OFFICIAL I70 BITCH THREAD....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WTF is dat

yeah tabor is totally awesome

---

As a resident of the BFE part of SW Colorado (our great politicians can't even get us Denver TV stations via local media to see what they are doing while representing us), I am VERY happy to have TABOR protecting our taxation interests. It is the only thing that gives us any power against paying for profligate spending for things that do not benefit us by the people you vote for. IMHO, it protects us minority state residents from a real and present tyranny of the majority over there on the overpopulated front range. Thank God we do not have a pure democracy in our state government or we would be bled dry to fix your traffic problems. I would happily vote for TABOR again if necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

As a resident of the BFE part of SW Colorado (our great politicians can't even get us Denver TV stations via local media to see what they are doing while representing us), I am VERY happy to have TABOR protecting our taxation interests. It is the only thing that gives us any power against paying for profligate spending for things that do not benefit us by the people you vote for. IMHO, it protects us minority state residents from a real and present tyranny of the majority over there on the overpopulated front range. Thank God we do not have a pure democracy in our state government or we would be bled dry to fix your traffic problems. I would happily vote for TABOR again if necessary.

---

So all of the highway and/or major construction projects in Southwestern Colorado are paid for with tax revenues collected only from residents of Southern Colorado?

Yeah, I'm willing to bet that a lot more is spent per capita on road maintenance for southwest Colorado residents than is spent on front range residents. We should cut off their funding. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

Yeah, I'm willing to bet that a lot more is spent per capita on road maintenance for southwest Colorado residents than is spent on front range residents. We should cut off their funding. :D

---

Careful or Hinsdale County will march on the Southern Sun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mdblows

So all of the highway and/or major construction projects in Southwestern Colorado are paid for with tax revenues collected only from residents of Southern Colorado?

---

Yeah, total Bullshit. Like most rural areas they are subsidized by the urban tax base, but like most rural voters FatBrain thinks that its the other way around. Ignorant, arrogant, selfish, hypocritical rednecks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

Yeah, I'm willing to bet that a lot more is spent per capita on road maintenance for southwest Colorado residents than is spent on front range residents. We should cut off their funding. :D

---

Yes, exactly. We should pass a Tabor amendment that says "counties shall receive back in expenditures no more than they provide in tax income." They'd be driving on pot holed dirt roads within 10 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick

Yeah, total Bullshit. Like most rural areas they are subsidized by the urban tax base, but like most rural voters FatBrain thinks that its the other way around. Ignorant, arrogant, selfish, hypocritical rednecks.

---

If you check the proposed State expenditures (since we are discussing TABOR limits) for these I70 projects to make it easier for a miniscule percentage of the state's population to get to a ski area one hour earlier versus State spending on similar projects in the rest of Colorado you will realize what a self-centered, stupid fuck you are. Grow up. Go ahead and pass a new tax on Front Rangers to pay for their own lack of population infrastructure planning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

... tyranny of the majority over there on the overpopulated front range....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

... a miniscule percentage of the state's population to get to a ski area quicker versus State spending on similar projects in the rest of Colorado...

---

Are we a tyrannical majority or a minuscule percentage? You can't have it both ways. Traffic on I-70 isn't only a shit show in ski season either, summer can cause quite the clusterfuck as well. Additionally you forget that the I-70 corridor serves not only Denver residents, but the largest population of ski tourists in the US. Spending on it serves Colorado's economic development interests.

Furthermore there is no refuting that counties outside of the Front Range metro area get significantly more tax dollars spent in them than they generate. If we implemented TABOR at a state level rural Colorado would be seriously boned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

If you check the proposed State expenditures (since we are discussing TABOR limits) for these I70 projects to make it easier for a miniscule percentage of the state's population to get to a ski area one hour earlier versus State spending on similar projects in the rest of Colorado you will realize what a self-centered, stupid fuck you are. Grow up. Go ahead and pass a new tax on Front Rangers to pay for their own lack of population infrastructure planning.

---

Most of those projects discussed above aren't actually about ski traffic - rather travel through Denver.

Any you are the one who needs to grow up and look at facts rather than your thinking that is really self-serving and hypocritical.

You are a parasite on the back of the bulk of tax-paying citizens, enjoying your Denver and Federal subsidized roads when were it left to your local jurisdiction to fund you'd be driving on washboarded dirt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doebedoe

If we implemented TABOR at a state level rural Colorado would be seriously boned.

---

TABOR is already implemented as a state level law, isn't it?

Seriously, if you think TABOR is such a bad idea, why not find a way to convince the rest of us to repeal it? It was voted for based on the majority of the state's voters who thought that not only was it a good idea but also there was a valid need for it to be implemented. It is working exactly as designed and voted for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick

but like most rural voters FatBrain thinks that its the other way around. Ignorant, arrogant, selfish, hypocritical rednecks.

---

Kewl, geographic bigotry! Are you one of them effete, urban, hipster metrosexual queers we rednecks hear tell about in those glossy magazines? Golly!

You guys please get back on track. You almost had a solution to the I-70 clusterfuck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by concretejungle

Careful or Hinsdale County will march on the Southern Sun.

---

I'm not scared of them!

Ok, yeah, I am.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

Seriously, if you think TABOR is such a bad idea, why not find a way to convince the rest of us to repeal it? It was voted for based on the majority of the state's voters who thought that not only was it a good idea but also there was a valid need for it to be implemented. It is working exactly as designed and voted for.

---

You assume that a) voters know the long-term implications of votes they make and b) that Tabor is working exactly as designed. When in fact, it hasn't, and has in fact been modified by subsequent vote(s).

And you still haven't responded to the many people who refuted your claim that your taxes would go to support spending on the Front Range, when in fact it's the exact opposite. Look, I lived in Durango for many years and get how all of this stuff going on in the Front Range seems distant and alien, and it feels like statewide decisions are made "up there" and don't represent your values or desires. And yes, in many ways that is true, especially for the SW corner where ABQ is the primary city and source of goods. But the reality is that the citizens of La Plata County and its neighbors are the ones being "supported" by Front Range taxpayers, not the other way around. You can't seriously think that La Plata, San Juan, and Ouray Counties have a tax base that is able to pay even just the maintenance on Coal Bank/Molas/Red Mountain Passes, or that La Plata, Archuleta, Rio Grande, and Mineral Counties have the tax base to pay for all the maintenance, let alone the big reconstruction, on Wolf Creek. So, if you don't want to be targeted with what you call "geographic bigotry" (which you kinda started, BTW) then at least show a little realism as to where the tax dollars come from and where they are spent.

Eastbound I-70 was completely adaquate yesterday at 3:30, especially if you slow ass DB's would get out of the left lane.
There wasn't a single car in the right lane on the entire 11 mile tunnel approach and only two trucks.

^^ everyone's afraid of the dropoff right of the right lane I think. It's ridiculous.

WB was a total crapshow of left lane drivers yesterday evening. Couple of snowflakes and bam 40mph on a weekday at 5:30pm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

I'm not scared of them!

Ok, yeah, I am.



You assume that a) voters know the long-term implications of votes they make and b) that Tabor is working exactly as designed. When in fact, it hasn't, and has in fact been modified by subsequent vote(s).

And you still haven't responded to the many people who refuted your claim that your taxes would go to support spending on the Front Range, when in fact it's the exact opposite. Look, I lived in Durango for many years and get how all of this stuff going on in the Front Range seems distant and alien, and it feels like statewide decisions are made "up there" and don't represent your values or desires. And yes, in many ways that is true, especially for the SW corner where ABQ is the primary city and source of goods. But the reality is that the citizens of La Plata County and its neighbors are the ones being "supported" by Front Range taxpayers, not the other way around. You can't seriously think that La Plata, San Juan, and Ouray Counties have a tax base that is able to pay even just the maintenance on Coal Bank/Molas/Red Mountain Passes, or that La Plata, Archuleta, Rio Grande, and Mineral Counties have the tax base to pay for all the maintenance, let alone the big reconstruction, on Wolf Creek. So, if you don't want to be targeted with what you call "geographic bigotry" (which you kinda started, BTW) then at least show a little realism as to where the tax dollars come from and where they are spent.

---

You might be right about some of the SW counties at least for income and maybe property tax, but imagine they're bringing in pretty good tourist sales tax.

Anyways, some of the rural counties kick in big time per capita, for example Weld county. If Weld got to keep all their money, the streets would be paved with gold.

City people like to bitch about the Red State/Blue State thing and how their money goes to rural areas, and it's somewhat true on a federal level. But the money most often flows from rural to city at the State level, especially for big Ag and Mineral counties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Danno

You assume that a) voters know the long-term implications of votes they make and b) that Tabor is working exactly as designed. When in fact, it hasn't, and has in fact been modified by subsequent vote(s).

---

It is easy to claim that the majority of the voters are not as intelligent or informed as you are/I am. Lord knows there are many state elections results that turned out differently than I wished. But they all have some remedies prescribed by our laws. That can more easily be done by an RTD-based front range user fee increase (US 36 style toll road?) ballot proposal than a state-wide tax ballot or repealing TABOR.

The issue at hand is who should pay for and benefit from a huge tax or direct user fee increase to upgrade the capacity of an "interstate federal" highway for the ostensibly claimed reduction (half hour? one hour?) in the driving time to a recreational destination for the enjoyment of a small minority of state residents for a couple days a year.

Edit: I base my statement about "the issue at hand" based on the expressed sentiment of the large majority of respondents in this thread about potential solutions to the "problem".

Quote:

---

So, if you don't want to be targeted with what you call "geographic bigotry" (which you kinda started, BTW)

---

I went back and looked at the personal attacks and would refer you to post #857.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capulin overdrive

You might be right about some of the SW counties at least for income and maybe property tax, but imagine they're bringing in pretty good tourist sales tax.

---

Also, don't forget oil and gas tax revenue contributions. How much energy production tax revenue does Denver County bring in?

Income taxes generally go into the state general tax fund but property taxes are supposed to benefit local tax funds.

We can also discuss the water rights that have been "appropriated" from the western slope to provide green lawns along the front range in another thread.

To get back to the thread's intent, I have not been back to the front range more than twice in the last decade because the traffic there is insufferable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

Also, don't forget oil and gas tax revenue contributions. How much energy production tax revenue does Denver County bring in?

Income taxes generally go into the state general tax fund but property taxes are supposed to benefit local tax funds.

We can also discuss the water rights that have been "appropriated" from the western slope to provide green lawns along the front range in another thread.

To get back to the thread's intent, I have not been back to the front range more than twice in the last decade because the traffic there is insufferable.

---

I'm well aware of mineral income just didn't know how many wells some of the SW counties have. Know they have some.


And yea the water thing is a big deal, I'm SE CO and they've taken away a bunch there.

[QUOTE=FatChance;4403924
The issue at hand is who should pay for and benefit from a huge tax or direct user fee increase to upgrade the capacity of an "interstate federal" highway for the ostensibly claimed reduction (half hour? one hour?) in the driving time to a recreational destination for the enjoyment of a small minority of state residents for a couple days a year.
[/QUOTE]

So this is really the struggle. It might be argued as a tourism issue, but the reality is that tourists may suffer once or twice a season in their rental or CME van between DIA and Summit/Vail, but they will have their Epic® vacation to distract them, and odds are they've escaped a daily hellish commute for this Epic® vacation and are somewhat conditioned to such things.

It's the Front Range residents who are causing and suffering in the traffic. Well actually, Vail Resorts creates this high value/low cost winter fun pass that everyone who moves to the Front Range must purchase to fulfill their Colorado Dream™. (I realize there are long time residents who were living the dream in the 80s and 90s and now carry some resentment towards the hundred or so people moving to Denver metro daily and contributing to the cluster on every piece of asphalt...I feel ya...I moved to SLC largely because of the cluster - metropolitan success is a bitch, so are fast breeding mormons but they don't ski)

So, here's one way to look at it. Cause: Cheap passes. Solution? Raise the Epic pass price $3-400 and cull the I-70 herd. I realize this wouldn't do anything for the summer traffic, except maybe stem the flow of new arrivals moving to the area to buy a cheap pass and live the Dream™.

It could be a fun exercise to ask VR to pony up some serious cash for road improvements, since it's their toxic-to-the-skiing-experience model that is fucking up the program.

I guess the reality is that there are just way to many people living and moving there, all trying to do the same thing. Spending billions of dollars to add lanes up I70 or completely fuck up the lives of everybody living in the 285 corridor for 10 years to make that viable option so people can go recreate....I dunno...thats a tough pill to swallow. Tragedy of the Commons for sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flowtron's ghost

It could be a fun exercise to ask VR to pony up some serious cash for road improvements, since it's their toxic-to-the-skiing-experience model that is fucking up the program.

I guess the reality is that there are just way to many people living and moving there, all trying to do the same thing. Spending billions of dollars to add lanes up I70 or completely fuck up the lives of everybody living in the 285 corridor for 10 years to make that viable option so people can go recreate....I dunno...thats a tough pill to swallow. Tragedy of the Commons for sure.

---

Tough pill, but it is the reality. Unless the greater Front Range becomes a complete economic shithole and the mountains turn to sand, people will keep living and moving here.

And pricing out the masses from cheap seasons passes through government intervention? Can't wait to see the new plans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

If you check the proposed State expenditures (since we are discussing TABOR limits) for these I70 projects to make it easier for a miniscule percentage of the state's population to get to a ski area one hour earlier versus State spending on similar projects in the rest of Colorado you will realize what a self-centered, stupid fuck you are. Grow up. Go ahead and pass a new tax on Front Rangers to pay for their own lack of population infrastructure planning.

---

very nice bro I'm with you

my take away is if you live on the front range your looking for the secuirty of a nice well paying job, nice house, nice schools for your babies and you don't mind paying more taxes because in return for higher taxes you get all those services you want to make life better and good schools for your children so you don't care for tabor cause it limits the secuirty and services that make you feel safe

if you live in a rural part of the state income a good job and all that secuirty isn't something your looking for hence you moved away from the rat race, you want to hide out, you don't really care for goverment services and you are more into self reliance than hoping someone else provides that for you so you think tabor is as awesome as string cheese

honestly it's entertaining to think about the i70 mess but when it boils down to the truth there is not a problem, the problem is a bunch of entitled white people who work hard all week want to go skiing on the weekends and enjoy thier hard work in terms of relaxation and fun in the mountains then on monday they return to the rat race and start all over again dreaming about that weekend and wishing they could have the job security and the ski resort in their front yard instead they have a shit show of a commute to the fun, white people problems for sure

15 years ago I lived in a part of the Front Range that was pretty rural. The main road to get to I25 was dirt. Now it was a good dirt road and you could do 40 mph. As more people moved to the area the demand to pave this road grew. Taxes were raised and a beautiful wide two lane road was built. You could easily do 60 on the new road but the speed limit was 45. Soon after radar traps became a regular thing and the locals soon learned 45 was the limit. So we had higher taxes, more cops, and no faster travel. Progress.

Fatty - the main issue that I have with your thinking is that its just not based in fact. You think SW CO is being bled by a "minority" when in fact your minority is bleeding the rest of us who pay the bulk of the tax that goes to roads. If you think that the situation is equitable, then fine, but don't bitch that Front Rangers are bleeding you of your tax dollars when YOU are a beneficiary of the subsidized roads that Front Rangers are funding for you.
See this reference in a highway study that highlights that Denver area road users only benefit from $.69 of every dollar in tax they pay because the rest is allocated to other parts of the state.
https://books.google.com/books?id=X2...tput=html_text

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capulin overdrive

You might be right about some of the SW counties at least for income and maybe property tax, but imagine they're bringing in pretty good tourist sales tax.

---

Do you think that a handful of small local resorts bring in anywhere close to the tourist sales tax of 5 of the 10 most visited ski resorts in the country in Vail, Breckenridge, Copper, Keystone, and Winterpark - which are all accessed via I-70? The skier visits at Telluride, Durango, Silverton, and Wolf Creek is miniscule compared to those.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FatChance

Kewl, geographic bigotry! Are you one of them effete, urban, hipster metrosexual queers we rednecks hear tell about in those glossy magazines? Golly!

---

A swing and a miss. That's some grade A shot in the dark, bigoted, insulting though..

Loser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tommyvee

Will Colorado be better off if Tabor prevents reconstruction of I-70 and the viaduct collapses?

---

Nice job on that rather dramatic red herring.

TABOR does not prevent any projects. It just adds a new step to get voter approval for projects that require new taxation authority. Popular projects that can show their obvious desirability, manifest benefits and clear financial sense should have no problem gaining voter support to approve that new authority.