Replies: 23
| visibility 519
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 9:40 AM
|
|
AND something that we might be able to agree upon: infrastructure - roads, bridges, dams, electrical grids, renewables, and cybersecurity.
1. Infrastructure investment is an obvious need. Politicians have neglected infrastructure for far too long. It is not a very sexy political concern and it really doesn't help politicians get re-elected, so they neglect it.
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/state-us-infrastructureThe State of U.S. Infrastructure Amid an economic crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic, debate continues over how to improve the nation’s infrastructure, as analysts say U.S. transportation, water, and other systems face major shortfalls.
https://transportationtodaynews.com/news/17049-u-s-infrastructure-needs-exceed-2-trillion-american-society-of-civil-engineers-says/
2. Infrastructure investment provides the opportunity to provide jobs and economic stimulus. Thousands of jobs could be created, many for those who need them most right now. And those workers would spend that money in local communities all across our nation - creating a money multiplier effect that would help regenerate lots of local businesses that could really use the boost right now. In 2015, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that every dollar spent on infrastructure brought an economic benefit of up to $2.20.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/otps/pubs/impacts/
https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/why-infrastructure-matters-rotten-roads-bum-economy/
3. The benefits of infrastructure investment contributes to an improvement in everyone's lives - Conservatives & liberals, urban & rural, rich & poor, whites & people of color, men & women. It will not cure our divisions, but it might reduce them a little bit so that we could start seeing each other as humans again.
Humans that just want to get to work more easily and safely. Humans that just want to trust our sources of electricity and water. Humans that want to see our government work for us. Humans that just want to get back to some semblance of normal.
https://www.businessroundtable.org/delivering-for-america-full-report#:~:text=For%20U.S.%20households%2C%20infrastructure%20makes,with%20population%20and%20economic%20growth.
Infrastructure is not earth shattering politics. It is not sexy. It is just good, solid bipartisan governance - providing needed services to all Americans.
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 9:41 AM
|
|
True. We are at square 1 with just about everything. It will be nice to see some work get done.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40656]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23591
Joined: 1/29/05
|
We are at square 1 with just about everything
Jan 21, 2021, 9:56 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: We are at square 1 with just about everything
Jan 21, 2021, 10:09 AM
|
|
Did you draw that? That's great art. I can't tell what it is, but you keep pluggin away.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1315]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 8987
Joined: 1/25/11
|
Re: We are at square 1 with just about everything
Jan 21, 2021, 10:22 AM
|
|
It's an aged, drooling Joe Biden caricature!
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8984]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9784
Joined: 4/27/13
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 9:42 AM
|
|
lefties want to talk about trump objectives
now
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 9:50 AM
|
|
His only objective was to have rallies and have his cult cheer for him. He had no objectives after year 1 or 2 maybe.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 10:00 AM
[ in reply to Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today ] |
|
ranger,
2 points:
1. I think infrastructure has been an issue long before Trump made the scene.
2. Trump talked about infrastructure, but he did not DO squat (unless you count that foolish wall) This was his MO - talk a lot and do little.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6402]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11145
Joined: 6/5/03
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 11:05 AM
|
|
Actually, Trump DID do something significant. He cut the ridiculous amount of time for environmental studies to be completed and approved for highway projects. Those new interchanges in Charleston for the new port? Could have been done several years ago but for environmental regs and lefty groups like the Sierra Club filing lawsuits to halt them.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 1:58 PM
|
|
Well, coot, I grew up in Charleston and I think the wetlands deserve to be considered and protected. YOU may enjoy asphalt more than the marsh ecosystem, but many of us do not.
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17285]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14229
Joined: 12/14/98
|
Heading to the Mange and engaging in the Fire Brownlee posts***
Jan 21, 2021, 9:54 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42151]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38237
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 9:54 AM
|
|
Agreed, and it's a major looming issue in America that is grossly overlooked.
How much should be handled by the feds vs. the states, though?
What worries me on the federal level is that, while this is completely important and necessary, it's going to be one hefty price tag. Something else has to get cut. At least, I would think that would be the case but we know how that works.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 10:07 AM
|
|
cat,
I was thinking about that - some kind of federal/state cooperation as far as which projects should take priority. And then maybe some kind of matching state/federal funding for them.
I am not sure I agree about cuts elsewhere. Even though we are talking about infrastructure, there is a huge stimulus impact to this. I would hope we could make this a steady, long-term set of projects - something like $150B per year for the next ten years, rather than trying to do it all at once.
The investment might be well worth it if it leads to a faster, more robust economic recovery. With the incredibly low interest rate to borrow money, the long term price tag on this could be relatively low.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24051]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12167
Joined: 9/1/14
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 10:59 AM
[ in reply to Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today ] |
|
Do it while interest rates are low. If done right it will have great return to the economy. The big concern would be all the garbage add ons by the time an infrastructure bill was passed. The last time I heard about roads and bridges, I thought I would see a lot more roads and bridges for about a trillion dollars.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 2:01 PM
|
|
fuller,
I am afraid that that is a part of the process, but here is a question. What % of add-ons would you be willing to accept as the price of doing business ? 10 % 25 % ??
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24051]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 12167
Joined: 9/1/14
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 3:07 PM
|
|
I was hoping single digit percentages would be an option. Too bad line item veto was found to be unconstitutional (and I agree with that even though I don't like the results). This is an area the President can really get involved in with a veto threat of the entire bill.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119697]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54464
Joined: 6/24/09
|
I'm ALL-In if they re-pave HWY133 from 123 all the way
Jan 21, 2021, 9:56 AM
|
|
to Six Mile first....
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47750]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30413
Joined: 11/15/99
|
Or widen 123.***
Jan 21, 2021, 10:36 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: Or widen 123.***
Jan 21, 2021, 2:02 PM
|
|
How about solving the daily traffic jams in Clemson ??
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40656]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 23591
Joined: 1/29/05
|
There is currently a PAC working in NC to try and address
Jan 21, 2021, 9:59 AM
|
|
road funding going forward. We had a discussion about it at work yesterday and the PAC is trying to offer up ideas to the governor and state legislators about ways to decrease our dependency on the gas tax with cars continuing to improve in MPG.
Some of the ideas included increasing the one time highway use tax, increasing the renewal fees at the DMV, and phasing out the gas tax through an increase in state sales tax. Another idea included the use of mileage based fees per vehicle, but the PAC is worried that people will view this as the government trying to keep tabs on where you're traveling (even though your phone is already doing that for you, but Cletus and Bubba don't know that).
Unfortunately, this type of spending isn't popular with constituents. Roy Cooper refuses to even look at it or entertain the ideas that are being proposed because he's focused on teacher raises and identity politics.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: There is currently a PAC working in NC to try and address
Jan 21, 2021, 10:12 AM
|
|
rulez,
I am a little confused. I don't see the need to move away from the gas tax as a means of providing highway maintenance. I understand that vehicles are getting better MPGF, therefor reducing gas consumption (a good thing).
But wouldn't it be simpler to just raise the gas tax per gallon to compensate for that reduction ? People would end up paying about the same amount of $$ per year but with less gallons consumed.
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [257]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 1532
Joined: 10/4/09
|
It’s really hard to pass a gas tax increase.
Jan 17, 2018, 11:05 AM
|
|
The other proposals might be just as hard, but the gas tax increase is always contentious.
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: It’s really hard to pass a gas tax increase.
Jan 21, 2021, 2:06 PM
|
|
9,
What you have to do is make a big public presentation about the projects you plan over the next ten years. You have to make sure it includes some popular projects and a little something for most everyone.
While you've got people enthused about making their lives better and easier, you propose the gas tax to pay for it.
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1315]
TigerPulse: 74%
Posts: 8987
Joined: 1/25/11
|
Re: I thought we might talk about something of substance today
Jan 21, 2021, 10:31 AM
|
|
Trust me, there will be no money for infrastructure and such when TRILLIONS go to the Green New Deal fiasco, all over 1.5 degree F!!
Now, if you're willing to pay 85% taxes, yes, we can do that stuff. Try to be smarter. Good grief, you lefties live in La La Land. Comedy of the Absurd comes to mind when you guys start debating the 'wonderfulness' of Joementia and the Dems! Just unreal.
You DO realize that Trump created the greatest economy in the history of the world, all of which is being dismantled by a demented old man stumbling around the WH!?? Probably not.
Hey Toby, how's your debate prep coming along? If you want, you can bring your presentation on a teleprompter, as a show of cooperation and understanding by Miura.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 23
| visibility 519
|
|
|