The future of US infrastructure

[fdcg27]

I think we can generally agree that we have a great deal of road, shipping port and airport infrastructure that needs either replacement, rebuilding or expansion.
The difficulty involves how we pay for all of this.
The administration mooted a plan that was all pants and no wallet reflecting the realities of the current federal budget. This proposal disappeared without a trace.
Most current thinking involves user fees in the form of either higher fuel and vehicle registration taxes or toll roads and bridges.
Maybe we should think a little more broadly about the economic benefits of infrastructure improvement as well as how we account for government spending?
Outside of government, accounting capitalizes major assets and depreciates them over the working life of the asset. Within government, we count almost all outlays as current spending and don't reflect capital assets as depreciable over time. This creates a false picture and makes current spending look larger than it really is. We also lack the indication of useful life that a realistic depreciation schedule provides and the need to rebuild a road or replace a bridge comes as a surprise.
Perhaps we need to have a plan on the shelf for the next recession both to create needed jobs and to take advantage of what will be lower rates for labor and materials?
To do this will also require that we change government accounting to reflect the anticipated lives of the capital investments funded and to stop treating infrastructure investment as current spending.
Borrowing money to invest in an asset with a long-term payoff, like one's house, isn't the same thing as borrowing money for current spending. We also need to consider the economic payoff in reduced delays for the shipment of the goods that everyone buys as well as the movement of people. No amount of roadbuilding will relieve congestion in our major metro areas and putting a bunch of autonomous car service EVs into the mix will only move congestion from privately owned cars to them. Investment in fast and robust light rail, preferably subway is the only way of accomplishing this and the cost will be huge, although the payoff will also be huge and very long-term.
I've beaten this drum before and I'm curious what others think of this idea.

 

[Mr Nice]

A lot LESS money spent on foreign aid and MORE $$$$ invested here in the USA for infrastructure. Billions wasted yearly to 'help' countries that hate us.

Fast forward to 2:15 to see crumbling bridge.

 

[PimTac]

Go back to infrastructure spending instead of social spending.

I agree on the airports. Ours are way behind compared to those overseas.

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted by Mr Nice
A lot LESS money spent on foreign aid and MORE $$$$ invested here in the USA for infrastructure.

The wars with out profits are foolish, end all welfare to migrants past present and future. My Grandma was a migrant [italy] and she was proud to never ever have been a parasite on the taxpayers.We could go on and on how the politicians waste the taxpayers dollars. A few billion dollars here and a few billion dollars there all of a sudden adds up.

 

[simple_gifts]

< 2% of the US budget goes to foreign aide. Not doing much with that, maybe we can repaint the lines on the roads.

People think foreign aide is a huge part of the budget; it isn't

 

[rshaw125]

The trillion we totally wasted in Afghanistan would have helped a lot.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted by PimTac
Go back to infrastructure spending instead of social spending.

I agree on the airports. Ours are way behind compared to those overseas.


Some of our airports are in desperate need of replacement if only to relieve them of peak traffic volumes both landside and airside that they can handle only in good weather.
I'm thinking of LGA, JFK, EWR and DCA in particular. The difficulty would be in finding room to build these new hubs where people would actually use them.
Other American airports are models of good design and operating efficiency.
I don't think that there's an airport in the world that's more efficient in moving people and flights than ATL. Among major airports here, DIA, ORD and MSP are also nice and are well equipped to deal with bad winter weather.
TPA is also a nice smaller airport as is MSY, which will soon open its brand new terminal that should go a long way toward relieving the press of people the current terminal struggles to accommodate.

 

[69GTX]

A year old estimate places the total amount of combined war in the Middle East since 2001 at $5.6 TRILL. That's a lot of bridges, roads, and airports. A bill just come out of Congress giving $5-$6 BILL to Latin America/South American countries in aid/training/infrastructure to help slow or stop their immigration north. Crazy stuff.

 

[JeffKeryk]

Wars, etc. put on a credit card... Who's gonna pay? Just askin'...

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

fdcg, I think we have a way to partially resolve the infrastructure point while also simultaneously solving the social spending. It's easy- everybody is down on their luck at some point. You need a government check for a short term to get back on your feet and find gainful employment? No problem. Make each town's Public Works Department exactly that- show up and work the week, patch potholes, plant flowers in the park, clean up highways, dig ditches, etc... and collect your "unemployment" or "benefits" check at the end of the week. Plus, it's got a 6-month limit so you're still trying to find a regular job. No more paychecks to couch-dwellers, drug dealers, or general leeches who manage to find loopholes in the system. You need money to survive? Your local community has plenty of small jobs that require little to no skill but can't be filled with a full-time employee.

If you don't want to work, tough luck. No check at all, and that money goes to the DOT instead. Endless free lunches and the leeches that consume them have been the downfall of many nations in history. Verified medical reasons for not working are external to my diatribe.

 

[rshaw125]

Originally Posted by 69GTX
A year old estimate places the total amount of combined war in the Middle East since 2001 at $5.6 TRILL. That's a lot of bridges, roads, and airports. A bill just come out of Congress giving $5-$6 BILL to Latin America/South American countries in aid/training/infrastructure to help slow or stop their immigration north. Crazy stuff.

They need highly effective birth control

 

[MrHorspwer]

Originally Posted by simple_gifts
< 2% of the US budget goes to foreign aide. Not doing much with that, maybe we can repaint the lines on the roads.

People think foreign aide is a huge part of the budget; it isn't


Don't try to inject logic into this argument.

Blaming it on foreign aid, immigrants, and welfare recipients (not corporate welfare though... that's different) allows one to place blame. Figuring out who is to blame is the first and most important step in problem solving! Actually solving the problem is optional once you've found someone to blame.

Considering the main point of infrastructure is commerce and those the benefit most from commerce is business and industry (followed by us lowly employees), I'd probably say that they should shoulder a fair amount of the cost. Wasn't their tax burden just reduced though? So they could invest in America by buying back a record amount of stock? Huh.

Originally Posted by 69GTX
A year old estimate places the total amount of combined war in the Middle East since 2001 at $5.6 TRILL. That's a lot of bridges, roads, and airports. A bill just come out of Congress giving $5-$6 BILL to Latin America/South American countries in aid/training/infrastructure to help slow or stop their immigration north. Crazy stuff.


Defense budget for FY19 is $637 billion. $5.6 trillion is about 8 years of normal defense spending at current levels. That $5 billion to Latin America could be continued each year for the next 127 years at our current defense spending level. Heck, you could probably buy Latin America, all of it, for less than $637 billion.

 

[fdcg27]

I've long thought that there's plenty of public work that needs doing and that we could leverage benefits to the long-term unemployed by creating jobs in which people would do this work.
This could be a win-win proposition in that those unable to find work could make maybe ten bucks an hour while a lot of local improvement work could be done at low cost.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Originally Posted by MrHorspwer
Defense budget for FY19 is $637 billion. $5.6 trillion is about 8 years of normal defense spending at current levels. That $5 billion to Latin America could be continued each year for the next 127 years at our current defense spending level. Heck, you could probably buy Latin America, all of it, for less than $637 billion.


So let's just wipe out the defense budget and let the country be overrun... sounds like a great plan

And regarding your comments about giving to other countries- here is a story relayed by Davy Crockett while he was a Congressman (that the story is exactly relayed as told is obviously unverifiable, but the points are as valid today as they were in Davy Crockett's time):

Originally Posted by Davy Crockett story
"The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be trusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government.

"While you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20 million as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and in any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.

"No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in the country as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from necessity of giving what was not yours to give.

"The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution. So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you."

 

[oldhp]

Originally Posted by rshaw125
Originally Posted by 69GTX
A year old estimate places the total amount of combined war in the Middle East since 2001 at $5.6 TRILL. That's a lot of bridges, roads, and airports. A bill just come out of Congress giving $5-$6 BILL to Latin America/South American countries in aid/training/infrastructure to help slow or stop their immigration north. Crazy stuff.



They need highly effective birth control


^^^^^^^Congress.....Right????^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[oldhp]

A lot LESS money spent on foreign aid and MORE $$$$ invested here in the USA for infrastructure. Billions wasted yearly to 'help' countries that hate us. smirk

Yep, I'm getting sick and tired of "my" money going >>>>>out>>>>>>> of this country. The biggest question is WHY our elected officials do this??? (smirk face here)

 

[totegoat]

Our infrastructure will suffer as long as there is dysfunction in DC. Utterly ridicules

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Originally Posted by fdcg27
I've long thought that there's plenty of public work that needs doing and that we could leverage benefits to the long-term unemployed by creating jobs in which people would do this work.
This could be a win-win proposition in that those unable to find work could make maybe ten bucks an hour while a lot of local improvement work could be done at low cost.


I read an article last week that there are over 1 MILLION open job postings in the country right now. I understand, some of them require special skills. But the majority of them are just jobs that people "don't want to do". That's a huge distinction from not being able to find work. But I still think the "public works" idea has merit... the working, taxpaying people don't get anything for free, and deserve to see the fruits of their taxes in their communities. Those who are "without" can perform the tasks that do not have a fulltime public position to accomplish them and be paid for their labor instead of just absorbing the energy of those that toil for their income.

 

[MrHorspwer]

Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Originally Posted by MrHorspwer
Defense budget for FY19 is $637 billion. $5.6 trillion is about 8 years of normal defense spending at current levels. That $5 billion to Latin America could be continued each year for the next 127 years at our current defense spending level. Heck, you could probably buy Latin America, all of it, for less than $637 billion.


So let's just wipe out the defense budget and let the country be overrun... sounds like a great plan

Where did I say we need to stop defense spending? Where did I even say we had to reduce defense spending? Nice straw man though.

People have a hard time conceiving large amounts of money. I was just helping you conceive that compared to the $637 billion spent on defense, $5 billion in foreign aid is paltry, especially since that $5 billion to Latin america is a one-time payment, not a recurring cost.

Also, I wonder if Davy Crockett would consider a state giving a $1 trillion corporation $4.1 billion to set up shop "charity" or if that was a legit part of constitutional "collect and pay moneys".

 

[grampi]

The Fair Tax Plan would fund everything, and yet it will likely never be implemented...