• Sen. Sanders will introduce a $1 trillion infrastructure spending bill in the coming weeks.
    81 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Saxon;46855528]I have a friend that is a state rep and he tells me that a lot of bridges in Minnesota are just waiting to be a repeat of the 35W bridge collapse because of the dire state of disrepair they are in. It isnt' just roads and bridges either, our powergrid is in a piss poor state too[/QUOTE] Resident here: Can confirm. Bridges are way past their replacement date and mnDOT is just now getting around to fixing some of the most traveled ones in the metro. Power grid isnt bad if your in the burbs', but any external lines are shitty. Minnesota has one of the WORST maintenance budgets because we have to deal with hot summer and unbelievably cold winters. No matter what you do, roads will need replaced in like 5 years.
I wouldnt be surprised if they shot it down because it increases government spending. Oh and while the bill bernie is introducing is great, we need 3 trillion to bring our infrastructure to passible levels.
[QUOTE=Riller;46854142]I wouldn't be surprised if the GoP shoot it down for the sole reason it was proposed by a Democrat, and then propose the exact same thing themselves.[/QUOTE] but tacs some bullshit onto it for the fun of it
[QUOTE=Bradyns;46854023]13 million jobs is a big promise.. I hope it's delivered of this comes to fruition.[/QUOTE] I remember a similar promise made by Obama when his infrastructure spending bill was pushed through. Where did all that money go, and there weren't nearly as many jobs created as promised. [editline]4th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=AntonioR;46855635]Wait a minute here. I see people often complain about US infrastructure. If you are not spending money on universal health care, free education and infrastructure then where the hell does all the money go to ? And on top of that the US is 20 trillion dollars in debt. Seriously ?[/QUOTE] Bottomless money pit bureaucracies with no accountability and pork projects for the congressmen's benefactors.
[QUOTE=darunner;46856127]I remember a similar promise made by Obama when his infrastructure spending bill was pushed through. Where did all that money go, and there weren't nearly as many jobs created as promised. [editline]4th January 2015[/editline] Bottomless money pit bureaucracies with no accountability and pork projects for the congressmen's benefactors.[/QUOTE] The stimulus bill saved and created about 3 million construction jobs. It also saved our infrastructure and economy from complete collapse into a depression. It wasn't just infrastructure it invested in, either. It was our education system, financial and medical system, too.
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;46856146]The stimulus bill saved and created about 3 million construction jobs. It also saved our infrastructure and economy from complete collapse into a depression. It wasn't just infrastructure it invested in, either. It was our education system, financial and medical system, too.[/QUOTE] Bullshit. It did not save our infrastructure, as this bill clearly emphasizes. Nothing suggests it saved our economy. And if it invested in our education, financial and medical systems, then why do they all still suck ass? If they got any of that money, it was clearly squandered.
[QUOTE=darunner;46856216]Bullshit. It did not save our infrastructure, as this bill clearly emphasizes. Nothing suggests it saved our economy. And if it invested in our education, financial and medical systems, then why do they all still suck ass? If they got any of that money, it was clearly squandered.[/QUOTE] Because it was hmm, only about 600 billion in spending? Of which only 7% of it went to infrastructure? A lot of the money that went to infrastructure went to re-pavement and upgrading efforts for the worst parts of the country. You know I hear people complain about the Democrats and the stimulus bill all the time, but we never see the Republicans offer a viable alternative? You know why? Because they can't. The Republicans in our government do not have a long term plan. -kill me it was an opinion piece-
You just posted a fucking opinion piece to back up your argument.
Infrastructure spending is good because we get something we can use for a long period of time out of it. Look at all the money we threw at the F-35 program and what use will we ever get out of it? At least with a bridge it'll be there for a while with people driving over it every day.
[QUOTE=darunner;46856273]You just posted a fucking opinion piece to back up your argument.[/QUOTE] yes and
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;46856316]yes and[/QUOTE] It's OPINION, not FACT. FACTS are useful for talking about FACTS. OPINIONS may have a basis in fact, but they are a skewed representation based on the author's bias. [editline]4th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;46856288]Infrastructure spending is good because we get something we can use for a long period of time out of it. Look at all the money we threw at the F-35 program and what use will we ever get out of it? At least with a bridge it'll be there for a while with people driving over it every day.[/QUOTE] That's silly. Just because you don't personally use it doesn't mean it's not being used. I could argue that MN doesn't have a bridge problem and would be a waste of money, because I don't drive there.
[QUOTE=darunner;46856350]It's OPINION, not FACT. FACTS are useful for talking about FACTS. OPINIONS may have a basis in fact, but they are a skewed representation based on the author's bias. [editline]4th January 2015[/editline] That's silly. Just because you don't personally use it doesn't mean it's not being used. I could argue that MN doesn't have a bridge problem and would be a waste of money, because I don't drive there.[/QUOTE] You honestly taught me a valuable lesson today. Infrastructure spending is still an excellent way of creating jobs, increasing productivity and ensuring the safety of our roads. Sure the stimulus bill is controversial as fuck, something that will never change. It's outcomes can be debated. But, when only about 7% went to infrastructure, think about how many jobs could be created when 90% of $1 trillion goes to it?
But 90% of it won't go there. It's going to go through dozens of money grubbing bureaucracies, corrupt companies, wasted, or there will be mission creep and the money will be spent on things it's no longer needed to do.
[QUOTE=darunner;46856577]But 90% of it won't go there. It's going to go through dozens of money grubbing bureaucracies, corrupt companies, wasted, or there will be mission creep and the money will be spent on things it's no longer needed to do.[/QUOTE] Because that's how it worked [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration"]the last time?[/URL] Government is fully and completely capable of providing jobs and useful public works projects, without excessive waste, when the political will is there.
WPA, statebanks, employment branch of the government, and job migration aid. The only things you need to keep this country running at full speed again.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;46856922]Because that's how it worked [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration"]the last time?[/URL] Government is fully and completely capable of providing jobs and useful public works projects, without excessive waste, when the political will is there.[/QUOTE] "But that's too bureaucratic"
[QUOTE=Riller;46854142]I wouldn't be surprised if the GoP shoot it down for the sole reason it was proposed by a Democrat, and then propose the exact same thing themselves.[/QUOTE] did you not even read the first line? "I-Vt." he's an independent, the problem that comes from his proposal is there is next to no return on the investment.
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;46856288]Infrastructure spending is good because we get something we can use for a long period of time out of it. Look at all the money we threw at the F-35 program and what use will we ever get out of it? At least with a bridge it'll be there for a while with people driving over it every day.[/QUOTE] and it puts people to work. It can puts lots of people to work.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;46856990]WPA, statebanks, employment branch of the government, and job migration aid. The only things you need to keep this country running at full speed again.[/QUOTE] also a world war... like the WPA and those programs were helpful but they didn't create lasting employment
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;46857458]did you not even read the first line? "I-Vt." he's an independent, the problem that comes from his proposal is there is next to no return on the investment.[/QUOTE] You'd think the creation of more than 5 million possible jobs, increased productivity and a partial solvent for a problem that has been lurking for 20+ is quite the return on investment.
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;46857613]You'd think the creation of more than 5 million possible jobs, increased productivity and a partial solvent for a problem that has been lurking for 20+ is quite the return on investment.[/QUOTE] So why was the possible jobs the keyline pipeline shot down? seriously it is the same size of a 4 lane high way.
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;46857623]So why was the possible jobs the keyline pipeline shot down? seriously it is the same size of a 4 lane high way.[/QUOTE] Do you not get it? Only 35 Permanent jobs would have been created, set aside from 2,500 short term construction jobs. You act like it would have made a dent in the economy. Especially when Keystone would bring the dirtiest type of oil through the US, at the cost of the global environment, and only make a profit for the Canadians and Chinese. Seriously, when a major infrastructure like this is in full swing, it helps so many sectors of the economy. When construction is going good, so does the economy.
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;46857653]Do you not get it? Only 35 Permanent jobs would have been created, set aside from 2,500 short term construction jobs. You act like it would have made a dent in the economy. [/QUOTE] Road maintenance will only lead to temporary jobs, too. Probably no permanent jobs. Because companies who do that stuff already exist.
[QUOTE=darunner;46857673]Road maintenance will only lead to temporary jobs, too. Probably no permanent jobs. Because companies who do that stuff already exist.[/QUOTE] It'll take well over 10 years for our infrastructure to pass the annual report card. That is a long time for short term jobs. Its obvious construction jobs are short term, however roads and bridges in the US will always need to be replaced.
If it goes through, can we get some steps toward road metrication while we're at it? :v:
[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;46857623]So why was the possible jobs the keyline pipeline shot down? seriously it is the same size of a 4 lane high way.[/QUOTE] oh god i hope the republicans don't try to tie the keystone pipeline to this, everyone makes money off of infastructure, only the koch brothers, canada, and china make money off of that stinker
[QUOTE=LoganIsAwesome;46857653]Do you not get it? Only 35 Permanent jobs would have been created, set aside from 2,500 short term construction jobs. You act like it would have made a dent in the economy. [/QUOTE] I don't get why no one in the last few threads ever provided me with those numbers. They just always said "less than X" but please point me to an official document saying the perm jobs and the temp jobs it creates. Please prove me wrong by your documentation. [quote]Especially when Keystone would bring the dirtiest type of oil through the US, at the cost of the global environment, and only make a profit for the Canadians and Chinese. [/quote] A pipeline is the equivalent to a 4 lane highway, US makes profit off taxation, tariffs, inceptions, refineries, and other misc jobs/cities supporting it. [quote]Seriously, when a major infrastructure like this is in full swing, it helps so many sectors of the economy. When construction is going good, so does the economy.[/quote] Creating jobs with virtually no return on investment is like printing more money so you have more of it. What the fuck kind of job/world do you want? Infrastructure delevopment is good, but without industries supporting them what good is building roads to nowhere? When 1 trillion could feed the hungry long term or such? [editline]5th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Sableye;46858123]oh god i hope the republicans don't try to tie the keystone pipeline to this, everyone makes money off of infastructure, only the koch brothers, canada, and china make money off of that stinker[/QUOTE] It's going to happen which is why I voted republican this time. We can 2/3rds over ride it.
[QUOTE=The Duke;46858055]If it goes through, can we get some steps toward road metrication while we're at it? :v:[/QUOTE] you can fix our roads.... but you'll never take....our MPH!
[QUOTE=Sableye;46858123]oh god i hope the republicans don't try to tie the keystone pipeline to this, everyone makes money off of infastructure, only the koch brothers, canada, and china make money off of that stinker[/QUOTE] I'd take the Keystone Pipeline for a $1 trillion public works bill.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;46858169]I'd take the Keystone Pipeline for a $1 trillion public works bill.[/QUOTE] At least that pipeline has a return on investment.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.