Donald's $1.75 T Infrastructure Plan

Infrastructure is a necessary expense. We need to put a lot of money into the infrastructure of this country, no matter who is in office.
 
Farming industry receives tons of government subsidies.
whats tons? 24 billion for 2017?

its a trillion dollar industry.

relative to other federal spending i would say its non existent
 
Bullet trains between the major coastal cities, please.
 
Thats my point, you really do not have any high tax states -- compared to nations you are trying to emulate. Local income tax levels in the 20-25% (with no federal offset reduction) sales tax in the 15 -24 range. These countries do tax their middle to lower classes way more in countries your left want to emulate.

How do you sell that to the american people?
I see your point now. How do you think we are trying to emulate other nations? I think the answer to that question will answer how it's funded, but you're right that it's almost never through local and state tax.

I'm with you on the point of having low taxes relative to other first world nations, particularly local tax. And yes, it's a hard sell for both parties quite frankly, but the right wants further cuts.
 
We have no fiscally responsible representation in government, hardly a reason to rejoice.

I agree with you on this but, very clearly speaking, the GOP from at least the last thirty years or so (or even longer?) has not been that fiscally responsible representation in the government. I mean, I don't know how this can actually be any clearer.
 
What the fuck?

Infrastructure is one of the few spending ideas that has bipartisan support.

The biggest issue with this infrastructure plan is it's completely unfunded, making it useless.

The second biggest issue is that when you spend money matters. Spending money on infrastructure during a recession does more for the economy than spending when unemployment is low. So yes, there's more support for infrastructure spending at some times.

Maybe take the time to read posts instead of diving into your reflexive "reeee criticism!", scrat.



he just up the defense bill to 716B...how is planning on spending for this?
 
whats tons? 24 billion for 2017?

its a trillion dollar industry.

relative to other federal spending i would say its non existent

I have no idea of truth but trillion seems much higher than expected. Source?
 
hi-rob-ford-04462528-8col.jpg

Are you allergic to discussion?
 
Nothing can actually be expected to change when these scum suckers can legally print themselves unlimited sums of cash through proxy of the Federal Reserve Bank. This is why I hardly follow politics. Simple human nature dictates that people will not do the right thing when there are much easier options than ripping off the bandaid. This is a slow decent into disaster, and it is delusional to think that anything different will occur.
 
the .9% figure is due to how its accounted

the actual figure is about a trillion


https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-produ...sentials/ag-and-food-sectors-and-the-economy/

The overall contribution of the agriculture sector to GDP is larger than this because sectors related to agriculture—forestry, fishing, and related activities; food, beverages, and tobacco products; textiles, apparel, and leather products; food and beverage stores; and food service, eating and drinking places—rely on agricultural inputs in order to contribute added value to the economy.
 
Can't wait to pay a toll to back out of my drive way.
 
the study showed funding was roughly even between rural and urban, in only 2005, and admitted volatility in the figures for the future.

sounds not reliable imo.

Most federal taxes are paid by urban populations.
 
Infrastructure is a necessary expense. We need to put a lot of money into the infrastructure of this country, no matter who is in office.

This times a million. We shouldn't be at risk of bridges collapsing or train tracks failing when it's preventable.
 
Back
Top