Vote Yes Commercials

[TheArtist]

Tim. This has a link to the Tennessee Valley Authority Report and some other good info about the dam designs and Living River project.

http://www.incog.org/ark%20river/default.htm

[booWorld]

I very seldomly watch TV, so I haven't seen the ads.  But I bet those kids are absolutely adorable.

Let me guess:  Big, pleading, Precious Moments styled eyes?

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by booWorld

I very seldomly watch TV, so I haven't seen the ads.  But I bet those kids are absolutely adorable.

Let me guess:  Big, pleading, Precious Moments styled eyes?

They were nice looking kids, parents, grandparents and of course Betty Boyd. All no doubt related to greedy oligarch ruling families. []

[booWorld]

For the past 18 years, I've lived within a few blocks of the river.  I can see it from where I live and from the building where I work also.  On average throughout the years, I estimate that I've walked or biked to River Parks about three times a week or so, depending on the season and on my work load.

I spend far more time looking at the river than I spend watching TV.  Yard signs and TV commercials for or against the tax will not persuade me to change my position.  There is no doubt in my mind that I would personally benefit from the approval of this tax, but yet I am against it because I don't think it's fair.  Why should someone in the hinterland of Tulsa County whose income is much lower than mine be forced to pay a sales tax in order to increase the value of my property and my quality of life?

I've enjoyed the Arkansas River for years.  Before I moved to Tulsa, I lived near the Arkansas in two separate cities in Kansas.  I love looking at the river from my window, and it was no accident that I chose to live close to it again when I moved to Tulsa.  As I write this, I'm glancing from my computer screen to the river and back, thinking about the unfairness of a regressive river sales tax.

On a very selfish personal level, I will gain from the approval of this tax, but I'm satisfied with the river as it is.  If a majority of Tulsa County voters approve it next month, then fine.  But if the tax is rejected, that's okay with me, too.

Some of the posts here are so extreme.  Some are written as though Tulsa will never survive if we don't approve the tax.  Others are written as though Tulsa will suffer greatly if we do approve it.  

Putting the extremism aside, I ask myself the following questions:

Should river development be a priority for Tulsa right now?

If so, is a county sales tax the best way to fund it?

Might there be other ways to finance river development other than a county-wide sales tax?


I think some of the arguments for the tax are valid.  My gut is telling me to vote against it.  I'll be interested to see what happens on October 9th.  But either way, it's nothing to blow a gasket over.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by booWorld

For the past 18 years, I've lived within a few blocks of the river.  I can see it from where I live and from the building where I work also.  On average throughout the years, I estimate that I've walked or biked to River Parks about three times a week or so, depending on the season and on my work load.

I spend far more time looking at the river than I spend watching TV.  Yard signs and TV commercials for or against the tax will not persuade me to change my position.  There is no doubt in my mind that I would personally benefit from the approval of this tax, but yet I am against it because I don't think it's fair.  Why should someone in the hinterland of Tulsa County whose income is much lower than mine be forced to pay a sales tax in order to increase the value of my property and my quality of life?

I've enjoyed the Arkansas River for years.  Before I moved to Tulsa, I lived near the Arkansas in two separate cities in Kansas.  I love looking at the river from my window, and it was no accident that I chose to live close to it again when I moved to Tulsa.  As I write this, I'm glancing from my computer screen to the river and back, thinking about the unfairness of a regressive river sales tax.

On a very selfish personal level, I will gain from the approval of this tax, but I'm satisfied with the river as it is.  If a majority of Tulsa County voters approve it next month, then fine.  But if the tax is rejected, that's okay with me, too.

Some of the posts here are so extreme.  Some are written as though Tulsa will never survive if we don't approve the tax.  Others are written as though Tulsa will suffer greatly if we do approve it.  

Putting the extremism aside, I ask myself the following questions:

Should river development be a priority for Tulsa right now?

If so, is a county sales tax the best way to fund it?

Might there be other ways to finance river development other than a county-wide sales tax?


I think some of the arguments for the tax are valid.  My gut is telling me to vote against it.  I'll be interested to see what happens on October 9th.  But either way, it's nothing to blow a gasket over.

                                              My answers your questions are absolutely not, absolutely not, and emphatically yes. Thanks, those questions really do put things into perspective and put the extremism aside.

[TheArtist]

Frankly I think these commercials are quite vanilla and uninspiring. The Channels video was a top notch example of the type of advertising I was thinking they would use. They need to have some dimensional, computer, renderings that show all the features, visually explaining what is really in this plan. The average person has no idea and I still hear people complaining about this as being an island with buildings on it in the middle of the river lol.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by booWorld

I very seldomly watch TV, so I haven't seen the ads.  But I bet those kids are absolutely adorable.

Let me guess:  Big, pleading, Precious Moments styled eyes?

They were nice looking kids, parents, grandparents and of course Betty Boyd. All no doubt related to greedy oligarch ruling families. []

It WOULD actually be interesting to know whether the Tax Vampires served up their own children to serve as PROPS for the Kaiser River Tax commercials.

When Vote YES TAX campaign adopts "It's for the Children" as its theme, reach for the Airsick bag.

[V]

[RecycleMichael]

Why would it matter if the children actors in the movie were from prominent Tulsa families or not?

They are actors in a television spot.

Please tone down the rhetoric...there is no need to use phrases like "served up their own children".

Actors...cute kids...not threat to you...

[Double A]

       

[sauerkraut]

quote:Originally posted by Sangria

Sorry, the tax is actually 8.517%

The 9.517% is the nuimber I got off my sales receipt from Best Buy off I-44 last night.

They over charged me for taxes and I will deal with them in a little while.

Even at that, 8.917 is not a whole lot better. Those half pennies add up fast.

The sales tax rates do seem high in Oklahoma and Tulsa. When I visit Tulsa I just can't get use-to paying sales tax on food items. Out of habit when I'm visiting Tulsa/Oklahoma and a food item is 99 cents I give the clerk $1.00 bill expecting to get a penny back in change then the clerk sez $1.09 and I have dig out some coins from my pocket. I'm from Ohio and we don't pay any sales tax on food items. If it's 99 cents we pay 99 cents. Paying sales tax on food itmes seems strange, but many other states also tax food items. However, Oklahoma is dirt cheap on prop. taxes. In Ohio we pay around $2,000.00 + prop. tax on a $100,000 home, in Oklahoma it's offten under $1,000.00. Our utility bills are thru the roof. The heating bills in Ohio are sky high, our Ohio vehicle license plates cost about $50.00 in reg. fees per year which is not bad. I don't know how much vehicle tags in Oklahoma cost. However, Oklahoma as a whole is a far cheaper place to live than many other states when you balance everything out. (many Ohio cities have a local income tax on top of the state income tax, Oklahoma does not have that.)[B)]

[TheArtist]

Kinda neat. "stolen from Tulsa World Sunday Opinion article"







One thing though.... If thats the Living River Dam and pedestrian bridge/restaurant. Where is the kayak and canoe part? I am guessing its cut off in the lower left foreground. The river seems to be flowing from left to right according to the dam structure so we are looking at the East Bank. Just where is this pedestrian bridge(street wise) and what is that bridge in the background? And its supposed to be a sunset, we are looking east. Would the moon be there in that phase at that time? I cant possibly vote for this plan if they cant even get the moon in the right position. []

[pmcalk]

That top picture, while kind of cool, looks to have a LOT of light glare.  Where's Patrick when you need him?

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by twizzler

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Kinda neat. "stolen from Tulsa World Sunday Opinion article"







One thing though.... If thats the Living River Dam and pedestrian bridge/restaurant. Where is the kayak and canoe part? I am guessing its cut off in the lower left foreground. The river seems to be flowing from left to right according to the dam structure so we are looking at the East Bank. Just where is this pedestrian bridge(street wise) and what is that bridge in the background? And its supposed to be a sunset, we are looking east, its apparently spring or early summer. Would the moon be there in that phase at that time? I cant possibly vote for this plan if they cant even get the moon in the right position. []

The opinion article mentions those graphics are an 'artist's rendering'. We all know how well artists can embellish reality. [8D]

Well at the 61st Street pedestrian bridge, I don't see any graphic effects of the GAS MASKS depicting on the pedestrians strolling over the Sewage Treatment Plant Overflow Ponds.......

Oooooh, what's that Smell??

Do you smell THAT smell??



[]

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Why would it matter if the children actors in the movie were from prominent Tulsa families or not?

They are actors in a television spot.

Please tone down the rhetoric...there is no need to use phrases like "served up their own children".

Actors...cute kids...not threat to you...

so you don't find it sad that they play dirty with commercials that are based on emotion instead of fact?  I mean, the "do it for the kids" angle is the sign of a desperate campaign.


and on another point....do the No River tax people get free commercial time?  They obviously can't afford to make a fancy commercial like this, but I thought there was a fairness act that gave equal air time to both sides on an issue.

[Steve]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

so you don't find it sad that they play dirty with commercials that are based on emotion instead of fact?  I mean, the "do it for the kids" angle is the sign of a desperate campaign.


and on another point....do the No River tax people get free commercial time?  They obviously can't afford to make a fancy commercial like this, but I thought there was a fairness act that gave equal air time to both sides on an issue.

I highly doubt that any of those kids in the commercial under the age of 13 have the slightest idea of the issue at hand.  And the same goes for every other child in Tulsa.  If the "Yes" people want my vote, then ditch the lisping children and give us some proven numbers to justify this economically over other infrastructure needs.  They can't do it so they resort to emotions.

After a series of court rulings in the 1980's by judges in thick with the Reagan administration, the FCC abolished its regulations known as the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987.  Since then, there has been much debate on the issue, but unfortunately there are currently no "fairness" rules required of broadcast TV.