Obama to Call for Major Road, Rail and Runway Spending

[tater]

Gov spending is inefficient. Recently our utility had to trench the street and repave. Went well. Then last week the county fixed the road that leads to ours. There were about 8 guys just directing traffic. 2 would have done nicely. But 6 supervising 2 seems a gov norm.

The way Obama is going we'll lose our bond rating----which will be an unmitigated disaster.


Not having a massive tax increase would certainly help my family throw money into the economy.

BTW, I love trains, but passenger rail is a financial dog. Some commuter systems can be ok, but they are rare and virtually all other systems worldwide are massively subsidizEd.

[bradclark1]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I agree that our transporation infastructure is in dire need of overhaul and repair, and has for a long, long time. Still, I would question the wisdom in spending another $50 billion on top of the stimulus that was already supposed to include earmarks for infastructure. What happened to that money the first time around?

$507 billion in spending programs and $282 billion in tax relief
$150 billion in public works projects for transportation, energy and technology, and $87 billion to help states meet rising Medicaid costs.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by tater

Gov spending is inefficient. Recently our utility had to trench the street and repave. Went well. Then last week the county fixed the road that leads to ours. There were about 8 guys just directing traffic. 2 would have done nicely. But 6 supervising 2 seems a gov norm.

The way Obama is going we'll lose our bond rating----which will be an unmitigated disaster.


Not having a massive tax increase would certainly help my family throw money into the economy.

BTW, I love trains, but passenger rail is a financial dog. Some commuter systems can be ok, but they are rare and virtually all other systems worldwide are massively subsidizEd.

but I guess where you live where there are avenues to move.....

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by tater

The way Obama is going we'll lose our bond rating----which will be an unmitigated disaster.

Take it from someone in the bond business - so long as the government retains the power to tax the American people, we won't lose our AAA rating.

Funny how people cry about Obama doing nothing about the economy. Then when he does something about the economy, they cry some more.

Politics.

[Zachstar]

I am kind of "meh" on this.

I much prefer his plan to stimulate technology and sciences. Those have the potential to really push us into the future.

[Gerald]

On Labor Day afternoon in Milwaukee, President Obama finally began to vigorously push the kind of high-profile, rebuild-America infrastructure campaign that is absolutely essential if there is to be any real hope of putting Americans back to work and getting the economy back into reasonable shape over the next few years.In a speech that was rousing, inspirational and, at times, quite funny, the president outlined a $50 billion proposal for a wide range of improvements to the nation’s transportation infrastructure. The money would be used for the construction and rehabilitation of highways, bridges, railroads, airport runways and the air traffic control system.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/op...f=barack_obama

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I agree that our transporation infastructure is in dire need of overhaul and repair, and has for a long, long time. Still, I would question the wisdom in spending another $50 billion on top of the stimulus that was already supposed to include earmarks for infastructure. What happened to that money the first time around?

I do not think there needs to be wisdom behind this. The infrastruture is in deep disrepair. Just bridge conditions in some places alone are scary enough. Waterways, sewerage, electrical grids are slowing becoming to small to handle the growing population. I support this from Obama but he not attempt to sell it as a stimulus type deal. It needs to be sold to the American public at large as a necessity.

[SteamWake]

Sounds like 'make work' projects to me.

Maybe Florida will get that high speed rail after all.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I do not think there needs to be wisdom behind this. The infrastruture is in deep disrepair. Just bridge conditions in some places alone are scary enough. Waterways, sewerage, electrical grids are slowing becoming to small to handle the growing population. I support this from Obama but he not attempt to sell it as a stimulus type deal. It needs to be sold to the American public at large as a necessity.

I'm not disputing the importance of infastructure. It does need a major overhaul. However, according the the New York Times article linked by Vendor, it is being sold as another 'stimulus'. Frankly, that doesn't matter to me; spending on infastructure is spending on infastructure; he can call it anything he wants. However, according to the numbers that Brad posted, we've just spent $150 billion on infastructure, which is now followed by a $50 billion chaser. To me, this says one of two things: Either the bulk of the last $150 billion was lost to beaurocracy and inefficiency or that the problem is so great that the previous spending was inadequate to the degree of being virtually invisible. In the case of the former, if $150 billion was chewed up in the system, then the $50 billion proposed would stand even less a chance. As for the latter, the additional spending would amount to a Band-Aid on a gangrened limb, meaning that if you are serious about infastructure overhaul, your figures need to be pushing towards a trillion in spending. Anything else would be mere political posturing.

[AVGWarhawk]

Most definitely it should not be sold as a stimulus deal. As far as the the original $150 billion spent, certainly inefficency and pork can account for lack of stimulus growth. Also, the way the government works it is very slow. The BRAC (base realignment and closures) that were instituted in 2005-06 are just now being bid on by contractors. Long time and red tape to get the the ball rolling.

[Takeda Shingen]

I'll concede that at the very least it is good that someone in the White House is finally talking about infastructure overhaul. Politically speaking, it is never a very sexy initiative, which is why it has been ignored for so long. Whether he means it or not and whether the spending will be effective, we have yet to see. I suspect that it will not be, but I may yet be proven wrong.

[Biggles]

Well it helped you lot to push yourself out of the Depression back in the 30s. Same with Germany, same timeperiod. Makes sense to try it again I guess.

Originally Posted by Biggles

Well it helped you lot to push yourself out of the Depression back in the 30s. Same with Germany, same timeperiod. Makes sense to try it again I guess.

I suspect you are wrong.

Market Crash (Oct 1929) Depression begins

FDR Elected (Nov 1932) Depression continues

"First New Deal" (1933) Depression continues

"Second New Deal" (1935) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 19.0% (1938) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 4.7% (1942) World at War

[tater]

On topic, trains are a waste of money, sadly. If they want rail, give tax breaks to companies willing to do it 100% privately. Gov can chip in right of ways if they want certain routes.

Then see if anyone is willing to do it unsubsidized.

Actually, I'd be fine with a subsidy that is similar to highway subsidy. Similar in terms of dollars per seat-mile traveled. Seat miles to be calculated based on fare structures designed to not lose money—no using exaggerated ridership numbers based on ridiculously low fares.

They should scrag any "light rail" projects completely, I'm pretty sure there is not one even close to break even in the US. My state's budget is in deficit to the exact tune of Richardson's "Railrunner." I like the train—cause my 4YO loves it—but it's basically a half-billion dollar "choo choo" ride, and they set the fare to be attractive to unemployed teenagers ($6 to ride all you want all day). Given that the bulk of commuters work for the State (offices in Santa Fe, court houses in ABQ downtown), and they are overpaid, they could pony up "real" commuter fares. The trip is comparable to Metro North, but the fare is absurdly low.

[Biggles]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

I suspect you are wrong.

Market Crash (Oct 1929) Depression begins

FDR Elected (Nov 1932) Depression continues

"First New Deal" (1933) Depression continues

"Second New Deal" (1935) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 19.0% (1938) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 4.7% (1942) World at War

Didn't say it fixed it, I said it helped you fix it...