I had a meeting with members of my Congressional Rep's staff in January 2012 and one of the things we talked about the infrastructure in the country, and particularly here in the Northwest. We were trying to find a way to get the message across to the population that we need a huge increase in investment in the national infrastructure. this sort of thing unfortunately helps, but we now have 3-4 generations since the interstate system was built now its all taken for granted. we forget that the majority of our major bridges are between 50 and 80 years old and engineering has changed since then as has the traffic count and size of vehicles, the bridge in WA is a great case in point. But people just don't want to hear that when they see the price tag of a bridge these days.
I'd bet we could decrease expenditure, and by re-directing funds now wasted in the afore-mentioned regions toward our own interests, the interests of the public, not the few who profit from sending our wealth abroad, we could build infrastructure here like we did in the Eisenhower years, or better.
And something most of the younger generation isn't aware of, is most of our infrastructure was part of the whole putting America back to work after the Great Depression. That includes most of the locks and dams. The ones on the upper Mississippi and Illinois are falling apart and are always being closed down for repairs causing millions in lost revenue due to the barges just sitting and waiting to be moved.
If it put America to work once I don't see why it couldn't work again.
I would agree with both of you completely, however, we have a very "penny wise, pound foolish" sector of elected officials and public who simply do not, or will not, understand the concept of investment in infrastructure as an investment in the future, they simply do not understand the value of anything that cannot be directly sold or tabulated input versus output.
I'm not sure if it is totally relevant or not, but one detail of the interstates that is overlooked is that Eisenhower sold them as a civil defense measure more than commerce, he harnessed the red scare to do something vital.
I would agree with both of you completely, however, we have a very "penny wise, pound foolish" sector of elected officials and public who simply do not, or will not, understand the concept of investment in infrastructure as an investment in the future, they simply do not understand the value of anything that cannot be directly sold or tabulated input versus output.
I'm not sure if it is totally relevant or not, but one detail of the interstates that is overlooked is that Eisenhower sold them as a civil defense measure more than commerce, he harnessed the red scare to do something vital.
Sad state of affairs, isn't it? I salute your efforts to try and overcome the ignorance & incompetence and downright malicious self-interest of our "leaders".
Poor maintenance is another cost of paying for corn squeezins to adulterate our fuel. For thirty years now, money derived from the gas tax which was intended for highways has instead been diverted to ethanol subsidies. Yes another government boondoggle.
1) First we paid subsidies
2) Then we pay higher energy costs because ethanol production uses more energy than it produces.
3) Next we have to buy more fuel because gasohol reduces gas mileage
4) Because we are essentially burning food, we therefore pay more for food, and...
5) Not to mention that people who we used to send food to instead starved
6) We paid for more frequent auto repairs cause the corn squeezins turned out eat everything from O rings to diaphragms to hoses on older engines
7) And now we pay for an accumulation of infrastructure too long ignored because maintenance money was diverted to subsidy.
Last year, Congress finally ended the subsidy ... but retained the requirement.
Oh man, crop subsidies and the gas tax are about the nastiest can of worms you'll get in government funding, if you can unravel it all you're a smarter man than I! There is some hope though, Virginia just put through a pretty new transportation plan and funding mechanism, it's one of those we'll have to wait and see if it is an improvement.
But that's the way it goes, local agencies find the solution and sell it to the state, state implements and gets other states on board and then the feds steal it and claim the credit. Which is fine so long as the problem is solved.
Comments
I'm not sure if it is totally relevant or not, but one detail of the interstates that is overlooked is that Eisenhower sold them as a civil defense measure more than commerce, he harnessed the red scare to do something vital.
1) First we paid subsidies
2) Then we pay higher energy costs because ethanol production uses more energy than it produces.
3) Next we have to buy more fuel because gasohol reduces gas mileage
4) Because we are essentially burning food, we therefore pay more for food, and...
5) Not to mention that people who we used to send food to instead starved
6) We paid for more frequent auto repairs cause the corn squeezins turned out eat everything from O rings to diaphragms to hoses on older engines
7) And now we pay for an accumulation of infrastructure too long ignored because maintenance money was diverted to subsidy.
Last year, Congress finally ended the subsidy ... but retained the requirement.
"I am from the government and I'm here to help."
But that's the way it goes, local agencies find the solution and sell it to the state, state implements and gets other states on board and then the feds steal it and claim the credit. Which is fine so long as the problem is solved.