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.
So what's new?? Ambitious projects overbudgeted and overtimed?? What a surprise....scheduled to open in November 2016 as previously originally planned in 2010...it was just a hope that it could be opened 11 months earlier in late 2015...not so now with the delay.
Last edited by saturno_v; 12-16-2014 at 10:49 PM..
And people wonder why America's infrastructure is falling apart... when nobody wants to pay a penny for our roads and bridges and railways, and everyone wants to be a free-rider sucking off on existing public utility. The rest of the income taxes all go to a bloated military and bankrupt social security system.
Quebec has high taxes and its infrastructure is still falling apart. Ontario has high taxes and it doesn't even fund the Toronto transit for operating expenses, and the TTC looks like from the 1970 with our antique fare boxes and paper transfers.
One would be naïve to think high taxes necessarily lead to better infrastructure. It really depends on where to taxes go.
Is there evidence showing public infrastructure in Canada is in better shape than in the US in general? I am not sure.
it seems the top three countries all have low taxes. South Korea, one spot ahead of Canada, also has much lower taxes.
And why is Norway, known for high taxes, rank much lower than the US?
Your ranking doesn't see to show anything, except the fact that rich countries tend to have better infrastructure. Nothing to do with taxation.
Because Norway is a sparsely populated country that doesn't require much physical infrastructure - with 25,000 km of coastline and a thinly populated space stretching for almost 3000 km from south to north. Norway is 385,000 square km, 3.8 times bigger than South Korea's 100,000 square km, and Norway only has 5 million total in population vs. South Korea's 50 million. For those reasons, South Korea obviously warrants a better infrastructure than many of the Northern European countries.
Quebec has high taxes and its infrastructure is still falling apart. Ontario has high taxes and it doesn't even fund the Toronto transit for operating expenses, and the TTC looks like from the 1970 with our antique fare boxes and paper transfers.
One would be naïve to think high taxes necessarily lead to better infrastructure. It really depends on where to taxes go.
Is there evidence showing public infrastructure in Canada is in better shape than in the US in general? I am not sure.
You are not sure doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. It only means you or anybody else on this forum have not done the necessary research as of yet.
For America's case, low taxes DOES indeed result in poorly funded infrastructure projects - as demonstrated by the now insolvent Federal Highway Trust Fund - which is funded annually since 1956 directly via the Federal Gasoline Tax, which has remained stagnant for the past 2 decades. Multiple large scale projects around America have already been delayed in the past 5 years due to funding shortfalls from the Highway Trust Fund, and this situation will only exacerbate in Fiscal Year 2015 as the fund has been officially insolvent since August 31, 2014.
I've posted multiple links, statistics, and graphs from the Department of Transportation in my previous posts to highlight this. Please read.
Because Norway is a sparsely populated country that doesn't require much physical infrastructure - with 25,000 km of coastline and a thinly populated space stretching for almost 3000 km from south to north. Norway is 385,000 square km, 3.8 times bigger than South Korea's 100,000 square km, and Norway only has 5 million total in population vs. South Korea's 50 million. For those reasons, South Korea obviously warrants a better infrastructure than many of the Northern European countries.
I believe that is a wrong argument...that survey is supposed to measure "quality" of infrastructure for the given population, not "quantity", two very different things....and by the way, Iceland ranks #5....maybe we need more language majors in the country.....
I believe that is a wrong argument...that survey is supposed to measure "quality" of infrastructure not "quantity", two very different things....Iceland ranks #5....maybe we need more language majors in the country.....
I was in no way referring to the survey. I am only making a statement that comparing Norway's infrastructure to South Korea's is comparing apples to oranges. Not comparable at all due to land size and population density. I think "quality" and "quantity" of infrastructure go hand in hand. Your country can build and maintain only one single road with excellent quality, lined up by golden-laminated rail guards, but that by no means demonstrates that you have "quality" infrastructure as a whole.
I was in no way referring to the survey. I am only making a statement that comparing Norway's infrastructure to South Korea's is comparing apples to oranges. Not comparable at all due to land size and population density. I think "quality" and "quantity" of infrastructure go hand in hand. Your country can build and maintain only one single road with excellent quality, lined up by golden-laminated rail guards, but that by no means demonstrates that you have "quality" infrastructure as a whole.
No, definitely quality and quantity do not always go hand in hand....Italy, for example, has a lot of infrastructure but it is often old/not efficient.
Obviously you will not have a 6 lane freeways connecting two villages of few thousands of people 500 km apart from each other in sparsely populate countries....that does not mean that the population in their own cities will not have excellent quality of public services.....a subway system will make no sense for a small town but it can be easily replaced by an efficient light bus service.
Higher taxes and the quality of the infrastructure are not related. California has high taxes including the highest tax on gasoline yet the condition of many of our highways are terrible. Arizona which has lower taxes has much better roads and freeways.
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.
