The Structurally Obsolete (interstates, solution, Nebraska, economic)
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.
At this point in time fule taxes are being diverted to mass transit, you would support using those taxes for roads and bridges as they were intended? Any time this topic comes up and it's suggested that fule taxes be used solely for the purpose of building roads and bridges one of the common arguents from the left is that roads and bridges are subsidized.
For one thing the Interstate system is considered an extension of defense, it would be integral to moving troops and equipment if this country were ever invaded. That's unlikely but that is part of the reason it was built.
I have no problem with paying more taxes for infrastructure but if you're going to tax you need to tax where it's appropriate and the obvious choice is to tax whoever is using the road.
So, in other words, you can't back up your earlier statement where the LEFT says that roads and bridges are subsidized. I have never, ever heard that argument, where did you get this from?
Did you read the Gov't link I provided on how Eisenhower and the Congress funded the building of the interstate system?
I really don't believe fuel taxes are being spent largely upon mass transit, please come up with something else. I happen to know states are misappropriating federal MFT's and diverting them towards other things, I read an article about it a few weeks ago.
Quote:
Nationwide in 2010, state and local governments raised $37 billion in motor fuel taxes and $12 billion in tolls and non-fuel taxes, but spent $155 billion on highways. In other words, highway user taxes and fees made up just 32 percent of state and local expenses on roads. The rest was financed out of general revenues.
Quote:
Thirty states restrict the use of their
gas tax revenues to highway purposes
only. Such restrictions limit states’
ability to finance mass transit, congestion and air quality improvement
projects, and other options not related
to highways.
*Correction on my part: Some of those listed were from around the country, not just in Washington State. But the 1st link above shows everything for Washington (or any state you want to see)
The 2nd link shows Washington DOT projects and how much stimulus was included for each project.
So, in other words, you can't back up your earlier statement where the LEFT says that roads and bridges are subsidized. I have never, ever heard that argument, where did you get this from?
You have never heard the argument that roads and bridges are subsidized when the topic concerns rails and mass transit?
Try searching for bike tax, that will give you many results.
Quote:
I really don't believe fuel taxes are being spent largely upon mass transit,
They aren't and I didn't say they were, not sure what the exact number is but a rough guestimate is s something like 10% to 15% is diverted to transit.
You have never heard the argument that roads and bridges are subsidized when the topic concerns rails and mass transit?
Try searching for bike tax, that will give you many results.
They aren't and I didn't say they were, not sure what the exact number is but a rough guestimate is s something like 10% to 15% is diverted to transit.
I've never, ever heard of that argument until you brought it here. {left claims of subsidizing}
Why are you attempting to turn structurally obsolete infrastructure into a left/right issue? People depend upon highways, bridges and other infrastructure in everyday life not to fail, liberal and conservative alike.
I do know that Amtrak is one heavily subsidized railway, they've received many government bailouts, and almost still can't stand up on their own, yet, they just expanded their fleet of "green?" locomotives.
I also know mass transit is subsidized too, but this doesn't mean this is a solely left issue either.
Normally, left and right along with the private sector pull together for accomplishing construction and repair projects, it's not all left who desires and advocates for projects, because if that were the case, nothing in America would ever have been built or repaired. Conservatives also back major repairs and improvements.
Yeah, seems ridiculous to me, a bike tax. How would that be a left issue?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
Our tax money was clearly better spent blowing up bridges in Iraq and then rebuilding them.
Definitely misappropriations of federal funds, to say the least. Gotta be able to get across another bridge to attack them at a later date in time, I'm guessing.
Why are you attempting to turn structurally obsolete infrastructure into a left/right issue?
I want you to go back to the very first you have made in this thread and compare it to mine.
Now justify this comment.
I do know that Amtrak is one heavily subsidized railway, they've received many government bailouts, and almost still can't stand up on their own, yet, they just expanded their fleet of "green?" locomotives.
I also know mass transit is subsidized too, but this doesn't mean this is a solely left issue either.
Normally, left and right along with the private sector pull together for accomplishing construction and repair projects, it's not all left who desires and advocates for projects, because if that were the case, nothing in America would ever have been built or repaired. Conservatives also back major repairs and improvements.
Quote:
Yeah, seems ridiculous to me, a bike tax. How would that be a left issue?
Follow along now, we subsidize bike travel. They pay $0 fro the privilege of using roads, while that is inconsequential for the most part when they are using a pre-existing road there has been accommodations made for bicycles like wider shoulders or outright back paths. When this subsidization is pointed it the common complaint by the left is that roads are subsidized. The same argument is used when trains and and other modes of mass transit are discussed.
When an oversized load takes out part of the supporting structure, we can expect a disaster. This had notihng to do with the age of the bridge (not that old, really).
But to address your inference, what ever happened to the 400,000 jobs that were to be created to rebuild "roads and bridges and dams" per Obama's speech after the vote on the 2009 stimulus? Funny. Never happened, did it.
Maybe they could have used that stimulus money that was supposed to be for infrastructure but went to Solyndra.
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.