GOP: Why waste money building "infrastructure"?

Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

Balance the Budget and We will talk. ;) Ever consider what James Madison considered General Welfare, or Hamilton up until the time he reversed Himself?
 
Conservatives have no plan for our deteriorating infrastructure, period.

Libertarians and Constitutional conservatives do. It's not the federal government's job. Stop taxing for it and let the states take care of their own infrastructure. Interstate highways, built under the false premise of national security (more like payoffs from Detroit), should be returned to the states and the federal highway tax abolished. When the feds touch it, it turns to shit. We'll also grow the shit out of economy while we cut unnecessary spending, leaving plenty of revenue for state and local infrastructure projects. Next.
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

Balance the Budget and We will talk. ;) Ever consider what James Madison considered General Welfare, or Hamilton up until the time he reversed Himself?

I've often thought of what the founders considered general welfare. It wouldn't have any semblance to our current welfare.
 
So what is "infrastructure"?

Building and maintaining:

Roads
schools
Post Office
prisons
bridges
highways
docks
rails
system that distributes:
water
gas
electricity
collects sewage

And that's just a few.

Imagine doing without these? What kind of America would be living in? Is this what Republicans mean when they talk about "going back"? A time before infrastructure?

The problem with infrastructure spending, RDean...as we learned with the first stimulus...is that it takes an incredibly long period of time to get those jobs up and running. So if you're proposing infrastructure spending as a way to fight unemployment "now" then you're dreaming. Those jobs kicking in a year to a year and a half from now aren't going to help the 14 million and growing unemployed in this country and they need help NOW!
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

You mean there used to be a Republican Party that supported boondoggle spending programs for the benefit of their political cronies. The Republican Party used to be as corrupt and prehensile as the Democrat Party is now. They switched personas when Wilson got elected.
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

And what makes you think there weren't cuts elsewhere? Do you have numbers to show otherwise?
 
So what is "infrastructure"?

Building and maintaining:

Roads
schools
Post Office
prisons
bridges
highways
docks
rails
system that distributes:
water
gas
electricity
collects sewage

And that's just a few.

Imagine doing without these? What kind of America would be living in? Is this what Republicans mean when they talk about "going back"? A time before infrastructure?
Obama would rather piss it away on failing cronies like Solyndra.
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

difference being we HAD NO INFRASTRUCTURE then, and we do now.
 
So what is "infrastructure"?

Building and maintaining:

Roads
schools
Post Office
prisons
bridges
highways
docks
rails
system that distributes:
water
gas
electricity
collects sewage

And that's just a few.

Imagine doing without these? What kind of America would be living in? Is this what Republicans mean when they talk about "going back"? A time before infrastructure?

The problem with infrastructure spending, RDean...as we learned with the first stimulus...is that it takes an incredibly long period of time to get those jobs up and running. So if you're proposing infrastructure spending as a way to fight unemployment "now" then you're dreaming. Those jobs kicking in a year to a year and a half from now aren't going to help the 14 million and growing unemployed in this country and they need help NOW!

It's work that needs to be done..and the sooner it gets approved the sooner the jobs come. And some news for you..even the "hint" of infrastructure spending has a stimulative effect on the economy.
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

Balance the Budget and We will talk. ;) Ever consider what James Madison considered General Welfare, or Hamilton up until the time he reversed Himself?

And that's going to take revenue as well as cuts.
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

Balance the Budget and We will talk. ;) Ever consider what James Madison considered General Welfare, or Hamilton up until the time he reversed Himself?

Imagine how much easier it would be to balance the budget if the American people had jobs? You would have fewer on unemployment, fewer on welfare and lots of revenue to work with.
But Republicans don't think along those lines. I can never understand why?
 
Back in the 1860's - when the Republican Party formed - they actually requested a Federal Government spending to build a railroad to the pacific coast cause the states deemed it was necessary and beneficial. Yep, that's right - there used to be a Republican party that supported infrastructure spending without cuts in other areas.

difference being we HAD NO INFRASTRUCTURE then, and we do now.

Now, it needs to be "modern".
 
Northeast Blackout 2003 > Cost to taxpayer in billions. Bailout Nation


Several private energy companies were told that their grids were dated and needed to be updated immediately. They were told by federal regulators that their grids would fail, and the consequences would be disastrous.

These companies did want to assume greater debt because they worried this would hurt stock valuation; therefore, they decided not to re-invest.

Consequently, their grids failed and the taxpayer was on the hook for billions - Bush bailed the energy companies out with taxpayer dollars.

Reagan told us that these companies would invest in infrastructure on their own incentive - but these private companies do not need to invest because they have lobbied the federal government into a bailout nanny state. Capitalism has always depended on a dynamic interventionist state to make sure profit makers had the fruits of reliable transportation, police protection, laws, etc. (Does anyone know the legal infrastructure required by one futures market?) When it snows, government plows the streets so consumers can reach business - and the wheels of profit can keep spinning. Without government help, capital would not exist.

The market is not going to build the next Hoover Dam. It is not going to build the roads, bridges, energy grids, water plants, etc., that are necessary for commerce. It is not going to pay for the police forces which protect property or the great public universities which educate its workforce. It is not going to build sewers and ditches. The markets staggering profits are based on an immense public investment.

(Capital investment is safe in the USA because of an expensive network of police and laws. This is not the case in the 3rd world, where American capital requires immense Pentagon support to protect supply chains. Who pays for this Michele Bachman, you idiot?)

The market has long depended on the taxpayer to socialize its costs & risks of . . . . while it privatizes the profit. The Reagan Revolution lied to a generation of people by telling them that government did nothing. This is the greatest lie ever invented, and it was invented by capital to lower its tax obligation to the public, which is now withering away.

Then when the people try to come after their investment in the form of higher taxes - so there is money to fund programs that benefit the hard working middle class - these companies pay talk radio to scream socialism.

Commerce and high population centers in the Southwest was made possible by the Hoover Dam. The 80s consumer electronics boom came out of technology developed in the Cold War Pentagaon & Space Program. Government funded R&D - performed at publicly funded universities - has ungirded technological advances for over 1/2 a century. (Do Republicans know the amount of public aid that has gone into developing just the computer/internet, biotechnology, and agribusiness alone?). And what about commercial air travel which has benefited immensely from public investment in aerospace technology. (Does the GOP know the amount of the subsidies pumped into Boeing? The figures would melt their brains)

The public has subsidized and bailed out profit makers from the beginning. Profit makers have depended on public infrastructure from the beginning. Who do you think stabilizes dangerous regions of the world when a particular supply chain is threatened? Where do you think Walmart's products are made? Answer: dangerous places that require government military support. Does anyone know why America maintains a global network of bases? So that it can make the world safe for the flow of resources. (Does the GOP understand how much of the Pentagon budget goes into securing the global market system - which ensures the reliable flow of capital and profits? Attention Michele Bachman: it's not all your money; it was made possible by the poor hard working taxpayer who pays into a government system which subsidizes and protects your profit. You imbecile) The reason the country is failing is because profit-makes - through targeted investments in the GOP and rightwing media - have successfully convinced the country that it owes nothing in return.

The short term gains of not paying their fair share of taxes are as massive as the short term gains made by energy companies who decided not to update their grids. This country has been destroyed by short-term profit makers who have parachuted to safety after looting the taxpayer, present and future. The old model was this: if the country enables your profit, than you are taxed in order to make the country stronger; in order to build a world class public university system and an efficient transportation system. The new model is this: use your profits to cover-up how much help you have received from government.
 
Last edited:
An over-heard conversation between Pharaoh Djoser and a small group of INSIDER priests

Q: Why build these silly pyrimids?

A: Well it gives the people something to do while they're waiting for the Nile to recede.

Q: But why waste so much human capital on a project based on a religion that you and I both know is just so much poppycock we use to keep the people in check?

A: Which would you rather have? -- A society working together on something basically harmless but silly, or a society falling apart because we haven't given them something to do?

Q: But who is going to pay for all this building?

A: The same people who keep you and I living in luxury, fool. The Egyptian SHEEPLE.

Q: But isn't this a waste of everybody's time?

A: Yeah, and that's exactly why we need to do it, too. Idle hands are the devil's playthings.
 
Conservatives have no plan for our deteriorating infrastructure, period.

You are absolutely right and no grand plan is needed. Infrastructure gets old, outdated and worn out all the time. Dangerous bridges are replaced on an individual basis. Overpasses that need to be higher, bridges that need to be wider are dealt with as funding permits.
Schools are replaced as necessary.
There is no need to spend a trillion and a half that we don't have on shady green jobs projects to reward political friends and "shovel ready" shit to keep unions busy so that they can funnel more money to reelection campaigns.
 
Last edited:
Conservatives have no plan for our deteriorating infrastructure, period.

You are absolutely right and no grand plan is needed. Infrastructure gets old, outdated and worn out all the time. Dangerous bridges are replaced on an individual basis. Overpasses that need to be higher, bridges that need to be wider are dealt with as funding permits.
Schools are replaced as necessary.
There is no need to spend a trillion and a half all in 2 shots, on shady green jobs projects and "shovel ready" shit to keep unions busy so that they can funnel more money to reelection campaigns.

I am wondering if the shovel ready projects that Obama said 'were not as shovel ready as we thought', are shovel ready now? Somehow, I doubt it.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top