3 ms·

hyperbole aside, the US does invest in its infrastructure. People exaggerate the numbers considerably, example is the bridge scares because that is pushed by co

hyperbole aside, the US does invest in its infrastructure. People exaggerate the numbers considerably, example is the bridge scares because that is pushed by construction and union concerns and they know how to scare you, if not them then the teams they hire yet they don't tell you how much those numbers have fallen since the early 90s. plus not all infrastructure items are under the domain of the federal government so those dollars cannot be applied to some needs. the only thing wrong with this countries government is that it is incredibly large for what it delivers and if you add in state, city, and local, governments it becomes even more absurd.

knz 10y ago
> example is the bridge scares because that is pushed by construction and union concerns and they know how to scare you The I-35 bridge collapse was a couple of miles from my apartment at the time and occurred during a significant public debate in Minnesota about infrastructure spending. There was no "scare" about bridges - just a decade of underinvesting in infrastructure despite the warnings of the DOT and engineers about the increasingly poor condition of nearly every bridge in the State and complaints about how reduced budgets meant less time inspecting infrastructure. Our Governor at the time (Pawlenty) was a notable opponent of government spending and had made significant cutbacks due to a "no new taxes" pledge and tax cuts (he had ambitions for higher office and unsuccessfully ran for President in 2012). Obviously Pawlenty wasn't directly responsible for the bridge collapse but our current Governor (Dayton) was elected partly due to promises to repair aging infrastructure (it was a major election issue).
- mason240 10y ago
  Which he has yet to follow through on.
  - knz 10y ago
    In the east metro the majority of overpass bridges have been replaced over the last 5 years - particularly along 35E north between 94 and 694, and 94 between St Paul and 280. The LRT line between St Paul and Minneapolis was also completed and the new Stillwater/36 bridge is nearly complete. That said, there are still claims of underinvestment (http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-s-bridges-are-still-out-there-aging/302251741/ http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-s-bridges-are-still-out...) and now the bonding bill has become a contentious issue again with Republicans who are unhappy about proposed spending on public transportation and are looking to fund tax cuts. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-minnesota-bonds-idUSKBN14O21X http://www.reuters.com/article/us-minnesota-bonds-idUSKBN14O... "Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton unveiled a plan on Wednesday to fund a variety of infrastructure projects "vital" to the state's future with $1.5 billion of general obligation bonds. The proposal is slightly bigger than the $1.4 billion bonding plan he proposed a year ago to the Democrat-controlled Senate and Republican-controlled House. A deal failed to materialize, leaving Minnesota without annual infrastructure funding. The Democratic governor could face a tougher battle this year as Republicans control both legislative chambers after winning a one-seat majority in the Senate in the Nov. 8 election." I believe he is leaving office soon - it'll be interesting to see if infrastructure spending continues to be influential in the election. I'm surprised no one tried to tie the recently passed Sunday liquor sales with infrastructure spending! ;)
_jal 10y ago
You have to separate new infrastructure from maintenance. New infrastructure provides politicians with press and opportunities to pay off friends. It also provides an ongoing maintenance expense. Maintenance is boring and expensive. Better to force yet another stadium through and leave the mess for the next pol. ...What are people going to use for a boogeyman once unions are finally extinguished?

knz 10y ago

> example is the bridge scares because that is pushed by construction and union concerns and they know how to scare you The I-35 bridge collapse was a couple of miles from my apartment at the time and occurred during a significant public debate in Minnesota about infrastructure spending. There was no "scare" about bridges - just a decade of underinvesting in infrastructure despite the warnings of the DOT and engineers about the increasingly poor condition of nearly every bridge in the State and complaints about how reduced budgets meant less time inspecting infrastructure. Our Governor at the time (Pawlenty) was a notable opponent of government spending and had made significant cutbacks due to a "no new taxes" pledge and tax cuts (he had ambitions for higher office and unsuccessfully ran for President in 2012). Obviously Pawlenty wasn't directly responsible for the bridge collapse but our current Governor (Dayton) was elected partly due to promises to repair aging infrastructure (it was a major election issue).

mason240 10y ago
Which he has yet to follow through on.
- knz 10y ago
  In the east metro the majority of overpass bridges have been replaced over the last 5 years - particularly along 35E north between 94 and 694, and 94 between St Paul and 280. The LRT line between St Paul and Minneapolis was also completed and the new Stillwater/36 bridge is nearly complete. That said, there are still claims of underinvestment (http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-s-bridges-are-still-out-there-aging/302251741/ http://www.startribune.com/minnesota-s-bridges-are-still-out...) and now the bonding bill has become a contentious issue again with Republicans who are unhappy about proposed spending on public transportation and are looking to fund tax cuts. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-minnesota-bonds-idUSKBN14O21X http://www.reuters.com/article/us-minnesota-bonds-idUSKBN14O... "Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton unveiled a plan on Wednesday to fund a variety of infrastructure projects "vital" to the state's future with $1.5 billion of general obligation bonds. The proposal is slightly bigger than the $1.4 billion bonding plan he proposed a year ago to the Democrat-controlled Senate and Republican-controlled House. A deal failed to materialize, leaving Minnesota without annual infrastructure funding. The Democratic governor could face a tougher battle this year as Republicans control both legislative chambers after winning a one-seat majority in the Senate in the Nov. 8 election." I believe he is leaving office soon - it'll be interesting to see if infrastructure spending continues to be influential in the election. I'm surprised no one tried to tie the recently passed Sunday liquor sales with infrastructure spending! ;)

_jal 10y ago

You have to separate new infrastructure from maintenance. New infrastructure provides politicians with press and opportunities to pay off friends. It also provides an ongoing maintenance expense. Maintenance is boring and expensive. Better to force yet another stadium through and leave the mess for the next pol. ...What are people going to use for a boogeyman once unions are finally extinguished?