Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm going to assume for a moment that the states all have road or/and infrastructure type projects that have been analyzed for engineering requirements, cost of repair and priority.
Rather than providing the economic stimulous through the rebate or whateveryouwanttocallit process, would it make more sense to put the money into some public works projects, and shore up our infrastructure while creating some short term employment? I'm thinking about what happened to New Orleans, Minneapolis and New York. Don't we have sewer, road and water containment projects that would be more beneficial to our economy than this rebate?
Wouldn't this better assure the funds would be used as a true stimulous, and perhaps provide some needed repairs along with some job skills training?
Assuming the projects are already identified and have engineering proposals, why couldn't we direct the funding towards those most needed, or/and in areas best helped with some economic stimulous.
Before anyone starts to discuss who does the work, assume it can only be done by certified and verified US citizens.
Take the money and build more refineries so we can convert more oil to gas. I'm sure there are a ton of bridges in the United States that can be improved. Don't even start about some of conditions of the interstates in this country either.
Hell, pay down our debt and ensure we don't lose our AAA rating.
Take the money and build more refineries so we can convert more oil to gas. I'm sure there are a ton of bridges in the United States that can be improved. Don't even start about some of conditions of the interstates in this country either.
Hell, pay down our debt and ensure we don't lose our AAA rating.
Heh... pay down the debt is a bit difficult, since we are taking on additional debt to come up with the "stimulus package".
Ah, but infrastructure investments during an election year just don't have the flash that a rebate does! You know very well this rebate has nothing to do with stimulating the economy, and everything to do with political jockeying.
I'm going to assume for a moment that the states all have road or/and infrastructure type projects that have been analyzed for engineering requirements, cost of repair and priority.
Rather than providing the economic stimulous through the rebate or whateveryouwanttocallit process, would it make more sense to put the money into some public works projects, and shore up our infrastructure while creating some short term employment? I'm thinking about what happened to New Orleans, Minneapolis and New York. Don't we have sewer, road and water containment projects that would be more beneficial to our economy than this rebate?
Wouldn't this better assure the funds would be used as a true stimulous, and perhaps provide some needed repairs along with some job skills training?
Assuming the projects are already identified and have engineering proposals, why couldn't we direct the funding towards those most needed, or/and in areas best helped with some economic stimulous.
Before anyone starts to discuss who does the work, assume it can only be done by certified and verified US citizens.
No, no.. you've got it all wrong. That makes way too much sense.
If you build roads, sewers, and stormwater systems with the money, then voters will just skip over that article in the newspaper, and not give it a second thought.
If you promise to give people money, they can waste it on foreign-made nondurable goods, which gives them instant gratification in your name. They probably won't realize that it was their tax dollars to begin with - hell, they'll probably think that it was magic! Free money! Yay politicians!
No, no.. you've got it all wrong. That makes way too much sense.
If you build roads, sewers, and stormwater systems with the money, then voters will just skip over that article in the newspaper, and not give it a second thought.
If you promise to give people money, they can waste it on foreign-made nondurable goods, which gives them instant gratification in your name. They probably won't realize that it was their tax dollars to begin with - hell, they'll probably think that it was magic! Free money! Yay politicians!
If the proposal was framed in such a way as to give jobs to "our deserving" citizens, kind of playing against the resentment many feel about the illegal immigrants taking away some jobs, couldn't this get more support from the general public?
If the proposal was framed in such a way as to give jobs to "our deserving" citizens, kind of playing against the resentment many feel about the illegal immigrants taking away some jobs, couldn't this get more support from the general public?
I think it could, given the right PR. Sort of like a "New Deal, Part II."
I think the main obstacle is that people don't see infrastructure as a big federal spending need. You'd be battling a great deal of apathy, and it would be difficult to appropriate the money in a way that made everyone happy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
