6 ms·

The country has totally forgotten the concept of the greater good and to invest in basic infrastructure that benefits everybody. It’s all about profit for some

The country has totally forgotten the concept of the greater good and to invest in basic infrastructure that benefits everybody. It’s all about profit for some groups. You see the same in healthcare. Nobody can seriously argue that the current setup is beneficial for the country as a whole but the people and institutions that benefit from the dysfunction will fight any changes tooth and nail.

omegaworks 4y ago
The country attempted to move forward on infrastructure, but the bill died in an anti-democratic institution dominated by right-wing austerity hawks (the US Senate).
- ducttapecrown 4y ago
  Those people are not austerity hawks. They are austerity hawks if and only if the President is a Democrat. Otherwise they run budget deficits.
- tylersmith 4y ago
  Bridges can be fixed without federal laws. It's ridiculous to blame all poor infrastructure on a single law failing to pass.
  - omegaworks 4y ago
    It's not really ridiculous when the federal government controls the power to issue currency. Any infrastructure improvement that occurs at the local level needs to be paid for by either tax or debt. Taxes take money out of a local economy and debt is typically more expensive for local municipalities. The federal government can borrow at extremely low interest and literally create currency if needed. If the infrastructure expands the productivity of the economy as a whole that currency creation does not contribute to inflation. At a macro level bridges enable more efficient commerce, so issuing currency to pay for them can be the most optimal way forward for the society. If the bridge saves 1,000 farmers $150,000 in fuel/transportation cost over the course of its life, that bridge created $150,000,000 of new value in the economy.
- jaywalk 4y ago
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > The country is not a democracy, so the Senate being "anti-democratic" is entirely irrelevant. Insofar as the government claims (and, more importantly, insofar as those subject to the government believe that it is important for a government to be able to claim) democratic legitimacy through consent of the governed, both the fact that the government as a whole is radically antidemocratic in structure despite superficial rituals of democracy, and the fact that the centerpiece of that antidemocratic structure is the Senate matters a whole lot.
anthropodie 4y ago
I am from India and just yesterday I saw episode of John Oliver related to state of Utilities in the US [1]. After that episode I was like thank God we don't have issues like this. The energy infrastructure in India is mostly owned by Government companies and yeah their are some issues but the grid works and it is maintained surprisingly well. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-YRSqaPtMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-YRSqaPtMg Edit: I am getting down voted lol. Maybe our infrastructure is not producing as much Energy as US but I am mostly talking about Grid. I guess I should have cleared that.
- NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
  I think perhaps then you got the wrong idea then because generally the service provided by utilities in the U.S. is far-and-away superior to that provided in India.
  - anthropodie 4y ago
    Not sure if you lived in India briefly or where you lived to have bad experience with the power companies. But I can attest that service in one of the most remote regions of India is very good. There are no power cuts and if there are because of some storm or other natural disaster they are resolved within 2-3 days.
    - NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
      I lived in Bengaluru for several years. In the U.S. we expect to be able to drink the water that comes from the tap, cutting off entire parts of a city for a day or more from the water supply is largely unheard of; same for electricity. We expect actual storm drains and sewage works as opposed to streets just flooding every time there's rain. etc. I'm not trying to be "down" on India but - having lived with both systems - the U.S. experience is objectively better from every point of view other than price.
      - anthropodie 4y ago

omegaworks 4y ago

The country attempted to move forward on infrastructure, but the bill died in an anti-democratic institution dominated by right-wing austerity hawks (the US Senate).

ducttapecrown 4y ago
Those people are not austerity hawks. They are austerity hawks if and only if the President is a Democrat. Otherwise they run budget deficits.
tylersmith 4y ago
Bridges can be fixed without federal laws. It's ridiculous to blame all poor infrastructure on a single law failing to pass.
- omegaworks 4y ago
  It's not really ridiculous when the federal government controls the power to issue currency. Any infrastructure improvement that occurs at the local level needs to be paid for by either tax or debt. Taxes take money out of a local economy and debt is typically more expensive for local municipalities. The federal government can borrow at extremely low interest and literally create currency if needed. If the infrastructure expands the productivity of the economy as a whole that currency creation does not contribute to inflation. At a macro level bridges enable more efficient commerce, so issuing currency to pay for them can be the most optimal way forward for the society. If the bridge saves 1,000 farmers $150,000 in fuel/transportation cost over the course of its life, that bridge created $150,000,000 of new value in the economy.
jaywalk 4y ago
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > The country is not a democracy, so the Senate being "anti-democratic" is entirely irrelevant. Insofar as the government claims (and, more importantly, insofar as those subject to the government believe that it is important for a government to be able to claim) democratic legitimacy through consent of the governed, both the fact that the government as a whole is radically antidemocratic in structure despite superficial rituals of democracy, and the fact that the centerpiece of that antidemocratic structure is the Senate matters a whole lot.

anthropodie 4y ago

I am from India and just yesterday I saw episode of John Oliver related to state of Utilities in the US [1]. After that episode I was like thank God we don't have issues like this. The energy infrastructure in India is mostly owned by Government companies and yeah their are some issues but the grid works and it is maintained surprisingly well. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-YRSqaPtMg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-YRSqaPtMg Edit: I am getting down voted lol. Maybe our infrastructure is not producing as much Energy as US but I am mostly talking about Grid. I guess I should have cleared that.

NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
I think perhaps then you got the wrong idea then because generally the service provided by utilities in the U.S. is far-and-away superior to that provided in India.
- anthropodie 4y ago
  Not sure if you lived in India briefly or where you lived to have bad experience with the power companies. But I can attest that service in one of the most remote regions of India is very good. There are no power cuts and if there are because of some storm or other natural disaster they are resolved within 2-3 days.
  - NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
    I lived in Bengaluru for several years. In the U.S. we expect to be able to drink the water that comes from the tap, cutting off entire parts of a city for a day or more from the water supply is largely unheard of; same for electricity. We expect actual storm drains and sewage works as opposed to streets just flooding every time there's rain. etc. I'm not trying to be "down" on India but - having lived with both systems - the U.S. experience is objectively better from every point of view other than price.
    - anthropodie 4y ago