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.
Sorry I thought we were discussing the deficit that ballooned in 2009.
Actually NEITHER of you are discussing the topic of the thread. OFF TOPIC.
If you want to have YOUR discussion open another thread.
THIS forum is about the bridge.
And I repeart, the OP PURPOSELY MISLED, IMO, on purpose, in his title AND statement. And all you guys want to talk about is deficits and budgets.
The bridge was NOT STRUCTURALLY OBSOLETE as the OP claimed. It is FUNCTIONALLY obsolete.
A huge difference.
"According to the National Bridge Inventory, a database compiled by the Federal Highway Administration, the bridge was built in 1955 and was deemed "functionally obsolete" as recently as 2010. That does not mean it is unsafe, however. It could mean that its design is outdated — that its lanes or shoulders are too narrow, for example."
I swear sometime I wonder if any of you read anything before going off. Did ANY of you even READ the article about the bridge?
Last edited by Quick Enough; 05-25-2013 at 07:34 AM..
So bombing women & children in the Military is ok! I guess that makes the "righties" feel ok too?
Clearly a poster who doesnt recognize the difference between offense, and defense..
Quote:
Originally Posted by munna21977
Legal? YES. But is there any limit to that? we dont want to spend all our money in DEFENSE (it is ATTACK basically) budget.Infrastructure spending is equally important for economy, job creation.
I'd have absolutely no problem if the federal government downsizing to its original intent of defense, and leaving states to fund their projects.
In 2012, the Federal Highway Administration said 67,000 — 11% — of the nation's 607,000 bridges were structurally deficient. That means the bridges are not unsafe but must be closely monitored and inspected or repaired. That percentage is little changed since 2007 when 12% of the nation's bridges were listed as structurally deficient and the I-35 bridge collapsed in Minneapolis.
It gets even worse. From the story, the bridge that collapsed was allowed to stay open even though its rating was 47 (not 52 as I previously thought),
The bridge, which was inspected last August and November, had a sufficiency rating of 47 out of 100 at its November 2012 inspection, state Transportation Department spokesman Noel Brady said Friday. The state average is 80, according to an Associated Press analysis.
And to top it off.
The bridge was not classified as structurally deficient, but a Federal Highway Administration database listed it as being "functionally obsolete" — a category for bridges whose design is outdated, such as having narrow shoulders and low clearance underneath.
This bridge isnt even deficient, which makes me wonder how bad the other 67K bridges are?
Sounds like they need to get sued - leaving "obsolete" bridges open while they waste money at the Microsoft campus. Doesn't anyone in Washington care about the people?
What are you worried about....Obammy hasn't done any infrastructure spending. All the stimulus $$$ went to unions, and banks. And they're holding on to it.
Actually NEITHER of you are discussing the topic of the thread. OFF TOPIC.
If you want to have YOUR discussion open another thread.
THIS forum is about the bridge.
And I repeart, the OP PURPOSELY MISLED, IMO, on purpose, in his title AND statement. And all you guys want to talk about is deficits and budgets.
The bridge was NOT STRUCTURALLY OBSOLETE as the OP claimed. It is FUNCTIONALLY obsolete.
A huge difference.
"According to the National Bridge Inventory, a database compiled by the Federal Highway Administration, the bridge was built in 1955 and was deemed "functionally obsolete" as recently as 2010. That does not mean it is unsafe, however. It could mean that its design is outdated — that its lanes or shoulders are too narrow, for example."
I swear sometime I wonder if any of you read anything before going off. Did ANY of you even READ the article about the bridge?
You got me! But, I am pretty sure the bridge is "structurally" in the river right now. I think a passing truck threw up a rock or something..
You got me! But, I am pretty sure the bridge is "structurally" in the river right now. I think a passing truck threw up a rock or something..
I am glad to see you are man enough to fess up, when caught.
"I think a passing truck threw up a rock or something.."
Sorry, a very poor attempt to deflect from your original title and statement.
Anyone who has followed this KNOWS the truck STRUCK one of the overhead supports. In fact, it was in the article that YOU posted. Do you NOT read your own articles?
Simple question. Why did you LIE about the indecent?
Another structurally obsolete bridge collapses! ... Naw, we don't need no infrastructure spending.
[URL="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-seattle-bridge-collapse-20130524,0,3319329.story"]I-5 bridge collapses north of Seattle - latimes.com[/URL]
Of course we do. Unfortunately, Congress keeps taking money out of the Highway trust fund, depositing IOUs and spending the gas-tax money os BS projects and "social" spending.
Not to mention, that the Stimulus money, intended for shovel-ready jobs, was given away to DemocRAT supporters such as labor Unions. Malfeasance at its worst - under Comrade Obama.
FWIW - the contract to rebuild a bridge may be sourced to the Federal government but the bridge will be rebuilt by a private contractor that bid for the work.
What are you worried about....Obammy hasn't done any infrastructure spending. All the stimulus $$$ went to unions, and banks. And they're holding on to it.
YC.......
Honestly I'm sick to death of how both parties handle infrastructure.
Republicans cut infrastructure spending so they can say they cut spending on the campaign trail, even though unlike a lot of what the government spends on it's worth every dollar and then some.
Democrats meanwhile pass bills they claim to be spending on infrastructure, but really are a tiny amount of infrastructure spending so they can claim to be passing an infrastructure bill when the vast majority of the contents are either welfare or handouts to supporters (both voters and corporate).
Disgusting on both ends and nothing that needs to get done gets done.
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.
But, I am pretty sure the bridge is "structurally" in the river right now. 
