Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:49:39 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:28:07 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 02:28:35 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:01:00 -0800, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 14:10:29 -0500, wrote:


What part of this is so hard to understand, your insurance is on the
cops computer in his car in real time.
It is not a "random stop". It is a flashing message on the laptop that
tells the cop, not only that your insurance was canceled but who your
agent/company is. You can't even get a tag without insurance and if it
lapses for any reason you tag is flagged.

So, how come all those illegals aren't getting stopped as soon as they
get on the road?? They aren't.

They run legal tags and they have insurance

? Huh? You believe that illegals have insurance on their to do list?

They do if getting deported is not on their to do list. We don't have
the Arizona problem. They will check immigration status on an arrest
and no insurance is an arrest..

Oh give me a break. I'm sure all the illegal Cubans rush to get their
car insurance all paid up.


No insurance is a tow in Florida and you ride to the station in cuffs.

I doubt it. Most likely you're given a ticket unless there's some
other reason to detain you.


That is simply not true. They do tow cars stopped with no insurance.
My wife has had it happen to employees. They have even waited at the
gate for them to come out and bust them right there.

Sounds like a police state to me. My neighbor got stopped for expired
tags. He didn't even have his DL on him. They gave him a fix it
ticket.

There is a huge difference between an expired tag and no insurance.
The cop simply tells you, he can't let you on the street with no
insurance and your car gets towed.

Here's a link...

http://www.insuranceusa.com/Californ...-Insurance.php

Here's another... scroll down.

http://www.ehow.com/list_6772564_sta...tion-laws.html

I don't see anything about getting your car towed...

"Auto insurance is mandatory and driving without the proper
documentation can lead to significant fines or even suspension of your
license."

I suppose you could run someone elses tag but that is fraught with
it's own perils. I would certainly expect a "felony stop" if I was
doing that. (dragged out of the car, knocked to the ground and a cops
foot on your neck)
The assumption is you are up to no good, car theft at the minimum and
perhaps something a lot worse.
That computer in the cop car has taken a lot of mystery out of who
they are looking at and certainly which car that tag belongs to.

Yet, there are lots and lots of people on the road without
insurance...

Not so much here, maybe you just need better enforcement there.
Maryland was bad about that, mostly because DC did not require
insurance. That may be better but they also do not talk to each other.
They have 2 deputies here in each district who do nothing but
insurance, out of state tags and radar.
They drive around all day just running tags to see what pops. That was
the allure of that camera system that did it automatically. They are
checking every tag that comes in range.
These guys also look for out of state tags in employee parking lots.
That one is a ticket but it is a ticket with a warrant attached if you
don't buy a Florida tag right away. The next time it is that tow and
the ride downtown.

They do all of this because we do have a lot of out of state people
here who will blow off a wreck and leave the injured party trying to
catch someone across a state line.

Well, good for FL. However, there are 49 other states plus DC.

Maryland is pretty nasty about insurance too and I bet the same is
true about California.
They do have instant check in the cop car, in real time there too.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:58:20 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:43:21 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


The buyer still has to come up with a tag and the insurance is tied to
that tag. I can't speak for everywhere but the wrong tag on a care
around here is a "felony stop". ( get out of the car, lay on the
ground, don't make any fast moves) The assumption is you are up to no
good, car theft at the minimum but you could be a drug courier or
driving a getaway car.

This all sounds like a paranoid fantasy to me. Most illegals are going
back and forth to work. They avoid doing stupid things and are just
regular people trying to get by. Sure, sometimes there are hardened
criminals doing dirty deeds. This has nothing to do with most people.

Most people just buy insurance and do things by the book.
Co-ordination between insurance companies and DMV's have no doubt
caused some people to buy insurance when they would have previously gone
uninsured.
Some of those systems can probably be gamed too.
Illegals most often just ride with a legal motorist.
But anybody who doesn't care about the law for whatever reason can buy a
used car on the street and steal tags. Happens all the time.
The smarter ones avoid vanity plates like CUDDLY4U.
Just go with something like 154 823L.
Cops aren't running tags enough to affect that.
But it could happen.
The tollway cameras and red light cameras could be advanced to go real
time and notify nearby cops of hits on stolen tags and lack of insurance
coverage.
Matter of time and politics.
Some would consider it too "Big Brother."
There's already squawking about red-light cameras.
I have mixed feelings about it.
Might not bother me if I was running the show.
Don't know yet, as it hasn't affected me and I don't know enough about
it.


They are testing the camera in the cop car that scans tag here as we
speak. It uses OCR to read the tag, the on board computer runs it and
a few seconds later the cop has a message flashing on the screen
telling him everything there is to know about the car and the owner..
This is not just for insurance, it is also Amber alerts, stolen cars,
wants, warrants or whatever else you can glean from a tag or the owner
of that tag.
This is still in testing but expect it on a cop car near you soon ...
as soon as they justify the cost.

Sure... ok, we'll just hang around until they get that working...

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:58:03 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:34:45 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:51:06 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 10:28:31 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"I_am_Tosk" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:11:11 -0500, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Listen up... if you walk into a used car lot and buy a car with cash,
you just drive out. The salesperson isn't going to ask you about
insurance.

Listen up.. No matter how many times you say it, it isn't true, at least
not here in CT. Might be in Kaliforna, but only to accommodate illegals
and derelicts... But not in CT. Every car sale is recorded, cash or
otherwise, the Tax man wouldn't have it any other way.





As I suspected, California has online linkage between DMV and the
insurance company and a cop can check your insurance from his car.+
Five years ago.

http://dmv.ca.gov/vr/insurance_suspension.htm

Here are some things you need to know about recent vehicle liability
insurance changes:

* As of January 1, 2006, all insurance companies are required to
report insurance status information to DMV for all private use
vehicles (CVC §16058).
* As of July 1, 2006, law enforcement and court personnel have
access to DMV records to verify that your California registered
vehicle is currently insured (CVC §16058.1).
* Effective October 1, 2006, your vehicle registration is subject
to suspension if the liability insurance is canceled, OR if your
insurance company has not electronically provided evidence of
insurance when you purchase and register your vehicle, OR if you
provide DMV with false insurance information (CVC §4000.38).

That's a lot of homework for the Plum. I think as soon as she noted the
"cash" thing, we all knew she was talking out of her ass... again. In CT
like you said in Fla, when someone drops insurance, the authorities are
notified right away.


Reply:
Buying a car for cash from a private party you do not have to show
insurance. And the lack of insurance takes a while to kick in. I sold my
96 s10 and the person failed to register the car in a timely manner. We
file a document with the DMV when you sell a car that removes you from the
liability for the car. I got a letter months later about expired insurance.
But that is more a problem with the DMV and their crappy records system.


The buyer still has to come up with a tag and the insurance is tied to
that tag. I can't speak for everywhere but the wrong tag on a care
around here is a "felony stop". ( get out of the car, lay on the
ground, don't make any fast moves) The assumption is you are up to no
good, car theft at the minimum but you could be a drug courier or
driving a getaway car.

This all sounds like a paranoid fantasy to me. Most illegals are going
back and forth to work. They avoid doing stupid things and are just
regular people trying to get by. Sure, sometimes there are hardened
criminals doing dirty deeds. This has nothing to do with most people.


The people who had this happen to them at my wife's place were just
driving back and forth to work too.

This is just stupid.

Call the cops, tell them your insurance expired and you still have to
drive to work a few days until you can get it reinstated. Use your
cutest girl voice. Tell us what they say. I bet the words "arrest" and
"Impound your car" come up.

That's just dumb. Come on.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:53:34 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:31:33 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 02:56:51 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:11:11 -0500, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...


Listen up... if you walk into a used car lot and buy a car with cash,
you just drive out. The salesperson isn't going to ask you about
insurance.

Listen up.. No matter how many times you say it, it isn't true, at least
not here in CT. Might be in Kaliforna, but only to accommodate illegals
and derelicts... But not in CT. Every car sale is recorded, cash or
otherwise, the Tax man wouldn't have it any other way.





As I suspected, California has online linkage between DMV and the
insurance company and a cop can check your insurance from his car.+
Five years ago.

http://dmv.ca.gov/vr/insurance_suspension.htm

Here are some things you need to know about recent vehicle liability
insurance changes:

* As of January 1, 2006, all insurance companies are required to
report insurance status information to DMV for all private use
vehicles (CVC §16058).
* As of July 1, 2006, law enforcement and court personnel have
access to DMV records to verify that your California registered
vehicle is currently insured (CVC §16058.1).
* Effective October 1, 2006, your vehicle registration is subject
to suspension if the liability insurance is canceled, OR if your
insurance company has not electronically provided evidence of
insurance when you purchase and register your vehicle, OR if you
provide DMV with false insurance information (CVC §4000.38).

And, that covers new cars or cars bought through a dealer. How many
illegals do that? Most buy cars 2nd hand from private parties.


The words "new car" and "dealer" do not exist in that quote. Why
don't you look up the statute yourself counselor?


Sure... they *can* look it up. Most are going somewhere for more
important things.

I bet those kids and Mexicans there would disagree.

I don't see anything in there about arrest or towing if that's the
only problem. Of course, if you'd like the cops to check their
immigration status, move to AZ.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:04:15 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:38:02 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 02:39:53 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:03:39 -0800, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 14:00:43 -0500, wrote:



He will if he wants tags and in florida your current insurance
coverage comes up when a cop runs your tag. If you cancel, it shows up
in real time, pretty much as soon as the agent types it into his
computer. This is the 21st century and computers are connected.
We are even testing a camera the cops will have on their car that
independently scans tags and checks everyone it sees against the
database for wants, warrants, insurance, stolen etc and alerts the cop
right then. A cop could be parked on the side of the road asleep and
he would be woken up if an uninsured car drove by.

Listen up... if you walk into a used car lot and buy a car with cash,
you just drive out. The salesperson isn't going to ask you about
insurance.


The salesman isn't but that green eyeshade guy in the closing office
will if he values his license.
Have you ever bought a car for cash? I do it every time. They can not
issue you that paper tag or transfer your tag without proof of
insurance
I suppose you could buy a car and take it out on a trailer but if you
are driving it you need a tag and you can't get a tag without
insurance

You're right about actual, legal used car lots. I doubt most illegals
do that, however.

They still need to buy real tags.

Maybe someday when they get around to it.



I am really starting to think you don't drive.

I'm really starting to think you'd prefer to be insulting and can just
barely contain yourself.

It is clear you never registered a car.

It's clear that you can't argue with someone who actually has facts to
support herself.


All of a sudden you think technology is going to just kick in and
solve all the problems? Come on.

It is sure chipping away at the problem. I am sure there are uninsured
drivers but they get caught often enough to be a deterrent and the
technology is making that a lot easier. A Mexican in a junker probably
gets his tag run a couple times a day. Racist? Profiling? maybe but
cops go where the likely arrests are.

BS. The cops have better things to do.

If that was true they wouldn't sit in the bushes with RADAR guns.

I didn't realize that RADAR susses out lack of insurance! I think you
should alert CNN.

Uninsured motorists are a political thing.
Everyone from the AAA to the insurance companies want it to stop along
with anyone who was hit by an uninsured motorist or just pays more for
their insurance than the should because a few people don't pay.

Political? I thought it was safety/financial. Is this a Republican
talking point that I missed?



BTW this is why I have been saying for years, insurance companies
should be titling cars and issuing tags. They are the ones with the
skin in the game and the databases the cops use anyway.
The whole thing could be rolled up into one national database and
eliminate 51 state (remember DC) operations that are not that good
about talking to each other

National db? Perhaps administered by insurance companies? Or, by the
gov't??? Sounds like a police state to me...

Insurance companies already maintain a national database. That was my
point.
The insurance company database is a whole lot more accurate than the
police database unless the police link to the insurance companies,
which they do in Florida.

Why do we need the police anyway? Why not just hire the insurance
companies to do it all? Sheesh..

We still need the cops to enforce the law. I am talking about the
insurance companies doing the bookkeeping since they already do most
of it anyway.

Why?

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:38:03 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:21:42 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:38:27 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:21:07 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:51:18 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:49:39 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:00:38 -0800, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 02:19:25 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 00:09:49 -0500, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

I don't think many are shot at in Germany and Japan, but I think it's
probably time to start moving them home. It can't all be done in a
moment. This won't have much of an effect either way, since it needs
to be a relatively slow process.

Why? What are they protecting? The Soviets are gone.

It's a nice way of handing over a bunch of Foreign aid, send a bunch of
Americans over and pay them to become a part of another countries
economy for a few years. Not saying there is no need for a presence, I
don't know the details, but still...

We probably have a better reason to be in Japan than Europe but make
no mistake, it is just to be a staging area for restarting the Korean
war.

In any case, you can't just give them a call and tell them to get on
the next plane.

Why not? They could certainly be gone in 180 days and that is a blink
in government talk.

If we donated the equipment to the German military, we could be out of there in
much less than 180 days.

Sounds like socialism to me....


We call it foreign aid.

All of our foreign aid combined is about 1% of the budget or some
similarly small number. I guess taxing rich people an extra 4% might
cover it. What do you think.


When in doubt change the subject huh?

You mentioned foreign aid, so you're the one who's trying to change
the subject.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:51:21 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:27:07 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:42:05 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:25:11 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 02:17:16 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:57:30 -0800, wrote:


So, how are you going to "redirect" all these "low-paid" troops into
homeland jobs without displacing those low-paid construction jobs?

By starting new projects.

Ok. So, you have no objection to projects sponsored and paid for by
the gov't! Sounds like the heavy hand of gov't to me. I have no
objection your honor!
\\

Good deal


I don't think many are shot at in Germany and Japan, but I think it's
probably time to start moving them home. It can't all be done in a
moment. This won't have much of an effect either way, since it needs
to be a relatively slow process.

Why? What are they protecting? The Soviets are gone.

Good grief! You know that little about economics and/or how the
military works? You can't just decide one day to close bases and then
everyone leaves.

Now you are worried about the Germans?

I'm thoughtful about how we as a nation are perceived and our effect
on the rest of the world. You aren't I guess.

I imagine there are plenty of Germans who wish we would go but even if
they didn't we are not the world's p[olicemen. If they want us there,
pay us to be there.

There are plenty more who appreciate us spending our money there. I
think we need to stay engaged there, but we don't need lots and lots
of bases. There are a few that should probably remain.


We could close foreign bases pretty fast if we wanted to and it is not
our job to replace the hole in the German economy. There are a few
people here saying the locals don't get that much money from our bases
anyway.

Sure thing! I guess that was the same sort of decision that was made
post WW1. That worked out pretty well, didn't it.

False equivalency again.

Really? Well, you just got done saying you don't care about the German
economy. That's what we said after WW1.

Do you really think the best way to help the German economy is to
occupy them?

No. I think the best thing for the US to do is to carefully reduce our
presence there without damaging their economy.

Yet we keep kicking that can down the road too.

Yes. So? You're so skeptical that we can't reform our tax code, but
you have no problem believing we can get out of all our commitments
(treaty and otherwise) in 180 days.




There was nothing in common with the surrender of a largely intact
Germany at the end of WWI, left to it;s own devices and their total
destruction in WWII.
We have occupied them for 66 years. When will we decide they are OK?

As I said, I have no objection to closing most of the bases. It just
doesn't need to devastate our or their economy to do that. Again,
we're looking for a long-term solution not a short-term reactionary
policy.

We are looking for ways to cut an $800 billion dollar pentagon budget.
You have to cut something.

Let's start with getting the facts right...

http://www.janes.com/events/OnlineSe...DefenceBudget/

I guess that all comes down to what is included in the defense budget
doesn't it?
It is usually democrats accusing republicans of understating what the
real cost of defense is.
Interesting where you will go to disagree with me.

Nothing to disagree with... sorry.

Maybe we can get rid of some nukes... oh wait, this was opposed by all
those fiscal conservative Republicans.

Nukes are probably the most cost effective weapons system we have if
you are looking about a deterrent from another super power.

Which super power would that be? China? I don't think they're
interested.

I agree we have more than we need. The problem is disposing of them is
more expensive than storing them. Most are technically "disarmed"
though from what we are told. The triggers are not with the booster.

Disarmed? Huh? If it's so expensive, and we've already disarmed them,
why are we spending billions on them?

That is still not where most of the money goes. It goes into "jobs"
building hardware we don't need that are scattered across 435
congressional districts.

And, your solution is....

I know! I know! Don't vote for the treaty!

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Feb 28, 8:21*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:38:27 -0500, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:21:07 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 12:51:18 -0500, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:49:39 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 10:00:38 -0800, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 02:19:25 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 00:09:49 -0500, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

I don't think many are shot at in Germany and Japan, but I think it's
probably time to start moving them home. It can't all be done in a
moment. This won't have much of an effect either way, since it needs
to be a relatively slow process.

Why? What are they protecting? *The Soviets are gone.

It's a nice way of handing over a bunch of Foreign aid, send a bunch of
Americans over and pay them to become a part of another countries
economy for a few years. Not saying there is no need for a presence, I
don't know the details, but still...

We probably have a better reason to be in Japan than Europe but make
no mistake, it is just to be a staging area for restarting the Korean
war.

In any case, you can't just give them a call and tell them to get on
the next plane.

Why not? They could certainly be gone in 180 days and that is a blink
in government talk.

If we donated the equipment to the German military, we could be out of there in
much less than 180 days.

Sounds like socialism to me....

We call it foreign aid.

All of our foreign aid combined is about 1% of the budget or some
similarly small number. I guess taxing rich people an extra 4% might
cover it. What do you think.

Seeing you were born to make ridiculous and inane arguments, do you
really care for his well-thought response?

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Feb 28, 8:27*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:42:05 -0500, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:25:11 -0800, wrote:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 02:17:16 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:57:30 -0800, wrote:

So, how are you going to "redirect" all these "low-paid" troops into
homeland jobs without displacing those low-paid construction jobs?

By starting new projects.

Ok. So, you have no objection to projects sponsored and paid for by
the gov't! Sounds like the heavy hand of gov't to me. I have no
objection your honor!
\\

Good deal

I don't think many are shot at in Germany and Japan, but I think it's
probably time to start moving them home. It can't all be done in a
moment. This won't have much of an effect either way, since it needs
to be a relatively slow process.

Why? What are they protecting? *The Soviets are gone.

Good grief! You know that little about economics and/or how the
military works? You can't just decide one day to close bases and then
everyone leaves.

Now you are worried about the Germans?

I'm thoughtful about how we as a nation are perceived and our effect
on the rest of the world. You aren't I guess.

I imagine there are plenty of Germans who wish we would go but even if
they didn't we are not the world's p[olicemen. If they want us there,
pay us to be there.

There are plenty more who appreciate us spending our money there. I
think we need to stay engaged there, but we don't need lots and lots
of bases. There are a few that should probably remain.

We could close foreign bases pretty fast if we wanted to and it is not
our job to replace the hole in the German economy. There are a few
people here saying the locals don't get that much money from our bases
anyway.

Sure thing! I guess that was the same sort of decision that was made
post WW1. That worked out pretty well, didn't it.

False equivalency again.

Really? Well, you just got done saying you don't care about the German
economy. That's what we said after WW1.

Do you really think the best way to help the German economy is to
occupy them?

No. I think the best thing for the US to do is to carefully reduce our
presence there without damaging their economy.



There was nothing in common with the surrender of a largely intact
Germany at the end of WWI, left to it;s own devices *and their total
destruction in WWII.
We have occupied them for 66 years. When will we decide they are OK?

As I said, I have no objection to closing most of the bases. It just
doesn't need to devastate our or their economy to do that. Again,
we're looking for a long-term solution not a short-term reactionary
policy.

We are looking for ways to cut an $800 billion dollar pentagon budget.
You have to cut something.

Let's start with getting the facts right...

http://www.janes.com/events/OnlineSe...DefenceBudget/

Maybe we can get rid of some nukes... oh wait, this was opposed by all
those fiscal conservative Republicans.

"oh wait?" D'Plume? Still having problems with dementia?

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Feb 28, 8:34*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:58:20 -0500, wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:43:21 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

The buyer still has to come up with a tag and the insurance is tied to
that tag. I can't speak for everywhere but the wrong tag on a care
around here is a "felony stop". ( get out of the car, lay on the
ground, don't make any fast moves) The assumption is you are up to no
good, car theft at the minimum but you could be a drug courier or
driving a getaway car.

This all sounds like a paranoid fantasy to me. Most illegals are going
back and forth to work. They avoid doing stupid things and are just
regular people trying to get by. Sure, sometimes there are hardened
criminals doing dirty deeds. This has nothing to do with most people.

Most people just buy insurance and do things by the book.
Co-ordination between insurance companies and DMV's have no doubt
caused some people to buy insurance when they would have previously gone
uninsured.
Some of those systems can probably be gamed too.
Illegals most often just ride with a legal motorist.
But anybody who doesn't care about the law for whatever reason can buy a
used car on the street and steal tags. *Happens all the time.
The smarter ones avoid vanity plates like CUDDLY4U.
Just go with something like 154 823L.
Cops aren't running tags enough to affect that.
But it could happen.
The tollway cameras and red light cameras could be advanced to go real
time and notify nearby cops of hits on stolen tags and lack of insurance
coverage.
Matter of time and politics. *
Some would consider it too "Big Brother."
There's already squawking about red-light cameras.
I have mixed feelings about it.
Might not bother me if I was running the show.
Don't know yet, as it hasn't affected me and I don't know enough about
it.

They are testing the camera in the cop car that scans tag here as we
speak. It uses OCR to read the tag, the on board computer runs it and
a few seconds later the cop has a message flashing on the screen
telling him everything there is to know about the car and the owner..
This is not just for insurance, it is also Amber alerts, stolen cars,
wants, warrants or whatever else you can glean from a tag or the owner
of that tag.
This is still in testing but expect it on a cop car near you soon ...
as soon as they justify the cost.

Sure... ok, we'll just hang around until they get that working...

I think D'Plume pretty much summed up who she is with her one line
response.