[Retroit]

Originally Posted by detwahDJ

Has a "public plane" ever been tried? Well the military, with its "useless public servants" does all right with its aircraft.
Roads and bridges are part of the common infrastructure which everyone must use, and government should operate them. Some who believe the canard that "privatization is always better" actually call for privatized corporate-owned roads.
How about a toll gate at your driveway?

I'd have no problem with that. Many states have toll roads. They are in better shape than the government owned ones. Most of these roads are automated, so you don't actually have to stop to pay the toll. You put a device in your car that keeps track of the tolls for you. I totally support people who use the system paying for the system and people who don't use the system not having to pay for it. Seems fair to me.

As for a public airlines, look at Russia. They've privatized their airlines. Suggesting that the military is "doing all right with its aircraft" ignores the extremely high cost of the military. They fly older gas-guzzling aircraft. They have virtually no concern for cost, as the taxpayer will pick up the bill. And their "customers", i.e. service members, can't actually complain and fly another carrier.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by diablo234

Last time I checked Canada is paying for all of it, not Michigan.

That's kind of like saying that if you take out a mortgage to buy a home, the bank is buying it for you.

Canada is loaning the money to pay for it.

[diablo234]

Originally Posted by Retroit

That's kind of like saying that if you take out a mortgage to buy a home, the bank is buying it for you.

Canada is loaning the money to pay for it.

Hardly since it is only the motorists who use the bridge who will pay for it via tolls (in other words Michigan taxpayers who are not using the bridge are not paying for it).

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/1b-windsor-detroit-bridge-deal-struck-1.1141713

Ottawa will make annual "availability payments" to fund the design and construction of the crossing as well as for the operation and maintenance expenses during the terms of the public-private partnership agreement.
No tolls will be charged in Michigan for use of the bridge. Canada will charge tolls, which will be used to reimburse the Canadian government for the funds it spent to build the span.
Canada will pay all costs of the required land acquisition in Canada and Michigan. It also will pay to construct an interchange to connect the crossing to I-75.
The public-private partnership agreement and the request for proposals must contain provisions for community benefit plans and for the involvement affected communities in Michigan and Canada.

[kurt48220]

Originally Posted by diablo234

Hardly since it is only the motorists who use the bridge who will pay for it via tolls (in other words Michigan taxpayers who are not using the bridge are not paying for it).

Availability payments are only made if the traffic falls short of projected numbers... Then those payments only cover the gap between projected and actual numbers.

[kurt48220]

Relegated to the obscure now Ed

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by diablo234

Hardly since it is only the motorists who use the bridge who will pay for it via tolls (in other words Michigan taxpayers who are not using the bridge are not paying for it).

That's true, but it is also true that Michigan Taxpayers who use the bridge will be paying for it. Since, I would assume, more people from Michigan than Canada will be using the bridge, we will be paying a greater share.

I do doubt that Canada is going to pull this off financially. All Maroun has to do is lower his toll below what the Canadians charge. No one has said what will happen to the current bridge once the new one is built.

[jambo101]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

I can understand if it's about employing American steelworkers, but if you're worried about collapsing bridges...

Report: Over 65,000 U.S. bridges in need of repair

There was a jobs bill that addressed the fixing of Americas infrastructure,it would have put many to work repairing such things as roads and bridges etc the GOP voted down the idea.
As for a new bridge to Canada /Michigan?Let private enterprise build the bridge rather than the tax payers of either country.Why should my taxes pay for your bridge?

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by Retroit

I'd have no problem with that. Many states have toll roads. They are in better shape than the government owned ones. Most of these roads are automated, so you don't actually have to stop to pay the toll. You put a device in your car that keeps track of the tolls for you. I totally support people who use the system paying for the system and people who don't use the system not having to pay for it. Seems fair to me.

As for a public airlines, look at Russia. They've privatized their airlines. Suggesting that the military is "doing all right with its aircraft" ignores the extremely high cost of the military. They fly older gas-guzzling aircraft. They have virtually no concern for cost, as the taxpayer will pick up the bill. And their "customers", i.e. service members, can't actually complain and fly another carrier.

So a corporate military would obviously be much better. Such a corporation would selflessly operate in the best interests of the country and not its own bottom line. Right... I wonder how they would decide who and when to invade.
And your corporate roads would keep pesky poor people in their homes and out of your way. Mobility and access to roads dependent on income? Good thinking. Pity the unemployed poor person looking for a job.

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by jambo101

There was a jobs bill that addressed the fixing of Americas infrastructure,it would have put many to work repairing such things as roads and bridges etc the GOP voted down the idea.
As for a new bridge to Canada /Michigan?Let private enterprise build the bridge rather than the tax payers of either country.Why should my taxes pay for your bridge?

Interstate commerce of all sorts and the supply chain for businesses across Michigan and the nation use that bridge. You are benefiting whether or not you personally drive over it.

[diablo234]

Originally Posted by Retroit

That's true, but it is also true that Michigan Taxpayers who use the bridge will be paying for it. Since, I would assume, more people from Michigan than Canada will be using the bridge, we will be paying a greater share.

I do doubt that Canada is going to pull this off financially. All Maroun has to do is lower his toll below what the Canadians charge. No one has said what will happen to the current bridge once the new one is built.

Actually it is the truckers themselves that will benefit more than anything since the current Ambassador Bridge is a huge bottleneck for them.

Anyways this bridge was badly needed because it provides motorists with a direct highway link to Highway 401 and Toronto as opposed to the current setup which has through traffic using Windsor city streets (particularly Huron Church Road which is lined with homes, businesses, and traffic signals). Mauroun's bridge proposal never addressed this issue which is why it was doomed to fail in the first place.