|
|
|
|
|
|
by Nadya
3522 days ago
|
|
|
>Oh yeah? It worked for the taxi industry in Austin. They tricked people into banning Uber and Lyft, so the taxi industry can continue to operate their monopoly. I know what you're talking about with that one! Going to quote myself from earlier on it... >"The way the phrasing was to accept/decline the ordinance to outlaw Uber was so confusingly worded I read it several times and still wasn't sure if I was supposed to vote "yes" or "no" on the ordinance... was it saying "yes" to the new ordinance to overrule/replace the old ordinance or was it voting "yes" to keep the old ordinance? If I voted "yes" was I voting to outlaw Uber or allow Uber? I have a feeling it was intentionally made as confusing as possible." It isn't that people are stupid - it's that these things are worded in such a way to make it as confusing as possible for people to understand. Or to purposefully mislead, such as the bit you quote. |
|
|
I don't disagree with that. Calling someone stupid who is mislead by this type of thing isn't really fair. It's very very tricky and you really need to do research ahead of time in order to make the correct vote. If you don't know who is bankrolling it, or how other groups feel about it, it would be quite difficult to vote "correctly" just based on what you're reading in the voter booth.