Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

vexingsilence t1_j7vvyte wrote

Reply to comment by TarantinoFan23 in Want passenger rail in Manchester? Make your voice heard by PurpleSubtlePlan

It's not a tactic to kill debate, it's a tactic to stop the state and the cities of Nashua and Manchester from dumping money into something that has failed to get off the ground in the ~50+ years that it's been under discussion. How much longer would you like to drag this out for? There's no use in keeping a project in the discussion phase for that long. It's either viable or it's not.

Would you be happier if this bill proposed shelving the project for a decade and then calling for it to be returned to the table for discussion then to see if conditions have changed enough to warrant further discussion?

2

TarantinoFan23 t1_j7w42jk wrote

I am in favor of making the best decisions. There is no limit to the amount of discussion to reach that conclusion. But we can't even debate the rail thing because we waste so much time debating if we should debate it. And THIS conversation is like debating if we should debate about debating. A person who is just looking to stifle progress can keep going like this forever. It is another insidious strategy to keep the focus away from the actual question at hand.

2

vexingsilence t1_j7w6yak wrote

The government shouldn't discuss topics endlessly. There are other topics that are not getting the attention they deserve by doing so. If a consensus can't be reached, it should be shelved for a while and everyone should move on. Revisit it at a later date after the interested parties have had time to come up with a more compelling pitch. I don't see an issue with that. A lot of people are in favor, a lot of against. There's no consensus.

2

TarantinoFan23 t1_j7wagdq wrote

You obviously don't want the rail and are doing mental gymnastics to justify shutting down debate BEFORE there is a decision. Let the debate die of its own merit or it will never be settled.

2

vexingsilence t1_j7wfa5q wrote

There's been 50+ years of debate. How much more do you want?

Like I said, there's no consensus. There's been countless studies and pitches over the years. None of them were compelling enough to rally enough support to get it approved.

2

TarantinoFan23 t1_j7zij3p wrote

Endless debate is actually fine as long as both sides are debating in good faith. There's no reason to stifle it unless you have an ulterior motive (like keeping status quo because it benefits you personally.)

0

vexingsilence t1_j7zqrmb wrote

It costs time and money to keep it going. If you can't make your case, it gets set aside. Much like this discussion here is about to.

0