3 ms·
Forty years ago, countries like the USA decided that it was good to stop investing in the country and giving increasing tax breaks to corporations because that
by coliveira 6y ago
Forty years ago, countries like the USA decided that it was good to stop investing in the country and giving increasing tax breaks to corporations because that would be enough to create progress. Now even economists finally realize that these companies have done nothing to grow the economy and that all the money given to them was diverted to increased dividends and buy-backs, CEO compensation, and investments abroad. The problems with infrastructure are not isolated, it is just an aspect of the malaise that it the ideology that more money should be given to the already rich. Now the country doesn't have the fiscal basis to invest anymore and the people are getting the results of this irresponsible behavior.
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y agoTFA has a more nuanced position than this. It's central point is that cities/towns/communities expanded by adding large amounts of infrastructure without any possible means to pay for its maintainance in the future. They did so because they gained short term revenue from the expansion, but failed to have any model whatsoever of how the infrastructure would be maintained.
- coliveira 6y agoThat is a myopic position because cities are not independent and don't live in a vacuum. Cities exist because it is in the interest of the country to develop areas with high industrial or services growth. The investments in infrastructure are a shared concern that benefits the whole country, not just the cities. This TFA theory is just another facet of neoliberal ideology that tries to compartmentalize profits and evade public investments in a large scale.