Donald's $1.75 T Infrastructure Plan

I don't think it's necessarily up to the government to pick up the whole tab, but they absolutely should come up with more than what's essentially a note stating: "yo, y'all need to fix your shit."
 
There is a should argument if its primarily benefitting city folk at the expense of rural towns.

These massive non free market projects rarely get divvied up evenly.

I think there could be alot of costs and benefits to it, historically would it be fair to say that federal infrastruture spending has been a success?

would those variables hold true today?

idk
I don' think it' as simple as rural vs city folks and certainly there is always room to improve the "non free market" spending. That doesn' mean we shouldn't build bridges and fund infrastructure that benefits everyone. Roads connect the rural to the city and so on....
 
There is a should argument if its primarily benefitting city folk at the expense of rural towns.

These massive non free market projects rarely get divvied up evenly.

I think there could be alot of costs and benefits to it, historically would it be fair to say that federal infrastruture spending has been a success?

would those variables hold true today?

idk

Rural towns exist mainly due to federal spending to begin with.
 
Rural towns exist mainly due to federal spending to begin with.

Are you discounting the farming industry a bit here?

i wouldnt be surprised to see rural towns more dependant on food stamps in recent years , but the hundreds of billions worth of cattle corn soy pork ect isnt produced in your local represenatives office.
 
Another pathetic joke from our Clown Show President.

From the article:

"Administration officials say the president's plan addresses the funding shortfall by committing $200 billion in federal funding over 10 years to stimulate state and local spending and private investment. Half of the funding, $100 billion, will be used as incentives to entice cities, counties and states to raise at least 80 percent of the infrastructure costs themselves.

...

That's a radical departure from the way many projects are funded now. Funding for federal-aid highways, including interstates, is usually allocated in an 80-20 federal-state split. This program would flip that funding burden. Major mass transit projects are often funded on a 50-50 federal-local basis. Again, this plan puts a much greater burden on local taxpayers and users."
 
Want to "keep" the campaign promise to fix the infrastructure? Also want to cut federal taxes for the wealthy? How can it be done?

Simple: make states pay.

Such genius, so finance.

6666612488986584480-1499059330.gif


tumblr_m7gc5fDac51rqlz5z.gif


Details of the long awaited infrastructure plan are here.

What does it boil down to? An unfunded mandate.



https://www.npr.org/2018/02/11/5849...long-awaited-1-5-trillion-infrastructure-plan
So all he did is simply shift the tax burden from federal to State, and instead of saving the average American money, he is making them pay more with the upcoming fee increases. Bait and switch.
 
He couldn't because back then the GOP really, Really, REALLY cared about the deficit.



See: "Rural Electrification Act of 1936"
Ah yes the old not actually obama but just obama routine. Because trump. Knew it.


So anyway, now that we’re against it why
 
Lol at Trump. Fixing/building a skating rink is just like fixing/building this countries infrastructure.
 
Is it safe to assume that no one in the House will take this seriously? I can't imagine Republicans signing up to increase state and local taxes in order to get the feds to throw in 10-20% for infrastructure projects.
 
It sounds customarily stupid.

And if Barack Obama was for the same kind of say stimulus package a lot of those decrying this action would be lining up to pay tribute to the package.
 
"Administration officials say the president's plan addresses the funding shortfall by committing $200 billion in federal funding over 10 years to stimulate state and local spending and private investment. Half of the funding, $100 billion, will be used as incentives to entice cities, counties and states to raise at least 80 percent of the infrastructure costs themselves."

That's roughly 3 months of military spending spread over 10 years.

And much of it will go unspent as the states will need to kick in the lions share before it gets spent.
 
Last edited:
It sounds customarily stupid.

And if Barack Obama was for the same kind of say stimulus package a lot of those decrying this action would be lining up to pay tribute to the package.
In this forum? I don't think so.

Also, why even bring Obama up in a thread about Trump's abysmal infrastructure plan?
 
I really can’t believe what I just heard Trump say in his press conference about this infrastructure shit. Blows the mind, ya know.
 
Are you discounting the farming industry a bit here?

i wouldnt be surprised to see rural towns more dependant on food stamps in recent years , but the hundreds of billions worth of cattle corn soy pork ect isnt produced in your local represenatives office.

Farming industry receives tons of government subsidies.
 
It sounds customarily stupid.

And if Barack Obama was for the same kind of say stimulus package a lot of those decrying this action would be lining up to pay tribute to the package.

If Barack Obama was this stupid people would defend him? thats your argument?
 
If Barack Obama was this stupid people would defend him? thats your argument?
Well, infrastructure is not a new issue and it's not something Obama considered too pressing. On one hand you gotta hand it to Trump for acknowledging the problem, on the other he's doing little more than slightly raising awareness to the issue.
 
Well, infrastructure is not a new issue and it's not something Obama considered too pressing. On one hand you gotta hand it to Trump for acknowledging the problem, on the other he's doing little more than slightly raising awareness to the issue.
Not true. Obama faced massive political opposition which prevented infrastructure spending.
 
Back
Top