Young family, considering a move from Idaho to Anchorage (crimes, home)

[TheDisillusionist]

Originally Posted by phlinak

You are correct in your conclusion.

Alaska has squandered countless opportunities to invest in infrastructure.

Two examples.

First, before the late US senator, Ted Stevens, lost his seat and seniority in 2008, he had political clout and used it to leverage a lot of useless pork-barrel spending up here (like the white elephant of a train station at Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport that has no scheduled train service).

https://www.adn.com/alaska-news/arti...ce/2010/03/03/

Second, our only US House Representative, Don Young, has also used his political clout to leverage a lot of useless pork-barrel spending up here (like the bridge to Gravina Island that would regularly serve 50 people).

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...elped-put-end/

How many hundreds of millions of dollars were wasted on just these two boondoggles, money that would have been better spent widening the Glenn Highway, building a light rail line to the Valley or a bridge across Knik Arm?

Interesting examples, thanks!

[Northrick]

Originally Posted by phlinak

You are correct in your conclusion.

Alaska has squandered countless opportunities to invest in infrastructure.

Two examples.


Second, our only US House Representative, Don Young, has also used his political clout to leverage a lot of useless pork-barrel spending up here (like the bridge to Gravina Island that would regularly serve 50 people).

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...elped-put-end/

I love how critics of the "bridge to nowhere" always leave out two very pertinent facts.


1) There are only two ways to get to Ketchikan - by airplane or by boat. Guess where Ketchikan's airport is located? That's right, Gravina Island. When this whole thing was national news, I didn't read a single article that pointed this out. For a city that relies heavily on it's airport, you'd think this would be important and that a bridge to the airport would not be to "nowhere."


2) Ketchikan is surrounded by Tongass National Forest and water. Most of the remaining developable land is guess where? Over on Gravina Island. It has seen very little development outside of the airport because it is not easily accessible. Again, never mentioned in the national news.


So, instead of arguing whether the cost of the bridge is too high for the size of the community served, everything got reduced to making it sound like building a bridge at all was a stupid idea even if it wasn't that expensive.


Alaska certainly has had it's share of boondoggles, but a lot of proposed projects had more merit to them than the reporting on them would lead you to believe.

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by Northrick

I love how critics of the "bridge to nowhere" always leave out two very pertinent facts.


1) There are only two ways to get to Ketchikan - by airplane or by boat. Guess where Ketchikan's airport is located? That's right, Gravina Island. When this whole thing was national news, I didn't read a single article that pointed this out. For a city that relies heavily on it's airport, you'd think this would be important and that a bridge to the airport would not be to "nowhere."


2) Ketchikan is surrounded by Tongass National Forest and water. Most of the remaining developable land is guess where? Over on Gravina Island. It has seen very little development outside of the airport because it is not easily accessible. Again, never mentioned in the national news.


So, instead of arguing whether the cost of the bridge is too high for the size of the community served, everything got reduced to making it sound like building a bridge at all was a stupid idea even if it wasn't that expensive.

KTN is the 5th busiest airport in the state. The bridge would have served a few more than 50 people.
Alaska certainly has had it's share of boondoggles, but a lot of proposed projects had more merit to them than the reporting on them would lead you to believe.

Seconded.

The whole "Bridge to Nowhere" was hype designed to elevate Palin in the eyes of the electorate during the '08 election season.

KTN is the 5th busiest airport in the state. The bridge would have served a bit more than 50 people.

[TheDisillusionist]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

Seconded.

The whole "Bridge to Nowhere" was hype designed to elevate Palin in the eyes of the electorate during the '08 election season.

Well, you don't have to try very hard to convince me that Palin is a lunatic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_Ua53PJlv8

[phlinak]

Originally Posted by Northrick

I love how critics of the "bridge to nowhere" always leave out two very pertinent facts]


1) There are only two ways to get to Ketchikan - by airplane or by boat. Guess where Ketchikan's airport is located? That's right, Gravina Island. When this whole thing was national news, I didn't read a single article that pointed this out. For a city that relies heavily on it's airport, you'd think this would be important and that a bridge to the airport would not be to "nowhere."


2) Ketchikan is surrounded by Tongass National Forest and water. Most of the remaining developable land is guess where? Over on Gravina Island. It has seen very little development outside of the airport because it is not easily accessible. Again, never mentioned in the national news.


So, instead of arguing whether the cost of the bridge is too high for the size of the community served, everything got reduced to making it sound like building a bridge at all was a stupid idea even if it wasn't that expensive.


Alaska certainly has had it's share of boondoggles, but a lot of proposed projects had more merit to them than the reporting on them would lead you to believe.

I love how proponents of cronyistic, pork-barrel spending love to gloss over the cost.

I don't consider a bridge that crosses a relatively small 1,000 foot stretch of water and costs $400,000,000 as something trivial that should not be questioned but just built.

Thankfully, this project was reviewed and appropriately killed.

[AlaskaErik]

Originally Posted by TheDisillusionist

Same goes for conservatives toward liberals. What's your point?

Conservatives don't play the politically correct game. We just tell it like it is.

[TheDisillusionist]

Originally Posted by AlaskaErik

Conservatives don't play the politically correct game. We just tell it like it is.

Right, and the liberals are just meanies.

[mizzile]

Originally Posted by AlaskaErik

Conservatives don't play the politically correct game. We just tell it like it is.

This made me laugh SOOOOO damn hard. OMG. No one cries more than a conservative if you say something politically incorrect about them. No one.

Don't believe me - call a conservative a racist when they are one, and watch them LOSE THEIR MINDS.

[AlaskaErik]

Originally Posted by mizzile

This made me laugh SOOOOO damn hard. OMG. No one cries more than a conservative if you say something politically incorrect about them. No one.

Don't believe me - call a conservative a racist when they are one, and watch them LOSE THEIR MINDS.

Wrong. Conservatives just use facts and logic, which makes leftists go full-blown emotional, because it's their only escape.

[TheDisillusionist]

Originally Posted by AlaskaErik

Wrong. Conservatives just use facts and logic, which makes leftists go full-blown emotional, because it's their only escape.

Oh really? Fact: Countries and states that make abortion illegal have higher rates of maternal deaths and infant deaths at birth. Abortions also usually decrease under liberal presidents that encourage access to free methods of birth control and increase under conservative presidents who don't.

Fact: immigrants commit less crime than native citizens.

Fact: black people experience racism way more often than white people.

Fact: coal employs far fewer people than solar, and imposing tariffs on solar to help coal is hurting the economy and suppressing jobs.

I will now sit back and await the firestorm of "full-blown emotional" rage.