Infrastructure

[qazplm]

1. Does everyone not agree this is a major problem? I'm assuming nearly everyone agree that our roads and bridges, power and water distribution systems, etc are all in serious need of repair and improvement nationwide yes?

2. If no, please explain.

3. If yes, then tell me how we are supposed to make this happen in a way that does not involve massive federal investment.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

A "major problem?" I don't know. The issues with water distribution here and in Flint are state-driven. California state environmental laws are to blame, at least in part, along with the four-year drought are to blame for the water crisis. San Diego county brought a desalinization plant online, the first of its kind here. I don't think it was federally-funded.

Power distribution systems need to be upgraded for security purposes more than anything else, IMO. I've driven two interstate networks across the country in the last 4 months and didn't notice anything that would make me say they're in dire need of repair.

Water should be local, IMO. Power should be federally funded - I agree with that. Roads, obviously the interstates are federal, but a lot of that falls on the state and is subsidized otherwise already.

Build a few dozen more nuclear plants while we're at it...

Generally speaking, I will always favor the lower levels of government handling local infrastructure because I think smaller organizations are better stewards of money than larger ones.

 

[qazplm]

A "major problem?" I don't know. The issues with water distribution here and in Flint are state-driven. California state environmental laws are to blame, at least in part, along with the four-year drought are to blame for the water crisis. San Diego county brought a desalinization plant online, the first of its kind here. I don't think it was federally-funded.

Power distribution systems need to be upgraded for security purposes more than anything else, IMO. I've driven two interstate networks across the country in the last 4 months and didn't notice anything that would make me say they're in dire need of repair.

Water should be local, IMO. Power should be federally funded - I agree with that. Roads, obviously the interstates are federal, but a lot of that falls on the state and is subsidized otherwise already.

Build a few dozen more nuclear plants while we're at it...

Generally speaking, I will always favor the lower levels of government handling local infrastructure because I think smaller organizations are better stewards of money than larger ones.

States are completely devoid of extra money, so how are they going to afford the massive costs?
Removing lead pipes for water alone across the country could cost 300 billion dollars.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...er-crisis-could-cost-us-300-billion/81359834/

That's not money any state has. That's just water. That's not bridges, or roads, power lines. We aren't even talking about access to information (internet) since we don't appear to believe that's a utility but a commercial product.

The American Society of Civil Engineers says we need 3.6 trillion to pay for necessary infrastructure repairs. Even if we assume the 300 billion for water and lead is taken out, that's still over 3 trillion dollars.

http://www.cnbc.com/2013/11/21/crisis-in-america-a-crumbling-infrastructure.html

Tell me how the states could remotely afford that?

Maybe you don't trust CNBC or the ASCE. What about the economist?
http://www.economist.com/news/unite...-drives-america-has-shoddy-roads-bridging-gap

Smaller organizations may be better stewards of money (or not, I see little evidence that is actually true) but even if we accept it as a given, the monetary value needed to solve the problem dwarfs the revenue that states have to deal with it. So at the end of the day, we are talking federal tax dollars, even if we are talking state control (and we see how well state control worked in Flint).

Again, who manages it aside, I do not understand and agree with Sanders on this one that it is perplexing to me that we can find a trillion for tax cuts, and we can find a trillion for two wars, but we can't seem to find money to repair and maintain our infrastructure...something that would help the poor AND the rich, small businesses and corporations...there are literally no losers here, except the idea that the federal government shouldn't spend money on anything but defense.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

LOL, you asked for opinions and had counterfire loaded regardless of whatever was written. I pretty much said water should be local, but everything else should be federal (power) or is already funded/subsidized by the federal gov't (roads), and yet you flame on with a bunch of links arguing your point with... no one? I guess.

 

[qazplm]

LOL, you asked for opinions and had counterfire loaded regardless of whatever was written. I pretty much said water should be local, but everything else should be federal (power) or is already funded/subsidized by the federal gov't (roads), and yet you flame on with a bunch of links arguing your point with... no one? I guess.

lol this is why it's a waste of time discussing issues with you. I looked up those links AFTER your response. I didn't have "counterfire" loaded up.

Point to me where I flamed you at all. Point me where I called you stupid, called your opinions stupid, or where I said one negative effing thing about you?

I responded to your comment that there wasn't much of an infrastructure problem with links that showed there was. I responded to your opinion about how this should be local with evidence about how water alone was too expensive for local.

Like I said, no one gets more huffy about someone disagreeing with you than you do. And you turn discussion and questions and responses into "arguments."

 

[gr8indoorsman]

The feelings are mutual.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Again, who manages it aside, I do not understand and agree with Sanders on this one that it is perplexing to me that we can find a trillion for tax cuts, and we can find a trillion for two wars, but we can't seem to find money to repair and maintain our infrastructure...something that would help the poor AND the rich, small businesses and corporations...there are literally no losers here, except the idea that the federal government shouldn't spend money on anything but defense.

From the CBO:
Public Spending on Transportation and Water Infrastructure Has Been a Fairly Constant Share of Economic Activity for 30 Years
As a share of GDP, public spending on transportation and water infrastructure over the past three decades has hovered at about 2.4 percent, which is 0.6 percentage points lower than the peak of 3.0 percent in 1959. That share rose briefly in 2009 and 2010, to 2.7 percent, as a result of the temporary increase in federal outlays brought about by the enacting of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). In nominal terms, total federal outlays under ARRA from 2009 to 2014 were $55 billion, about one-half of which was spent in 2009 and 2010. More recently, the caps on federal funding established in the Budget Control Act of 2011 and subsequently amended may have exerted downward pressure on federal infrastructure spending by limiting the growth of discretionary spending; under current law, those caps will remain in effect through 2021.

and we don't have money because
1,000,000,000,000 annually medicare/medicaid
895,000,000,000 annually social security
230,000,000,000 net interest on a debt of 19,000,000,000,000
With 3 line items, I ate up 63% of the federal budget and that's WITHOUT defense!

390,000,000,000 Corporate tax income revenue (a far cry from the 35% that's supposed to be coming in)
1,508,000,000,000 Corporate profit (after tax)

So in summary, your liberal congress decided to cap spending infrastructure spending and seriously expand healthcare services without any plan to pay for them. Cry more about defense please. Seriously, let's see the tears.

 

[qazplm]

The feelings are mutual.

Right, that's what I thought. No flames, no personal attacks, nothing, just discussion.

 

[qazplm]

Again, who manages it aside, I do not understand and agree with Sanders on this one that it is perplexing to me that we can find a trillion for tax cuts, and we can find a trillion for two wars, but we can't seem to find money to repair and maintain our infrastructure...something that would help the poor AND the rich, small businesses and corporations...there are literally no losers here, except the idea that the federal government shouldn't spend money on anything but defense.

From the CBO:
Public Spending on Transportation and Water Infrastructure Has Been a Fairly Constant Share of Economic Activity for 30 Years
As a share of GDP, public spending on transportation and water infrastructure over the past three decades has hovered at about 2.4 percent, which is 0.6 percentage points lower than the peak of 3.0 percent in 1959. That share rose briefly in 2009 and 2010, to 2.7 percent, as a result of the temporary increase in federal outlays brought about by the enacting of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). In nominal terms, total federal outlays under ARRA from 2009 to 2014 were $55 billion, about one-half of which was spent in 2009 and 2010. More recently, the caps on federal funding established in the Budget Control Act of 2011 and subsequently amended may have exerted downward pressure on federal infrastructure spending by limiting the growth of discretionary spending; under current law, those caps will remain in effect through 2021.

and we don't have money because
1,000,000,000,000 annually medicare/medicaid
895,000,000,000 annually social security
230,000,000,000 net interest on a debt of 19,000,000,000,000
With 3 line items, I ate up 63% of the federal budget and that's WITHOUT defense!

390,000,000,000 Corporate tax income revenue (a far cry from the 35% that's supposed to be coming in)
1,508,000,000,000 Corporate profit (after tax)

So in summary, your liberal congress decided to cap spending infrastructure spending and seriously expand healthcare services without any plan to pay for them. Cry more about defense please. Seriously, let's see the tears.

You forgot 1 trillion (seriously we have words we use for those big numbers) for tax cuts and 1 trillion for wars, and posting that our spending on infrastructure has remained constant shows what exactly? That we've been neglecting it for a really long time instead of doing the smart thing and getting out in front of it when it's cheaper and easier.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

You forgot 1 trillion (seriously we have words we use for those big numbers) for tax cuts and 1 trillion for wars, and posting that our spending on infrastructure has remained constant shows what exactly? That we've been neglecting it for a really long time instead of doing the smart thing and getting out in front of it when it's cheaper and easier.

I answered your question about why we "can't seem to find money" you snarky know-it-all. Defense isn't stealing it more than anything else is as you incorrectly asserted. buh bye

 

[qazplm]

I answered your question about why we "can't seem to find money" you snarky know-it-all. Defense isn't stealing it more than anything else is as you incorrectly asserted. buh bye

Your momma must be proud.