Livermore voters NO ON D!!!!!!!

[faggotwithalj]

Since Pardee homes actually has tons of money to advertise YES on Livermore Trails, I'm getting scared people are going to believe their bullshit (well it's not all bullshit, but definitely not info that leads one down the right track to making up one's mind....anyways...)Yes, one can see that this whole thing is being funded and promoted by a

Comments

Ah, I understand...

[montecristo]

So, basically, you're suggesting that we use the political means to steal land from the people who own it and want to develop it. Right. Since we can't afford to buy up the land ourselves and figure out to what use we'd like to put it, we should just steal it by fiat.

How clever. The laws of politics apparently trump the laws of property and even those of economics. If we want cheaper housing we should just vote it cheaper! Cool. What an idea. Let's do gasoline next. If we want open space, forget about buying up the land ourselves and leaving it undeveloped, we'll just steal it from the owners who hold it now and decree they're not allowed to use their own property. Brilliant. Voting is so empowering.

You know, I think you're right about the schools around here. The ones we have obviously aren't working.

Re: Ah, I understand...

[faggotwithalj]

I think you need to tone down your scarcasm just a bit, it makes you sound childish and like an asshole.... first of all, obviously you don't vote prices for things (I'm not that stupid, and thank you for beating around the bush to call me stupid [ah, my own scarcasm steps in] although I may be young and not a economics major, I know one thing, there is no need to continuing to develop Livermore... we will turn into southern CA. I don't know about Pardee homes and whether or not they have already bought the land from Livermore (I believe that is what we're voting on, whether or not to sell it to them so they can MANipulate however they see) but call me radical call me a hippie, what the fuck ever... I don't believe it "right, ethical, good-natured," for lack of better words... to capitalize on every aspect of our 'mother earth'.... not every piece of land needs to be "put to use"...why can't we just enjoy the pure beauty of the open space with out having a shopping center or housing development obstructing the view? Everything in our

[legaiiybrunette]

Yes! No on D!! I hate them.. they keep on harassing me with their stupid mailings and they even called me once. I told them to stick their head up their piehole.

NO ON D...

[aaroncohn]

No on D. It's bad for livermore. More people = more cars = more traffic. Currently livermore's 2 high schools are operating above capacity, which generates a lot of extra income for them. Adding another school would not only mean that the new school would be under capacity (and therefore at a defecit), but the other 2 schools would also then be under capacity, causing a deficit in those two schools as well. Not being able to pay for all three schools to operate, the board of education would have to close one of the existing schools, most likely livermore high, since it is the smaller of the two current high schools. Instead of developing houses if D is not passed, respected members of the council are pushing to use the land for agriculture

[aaroncohn]

why do you think the agriculturalists dont want the land. id like to see you grow something in mass quantities out there. its not the right soil for growing things. about all you can do is raise cattle out there. educate yourself a little about agriculture bud.

[aaroncohn]

You might have a point, but ultimately I am against using the land for housing. Since I don't know much about agriculture, I can't say that an attempt to grow food on the land would be successful, but it's important to me to fight population expansion, so I would support alternate uses for the land so long as they benefit the community.