse effect on the poor. I have no moral problem with gambling (normal) but I believe lottery tickets may only increase poverty. However if it was an increase in income or property tax used to fund veterans' programs, it'd have my staunch support.
Why? Property taxes are generally regressive.

I would think that depends on the area. In many places the poor tend not to even own real estate, or if they do its at very low valuation, while the wealthier have very valuable estates.
Logged
politicallefty
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,200
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -9.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: August 10, 2014, 11:34:48 AM »

Amendment 1: No
Amendment 5: No
Amendment 7: No
Amendment 8: No
Amendment 9: Yes

Amendment 1 is just a way for Big Agriculture to avoid state regulations. The last thing any state needs is additional protections of gun rights, as 5 does. I support the goals of 7 and 8, but I'm not supportive of increasing the regressive sales tax or state lottery programs as they currently exist. Amendment 9 is basically unnecessary after Riley v. California, but it's not a bad idea to set the right of electronic privacy in stone.
Logged
The Dowager Mod
texasgurl
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,972
United States


Political Matrix
E: -9.48, S: -8.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: August 10, 2014, 12:06:35 PM »

No.
No.
Yes.
No.
No.
Logged
traininthedistance
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: August 10, 2014, 03:04:32 PM »
« Edited: August 10, 2014, 03:06:37 PM by traininthedistance »

Funding transportation with a regressive and distortionary sales tax, rather than still-ridiculously-inadequate user fees (that should be way higher on Pigouvian grounds), is nothing short of horrific to my mind.

And, also, calling property taxes "regressive" is bizarre.  They're not perfectly progressive, sure, but are people who rent (or live with family, or in public housing) that invisible to you?
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: August 10, 2014, 03:10:01 PM »

No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes

Details for 7 and 8 are needed though to make a true decision.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: August 10, 2014, 03:19:55 PM »

Funding transportation with a regressive and distortionary sales tax, rather than still-ridiculously-inadequate user fees (that should be way higher on Pigouvian grounds), is nothing short of horrific to my mind.

Note the description says "state sales and use taxes". As I said above I'd need to know the details, such as how much of an increase we're talking about and on what items, but I should point out that increase in things like the gas tax doesn't just affect only outer suburbanite and exurbanites who commute more than 25 miles one way to work or even only people who drive at all. If transportation costs go up, the cost of everything does, food prices will increase if transporting them becomes more expensive. Of course this doesn't mean we shouldn't have a gas tax but anyone who thinks gas prices should be forcibly increased above $6/gallon or so is deluding themselves if they think there won't be any immediate negative effects on all segments of the population. It's also worth nothing that conversely improving transportation reduces transportation costs, so if done properly (once again, details needed), increasing the sales tax here might decrease prices in the long run (also a point I make about the gas tax, I'm reminded of McCain and Hillary's very stupid gas tax holiday proposal in 2008 and pointing out why it was such a bad idea that wouldn't benefit anyone.)

And, also, calling property taxes "regressive" is bizarre.  They're not perfectly progressive, sure, but are people who rent (or live with family, or in public housing) that invisible to you?

Well higher property taxes will increase rents. Minnesota has a unique solution for this, renters can apply for a special tax credit that gives them an additional refund (I'll be getting mine in a week or so) based on rent paid and income. But that's just Minnesota.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 14 queries.