Is building infrastructure in America a bad idea

[Will Wiley]

Donald Trump has said he wants to spend a lot of money building infrastructure in America.

Is that a bad idea?

If it is a good idea then why weren't Democrats or run of the mill republicans suggesting it?

 

[bleubird]

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/donald-trump-dc-hotel
This is how Drump will make America great again!

 

[Will Wiley]

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/donald-trump-dc-hotel
This is how Drump will make America great again!

Do you think the money should be spent on war instead of infrastructure?

 

[Funkytrip]

Donald Trump has said he wants to spend a lot of money building infrastructure in America.

Is that a bad idea?

If it is a good idea then why weren't Democrats or run of the mill republicans suggesting it?

Obama tried it, but Republicans blocked it. If Republicans allow it now, that would frustrate poor Obama probably even more because Trump will go 'I rebuilt our roads again' while Obama actually wanted to do the same thing, but wasn't allowed by the party of Trump.

 

[southernhybrid]

Obama did successfully pass a stimulus bill and a good bit of went to infrastructure spending. The stimulus that was passed just wasn't large enough to get enough done. After that, the Republicans blocked any attempt to improve infrastructure. And yes, it's a good idea to do something about our failing infrastructure. It is an opportunity to create jobs as well as updating the infrastructure, which is in terrible shape. Republicans probably want to privatize the entire mess, but I don't think that's the answer. It's fine to hire private contractors to do a lot of the work, but the money to pay them must come from somewhere and I seriously doubt it's coming from the private sector. We all benefit from adequate infrastructure, especially so for business since business uses the same roads, rail etc. to move their products to the markets.

 

[laughing dog]

Donald Trump has said he wants to spend a lot of money building infrastructure in America.

Is that a bad idea?

It's a great idea.

If it is a good idea then why weren't Democrats or run of the mill republicans suggesting it?

The run of the mill republicans are not suggesting it because they prefer tax cuts and cutting gov't spending. The Democrats ignored it during the last economic meltdown because they were mistaken that such spending would take too long to help the economy.

 

[PyramidHead]

It'd be a great idea if it doesn't include the rider that it currently does. The government will give private investors tax credits to entice them to work on infrastructure projects, but investors will only be interested in projects that stand to make a good return. This means very few of the work will be done on public highways unless they are transformed into toll roads, and work on bridges will be accompanied by fees for using them. In essence, another big gift package to rich businessmen that results in higher costs for average people. This may be offset somewhat by the economic stimulus that results from the increased construction, but a simpler and more effective solution would be to just take advantage of the low interest rates and borrow the money, removing the private sector middle man and obviating the need for tolls. Infrastructure, like healthcare, isn't the type of thing that should be in the hands of investors who want a big and early ROI anyway.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Donald Trump has said he wants to spend a lot of money building infrastructure in America.

Correction. Trump said he wanted to modify a single line of tax code so private domestic money held overseas could meander back to the US. It was this money he said would be used to spend on infrastructure. How private money goes into paying for sewer and water line replacements, I'm entirely uncertain of. Trump basers didn't seem to mind the massive issue with the plan though.

Is that a bad idea?

You'd start a thread on whether the sun existing tomorrow being a good idea because after all, doesn't it just make us lazy more reliant on the sun instead of taking charge of our own existence?

 

[funinspace]

Donald Trump has said he wants to spend a lot of money building infrastructure in America.

Is that a bad idea?

If it is a good idea then why weren't Democrats or run of the mill republicans suggesting it?

WTF? What planet are you from? FFvC will have to fight his own party, and beg for support from the Dums if he wants to increase infrastructure spending.

Though it is just the next 5 year transporation plan, signed last year, it is another indication of just which part supports larger infrastructure spending projects:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...r-infrastructure-bill-clears-congress/418827/

President Obama will sign the bill into law, as it fulfills his long-running push for lawmakers to pass an infrastructure bill even though it is significantly less than the $478 billion he sought in his own plan earlier this year.

The Senate approved the highway bill on an 83-16 vote. All but two Democrats—Senators Elizabeth Warren and Tom Carper—voted for it. Among the 14 Republican opponents were three of the four presidential candidates serving in the Senate: Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul. (Senator Bernie Sanders missed the vote.) The House cleared it, 359-65, earlier on Thursday. It won unanimous support from Democrats and opposition mainly from conservatives.

Party platforms couldn’t be much clearer in just which party supports increased infrastructure spending:
http://thehill.com/policy/transport...ic-and-gop-platforms-differ-on-infrastructure

While this year’s Democratic plank promises huge spending increases for the country’s transportation system, the GOP document calls for eliminating federal funding for mass transit, bike-share programs, sidewalks and rail-to-rail projects.
<snip>
The Democratic platform approved this week is loaded with dozens of references to transportation, calling for dramatic increases in federal spending on roads, bridges, public transit, airports, and passenger and freight rail lines.
<snip>
By contrast, the 2016 Republican platform approved last week calls for stripping programs from the Highway Trust Fund — money designated for road construction and other surface transportation projects across the country — that aren’t related to cars and highways.
<snip>
The GOP platform also calls for privatizing passenger rail service in the Northeast Corridor and ending federal support for high-speed and intercity rail projects across the country.

The platform seems to be somewhat of a contrast to Trump, who has repeatedly vowed to repair the nation’s deteriorating transportation system, even if it requires taxpayer dollars.
<snip>
The Republican document, meanwhile, remains staunchly opposed to hiking the federal gasoline tax, which finances the Highway Trust Fund. The gas tax hasn’t been increased in over two decades, although a number of states — including red ones — have raised their own fuel taxes.

 

[dismal]

Wait, do pipelines count as "infrastructure"?

If only there were some way to get private companies to build those.

 

[Sarpedon]

It is one thing I agree with Trump on.

Though I'm curious as to the details: I'm hoping he's talking about repairing and improving infrastructure to developed areas, not in opening large new areas to development.

 

[Derec]

Obama did successfully pass a stimulus bill and a good bit of went to infrastructure spending.

Yes, he did, and it was a good idea, but the biggest problem with the stimulus bill was that not enough of it went to infrastructure spending. Of the $831G only about $105G was spent on infrastructure.

The stimulus that was passed just wasn't large enough to get enough done.

It was about as big as could get passed. But not enough of it went to infrastructure.

After that, the Republicans blocked any attempt to improve infrastructure.

Yes, Republicans were all afraid of Tea Party primary challenges and they were opposed to any non-military spending.

And yes, it's a good idea to do something about our failing infrastructure. It is an opportunity to create jobs as well as updating the infrastructure, which is in terrible shape. Republicans probably want to privatize the entire mess, but I don't think that's the answer. It's fine to hire private contractors to do a lot of the work, but the money to pay them must come from somewhere and I seriously doubt it's coming from the private sector. We all benefit from adequate infrastructure, especially so for business since business uses the same roads, rail etc. to move their products to the markets.

Private roads would be a bad idea indeed.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is one thing I agree with Trump on.

Though I'm curious as to the details: I'm hoping he's talking about repairing and improving infrastructure to developed areas, not in opening large new areas to development.

I think he may have meant airports that he flies into often.

 

[Sarpedon]

Ah, the U.S. Grant approach to infrastructure construction.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, he did, and it was a good idea, but the biggest problem with the stimulus bill was that not enough of it went to infrastructure spending. Of the $831G only about $105G was spent on infrastructure.

One of the reasons for that was the claim that most of the mooted infrastructure spending was not "shovel ready". In otherwords, Congress and Obama eschewed some rational longer-run stimulus and pro-growth policy for an expected short run stimulus.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Why would Trump need to fix bridges anyways? Doesn't everyone just take their chopper everywhere?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes, he did, and it was a good idea, but the biggest problem with the stimulus bill was that not enough of it went to infrastructure spending. Of the $831G only about $105G was spent on infrastructure.

One of the reasons for that was the claim that most of the mooted infrastructure spending was not "shovel ready". In otherwords, Congress and Obama eschewed some rational longer-run stimulus and pro-growth policy for an expected short run stimulus.

You mean temporary tax cuts to help keep as much money as feasible into the economy, the cash for clunkers program to help drive new car sales, saving Detroit, and spending money on "shovel ready" projects, among other things. The stimulus also gave USACE money to full steam ahead on their levee assessment program (which helped save my job).

Obama was given one of the shittiest situations a President has ever walked into (Andrew Johnson and Harry Truman would be the only two worst situations), had an absurdly resistant Republican Party to face against... and all things said, he did very well. Yet, you'd think the '08 crash occurred in '16.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Why would Trump need to fix bridges anyways? Doesn't everyone just take their chopper everywhere?

Are you kidding? We can hardly get a good night's sleep for fear of chunks of concrete falling on our heads.