Trump's infrastructure plan and the ATL (Atlanta, Washington: loan, salary, trains)

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by cqholt

https://www.narprail.org/news/releas...ansit-funding/

I don't get it. Trump repeatedly promised a $1 trillion investment in infrastructure.

That's still peanuts compared to the Chinese but at least it's something.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by arjay57

I don't get it. Trump repeatedly promised a $1 trillion investment in infrastructure.

That's still peanuts compared to the Chinese but at least it's something.

His plan has always been to try to spur $1T in infrastructure mostly via private money backed projects like toll roads. However, in order to get that private money spent he is still planing to spend $200B in public funds. Unfortunately Trump only appears to be targeting road projects for those public funds and on top of that he is pulling money from transit and rail projects to do so.

Trump admin seems to be able to bungle about everything. The good news is, we will have a chance to overhaul congress in 2018 so hopefully we only end up with a two year delay in major rail infrastructure projects. However, I worry about a Trump led economic crash too.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by jsvh

His plan has always been to try to spur $1T in infrastructure mostly via private money backed projects like toll roads. However, in order to get that private money spent he is still planing to spend $200B in public funds. Unfortunately Trump only appears to be targeting road projects for those public funds and on top of that he is pulling money from transit and rail projects to do so.

Trump admin seems to be able to bungle about everything. The good news is, we will have a chance to overhaul congress in 2018 so hopefully we only end up with a two year delay in major rail infrastructure projects. However, I worry about a Trump led economic crash too.

It makes you wonder if the man knows what he is doing. Why don't we just get on with it? The Chinese are crushing us on infrastructure.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by arjay57

It makes you wonder if the man knows what he is doing. Why don't we just get on with it? The Chinese are crushing us on infrastructure.

Chinese aren't a good example. They are spending so much because they have no infrastructure.

[CCATL]

Originally Posted by bu2

Chinese aren't a good example. They are spending so much because they have no infrastructure.

And if I'm not mistaken, have so little regulation that much of what they build is built at the expense of their workers and population health and safety in general. Given that, they can do it much cheaper than we could.

[arjay57]

Originally Posted by CCATL

And if I'm not mistaken, have so little regulation that much of what they build is built at the expense of their workers and population health and safety in general. Given that, they can do it much cheaper than we could.

They also don't mess around. New dams or bridges? Subways or rail lines? Updated electrical grid? Bam.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by arjay57

They also don't mess around. New dams or bridges? Subways or rail lines? Updated electrical grid? Bam.

How many lives were lost, people relocated, rivers polluted, trees removed, damaged environment, etc?

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by arjay57

It makes you wonder if the man knows what he is doing. Why don't we just get on with it? The Chinese are crushing us on infrastructure.

Besides the standard amount of budgetary lag that comes with having a federal process and trillions to allocate taking time to get settled, no, Trump is inompetent. I don't necessarily belive that he is completly ignorant of what he's doing, but I do not belive that he knows how to do things correctly.

After all, his budget has a $4 Trillion shortfall over 10 years because his administration has double counted between tax cuts and closing the deficit.

Originally Posted by bu2

Chinese aren't a good example. They are spending so much because they have no infrastructure.

Yes and no. For things like interstates and large arterial roads, the contry is pretty well built out. A Chinese-style super investment into new roads would be a poor use of resources. After all, we can't afford to maintain what we have, why would adding more help when they've been shown to generate financially unsustainable growth?

Any money that does go into the highways and arterials should be maintenance based, targeting the most critically damaged and economically necessary stretches of road in the country. We should even be looking at burying and capping interstate sections that run through the hearts of cities, as that will have an increadible economic return in property values and reclaimed useful land.


On lots of other things, though, we could certainly use a massive building craze. Our interstate and regional passenger rail networks are depressingly lacking. Our metro transit systems are lacking. We could invest a ton of money into complete street programs and grid establishment / repair for local streets. We could invest in parks, and sewers, and power generation, and ecological repair.

There are TONS of projects, for adding needed infrastructure, overhauling existing infrastructure, and removing unnecessary / outdated infrastructure. A lot of these would have positive economic impacts, either actually creating more value for the cities they're built in than they cost to maintain (unlike large arterial roads and interstates) or removing unneeded and burdonsom infrastructure commitments.


Not saying we need to do it exactly like the Chinese are, because you're right in that they're playing catch-up from practically zero, but there are tons of legitimate infrastructural areas that we are extremly lacking, and where we have yet to reach a true saturation point of return on investment. For those, mostly non-car projects, we could certainly use a Chinese-scale investment.

Originally Posted by CCATL

And if I'm not mistaken, have so little regulation that much of what they build is built at the expense of their workers and population health and safety in general. Given that, they can do it much cheaper than we could.

True. We won't be doing everything hyper-cheap, but we could see some very real economy of scale savings if done right. Standardized tunneling crews, universal water system designs, national-contracted dam-removal crews, and such. If done correctly, and with certain procedural limits fixed (no manditory lowest bidder for example) we could stretch the money pretty well.

[bu2]

Well our interstate system was designed in the 50s. Our population and trade has shifted. We need more N-S routes and more in the south and California. I-7, I-11, I-27, I-49, I-69 and I-73 are all extensions that fill some of those North-South gaps.

[fourthwarden]

Originally Posted by bu2

Well our interstate system was designed in the 50s. Our population and trade has shifted. We need more N-S routes and more in the south and California. I-7, I-11, I-27, I-49, I-69 and I-73 are all extensions that fill some of those North-South gaps.

So we can continue with the past 60 years' worth of economically unsustainable growth and sprawl, and have even more interstates we can't afford to maintain?

I'll, personally, accept more interstates IF we go about removing into interstates across the country, and replacing them with boulevards, grid repair, and transit.