Just failed the CA DMV motorcycle popsicle test (and I thought Ihad passed)

It's more complicated than that because they get $300 per class
for BRC instructors, for example.

 

I was pretty clear in what I had said. I said total revenue.
I didn't say yearly revenue.

Anyone who lives in California is familiar with companies spending
millions to sponsor laws which benefit THEM!

They calculate how much money, in toto, they can receive by
passing the law. That gives them a business plan as to how much
they can spend in trying to get the propositions passed.

 

Atta boy! It's *obvious* that any mixture of public and
private must needs be "incestuous" in nature.

(Free Hint: don't ever let anyone tell you about the Department
of Defense and the Pentagon. "Incest" doesn't *begin* to cover
it.)

 

Gee, Al; do you live in a Communist state? One,
that is to say, where it's supposedly not "all about
money"?

And, if not, where does it say that making money
is a *bad* thing?

 

Oh dear.

Al, please listen closely: nobody has ever claimed that
no money changes hands for the CMSP classes. Nor
have they claimed that considered in total it isn't a hefty
sum.

But what you keep missing is that once the *costs* are
factored in nobody is getting rich teaching motorcycle
safety. Not the teachers. Not the school's owners.
And certainly not the states themselves.

It's not a scam. And the only reason it's there at all
is because without the MSF classes a lot more motorcycle
riders got squashed on a regular basis than was the case
pre-MSF.

Get it now?

 

? And this doesn't happen everywhere else too?

My, but you *are* naive!

Now all you have to do is demonstrate that (A) that happened
in this case, and that (B) it wasn't a good idea.

 

There is a difference between "not for money" and "not for profit". It
doesn't take a genius to understand this, which is why you can't.

 

I think the unstated issue is "training is worthless, I know as much
as there is to know and I learned myself it all for nothing".

 

I think you're right.

 

While I appreciate the compliment, I don't compose that well, really. I
doubt the fee is tax deductible as it's not really a donation, so I don't
know of a difference.

It's interesting that the BRC is mandatory for younger riders in CA. I took
Driver's Training via the California school system in 1969, the year my
family made their final move to Alaska. It was a worthwhile class, both
in-class and behind the wheel. I started riding the following year in
Alaska, probably before there was a motorcycle class or maybe even a
motorcycle operator license up here. The DMV test I took in 2000 wasn't
that difficult. I rode a 750 Nighthawk, which is a bit top heavy (in-line
4), but had no problem. Perhaps the CA DMV test is much more difficult.

I imagine the state of CA wanted riders to be trained, but didn't want to
get into the business of training riders due to the liability. Ideally
riders training would be offered via the school system, but motorcycles
only have 2 wheels, no seatbelt, no airbags, etc. Steering people to a MSF
compliant vendor is a good solution for CA. I wouldn't be surprised to find
that either the MSF or the company who actually gives the class approached
the state with the idea of completing an MSF class in lieu of taking the
rider test but that's what people do. Everyone with a business tries to
grow it.

$250 is a lot of money for low income families, but getting a less
expensive bike might help make up the BRC expense.

 

It was partially the liability question, but mainly the
fact that the state never had to money to run a tax-
supported program in the first place.

As Tim pointed out, they'd have to hire an entire corps
of specially-trained instructors, they'd have to purchase
and equip a number of areas designed to facilitate the
teaching and testing, and they'd have to purchase -and
maintain- a large number of bikes for the students to ride.

Where would they have ever found the dollars for the
original investments, given that it would have been spent
exclusively for the relatively small percentage of drivers
who wanted/needed a motorcycle endorsement?

It simply wasn't practical.

 

The more training the better.

I have some friends who work at the DMV so I'll give them
a call to see if I can gather up some statistics.

 

The bikes are donated, no?

The school parking lots are rented for next to nothing, on weekends, no?

The CHP pays for their own administrative costs, no?

Seems to me their only real cost that isn't heavily subsidized is
liability insurance.

 

The Older Gentleman wrote on Sat, 02 Mar 2013 07:01:44 +0000:

Who brought up the whole not-for-profit thing anyway?

It wasn't me.

 

Twibil wrote on Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:32:48 -0800:

It wasn't me who brought up the not-for-profit stuff.

And, it wasn't me who said they make a paltry amount of money.

I'm just bringing the facts to the equation, that's all.

 

That's hilarious.

 

There is a difference between who brought it up and who is still arguing
the toss. It doesn't take a genius to understand this, which is why you
can't.

 

The words "facts", "suppositions", and "opinions"
do not mean the same things; and you were offering
the latter two rather than the first.

Sorry.

 

The Older Gentleman wrote on Sat, 02 Mar 2013 22:11:00 +0000:

Childish slurs aside, we can all clearly say that the "non-profit"
status of the CMSP or MSF is meaningless in terms of the intelligent
"conversation" we are supposed to be having here.

 

Excuse my ignorance. What is a popsicle course?


--
Roadworshiper
Takes a beating but keeps on ticking.......

2004 H-D Road King
1978 Triumph Bonneville