Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Affiliates | Home RSS
 
 
 

Casperson wants trust fund money used for harbors

February 18, 2013

MARQUETTE — State Sen....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(11)

perplexed

Feb-18-13 11:01 AM

As usual another Casperson proposal inspired by his desire, funded by his logging buddies, to choke off money for conservation projects. His plan is no money for conservation, so go ahead and cut it all down and drilling up to make my financial backers more money, the*****with public good.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

googleyeyed

Feb-18-13 11:24 AM

Most fishing boats DO NOT need the greater depth of large recreational yachts,

only the few of privilege are able to keep,

which casperson purports to serve with his idea of raiding yet another fund intended for a specific and detailed purpose for ALL OF THE PEOPLE.

Interesting?

Interesting how republicans are bent on subverting, or ending the funding of money that benefit’s the majority,

and,

NOT, the minority,

such as the moneyed forest industry lobby.

The money should remain in use for the purposes that WE, the voters INTENDED,

not for the benefit of a privileged few.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

googleyeyed

Feb-18-13 11:25 AM

Along comes another generation of political hacks

(rhymes with quack)

who in effect says:

“the pension funds were just sitting there”, or

why did I rob the bank?

Because, that’s were the money is!

By way of comparison, funds perverted,or subverted from the voters’ intended use,

by casperson’s idea,

would serve the interests of just A FEW boaters,

while funds used strictly as the voters intended with their positive vote on November 6, 2984 in favor of Proposal B,

would be open to

SERVE ALL CITIZENS,

NOT just the few who ARE ABLE afford to own larger boats and yachts!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

googleyeyed

Feb-18-13 11:26 AM

“On Nov. 6, 1984, Michigan residents voted in favor of Proposal B, which amended the state Constitution and created the trust fund.

The constitutional amendment required … proceeds used to acquire and develop public recreation lands.”

On the surface, Michigan residents approved the use of trust fund monies to acquire and develop public recreation lands.

Period.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

googleyeyed

Feb-18-13 11:27 AM

For the COMMON GOOD OF ALL,

Or

For the good of a PRIVLEGED FEW?

THAT, REALLY,

IS THE QUESTION.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Feb-18-13 1:11 PM

Truley,

it is *******, if you don't consider yourself a republican,

bent on always bettering your republican position aka wallet!

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Feb-18-13 1:13 PM

the stars =

r.e.d.n.e.c.k.

- something the republican press considers to be

e.v.i.l.....

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Peace2all

Feb-19-13 12:26 AM

I know this has nothing to do with this article, but why don't the bunch of them get together and worry about our stupid, "Michigan No-Fault" Insurance?

My vehicles depreciate every year in value, but Insurance keeps going up! And I don't mean $100.00 for the year, it's around $400.00+ every year. We have no tickets, no violations, no claims nothing. We even have a thousand dollar deductable. Every year when our policy is due, I hear the same thing! "It's because you live in Michigan."

I am almost wanting to be like the other 47% and not carry any at all!

Been with the same company 13yrs and this is the thanks I get for being a responsible driver. I wasted my time and called other companies, they want our house and everything else to give a cheaper price. I think they are all in bed with one another.

I haven't seen any cash back from the state of Michigan for having Insurance since 1998? Where has it been all these years?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Feb-19-13 8:51 AM

The State of Michigan, (so I've been told) has many different requirements that auto insurance companies must meet, to do business in this state.

One of the requirements, is the notion that medical payouts for accidents are not capped in this state, as they may be in other states, thus the necessity to keep raising premiums, because of the ever-increasing costs for payouts due to medical care.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Peace2all

Feb-20-13 12:57 AM

The MCCA is separate from the policy. There was just a 21% increase for this. It is now $175.00 per vehicle that the Insurance collects and gives to the State of Michigan. Now, don't think they do that for free, they charge YOU $68.00 for them to do that.

Hospitals, etc. routinely charge 300 to 400% more for auto insurance patients then they charge work related injuries for the same exact procedures. If this is true, wouldn't Obama Care eliminate that cost?

I was informed that 1 in 5 are unisured in Michigan and in approx. 50% Detroit drivers are uninsured. I can see why when every year they keep going up in Premiums for No Good Reason! Thank You!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

frogleggs

Feb-24-13 10:54 AM

Peace,

it is evident that you have a shortcoming in your ability to tie non-capped medical costs in Michigan with the insurance premium you must pay.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 11 of 11 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web