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.
You mean welfare for states to plug their budget holes from the decreased revenue due to the economic crash of 2008?
I note your talking points keep changing, originally it was automatic increases, now its those poor poor states..
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv10334eva
It's obvious you haven't been looking for a job. For grins, put in various small towns, various mid size, and various big cities into indeed.com and see what you get.
Your correct, I havent been looking for a job, but I have helped a dozen people so far this year find one, so I'm not sure what your point is.. I'm sure no one else is either.
Why do you want to give our wasteful and inefficient government more money to spend?
I am only and always for LOWER Federal taxes. Period.
I would rather we use more tax credits, special investment bonds and/or new money than taxes to fund our national infrastructure revolution. And I would use local people, gov't and business manage each local project where feasible.
Or more simply have the Federal Gov't issue the necessary money.
He would be the biggest spending machine the world has ever known.
Ha! Obama said the same thing, remember "shovel ready jobs"? Remember Obamas trillion dollar "stimulus" bill? Of course not, dem spending = good, repub spending = bad.
I am only and always for LOWER Federal taxes. Period.
I would rather we use more tax credits, special investment bonds and/or new money than taxes to fund our national infrastructure revolution. And I would use local people, gov't and business manage each local project where feasible.
Or more simply have the Federal Gov't issue the necessary money.
I don't see how you can raise $1T with those types of vehicles, congress refuses to even raise gas taxes to pay for the highway system even though prices are low. How does Trump raise the money for this, specifically without congressional approval, they have been against any new taxes or spending for decades even with record deficits.
I don't see how you can raise $1T with those types of vehicles, congress refuses to even raise gas taxes to pay for the highway system even though prices are low. How does Trump raise the money for this, specifically without congressional approval, they have been against any new taxes or spending for decades even with record deficits.
It will take some very progressive, heterodox and out of the box thought IMO. Maybe Trump, I don't know. Of course like you say it does take Congress. And I along with them do not support more Federal tax. No way, shape or form.
Road and bridge builders might turn out to be the biggest winners of this year’s presidential election.
Both candidates have called for big new investments in infrastructure, and Republican Donald Trump now has a new plan to spend a gargantuan sum rebuilding the nation’s economic backbone: $1 trillion. Trump has said before that he’d double the infrastructure spending proposed by his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, whose plan calls for $275 billion in direct government spending over five years, plus another $225 billion in private investment. Trump’s new plan, drafted by economic advisors Peter Navarro and Wilbur Ross, would finance up to $1 trillion in spending over a decade.
Trump’s plan would rely heavily on private funding, with the government encouraging investment through a tax credit that would raise the return to investors and lower the cost of borrowing to states and municipalities that would oversee the projects. Unlike Clinton’s plan, there would be no need for new taxes to finance spending. Tax credits would cost the government some money, but taxes collected from the workers and companies participating in such projects would offset the costs, according to Navarro and Ross.
Trump is concerned about America. Obama on the other hand is concerned about The middle East, Wars, and empty threats to former enemies.
So Hillary's plan is $500 Billion over 5 years and trump doubles the spending and time to $1000 Billion in 10 years, or about $500 Billion every 5 years. How is that double?
It will take some very progressive, heterodox and out of the box thought IMO. Maybe Trump, I don't know. Of course like you say it does take Congress. And I along with them do not support more Federal tax. No way, shape or form.
They will not be able to raise that type of money without raising taxes, we are more than $1T behind in infrastructure. I don't see any specifics for raising this type of money, just generalities. By private funding I think he means government bonds, this was proposed by Obama over a year ago and went nowhere.
Bonds also cost taxpayers in the end, not a tax but might as well be because in the end it's money out of your pocket. There is no free ride, everything comes at a cost so you either agree to that cost or we continue to do nothing. There is an upside this will create jobs, increase payroll and other tax receipts and good infrastructure also brings industry.
Last edited by Goodnight; 10-30-2016 at 12:39 PM..
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.
