Check out some similar questions!

talaniman · Nov 27, 2012, 11:49 AM

I agree Tom, but we do know they have more people who don't participate or can't, in there economy, than they have those who benefit from it. Such imbalance is not a winning recipe for any society on earth.

paraclete · Nov 27, 2012, 02:19 PM

Tom I would say the number of unoccupied dwellings in the US is about the same as China, big difference though, they can fill theirs with a stroke of the pen. Their unoccupied dwellings are in redeveloped towns, in places where they want people to be, planning for them to be, whereas your are the result of mere profiteering

tomder55 · Nov 27, 2012, 02:44 PM

We have vacancies because of an economic downturn. While this is happening we don't have builders employed building ghost cities to keep construction workers employed . But it 's OK if you think white elephant projects are good policy.

talaniman · Nov 27, 2012, 02:52 PM

We don't build bridges, roads, and schools to keep them employed here either so what's the difference?

The have nots don't make economic downturns or throw people out of their homes either.

tomder55 · Nov 27, 2012, 03:07 PM

Yeah maybe we should have a couple more' Big Digs '.That should really get us out of the hole. Got a hint for you... we have Dem pols here in NY arguing over a decade about what a replacement for the Tappan-Zee Bridge should look like . It took over a decade to begin to see some progress at the ground zero site. Do you really think someone decides to build a road and hands a worker a shovel ? Not in this environment where career pols and union bosses enrich themselves in the planning phase .

paraclete · Nov 27, 2012, 03:17 PM

What happened to all those shovel ready projects, I expect most of them were shovelling bull?

You apparently have a problem with nation building projects, Tom, is that because you think your nation is built, already developed and doesn't need more building? Is your objection that someone will enrich themselves or that the wrong people will enrich themselves? I expect you have no problem with CEO's enriching themselves and keeping their gains with lower taxes. Why don't you have some white elephant projects, I've no doubt if we cast around we could find a few already under construction

tomder55 · Nov 27, 2012, 07:33 PM

Most times when the government is involved it's a white elephant. If CEOs build and enriches themselves it doesn't cost me a penny.

paraclete · Nov 27, 2012, 07:41 PM

That is a very incorrect idea, When CEO's take large salaries they reduce the available earnings available to stockholders, in fact some "earn" their large salaries when there is no apparent benefit to stockholders and appreciable dimunition of stockholder value. I can only assume you have no investments in stocks

excon · Nov 27, 2012, 07:50 PM

Hello again, tom:

most times when the government is involved it's a white elephant. If CEOs build and enriches themselves it doesn't cost me a penny.

Yeah, that gubment. It cain't build squat. They DIDN'T build the interstate.. They DIDN'T build our bridges and roads. They DIDN'T build Hoover Dam. They DIDN'T build our airports..

And they should never build anything again. They shouldn't even REPAIR our broken down bridges, or fix our roads, or an airport or two.

Maybe some CEO will do it..

Excon

paraclete · Nov 27, 2012, 08:57 PM

Ex that's gubment, backwoods style, the "if it ain't broke don't fix it " mindset. That thinking leaves nothing for the next generation and never invents anything for it's self. Pappy's muzzleloader is good enough to put dinner on the table and they never learned anythung else. You don't need radds and bridges when all you do is sit on your blessed assurance

tomder55 · Nov 28, 2012, 06:21 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

Yeah, that gubment. It cain't build squat. They DIDN'T build the interstate.. They DIDN'T build our bridges and roads. They DIDN'T build Hoover Dam. They DIDN'T build our airports..

And they should never build anything again. They shouldn't even REPAIR our broken down bridges, or fix our roads, or an airport or two.

Maybe some CEO will do it..

excon

Most of them were inefficient ,over-priced boondoggles . Don't use the Hoover Dam as an example . You know very well that situation with the unions allowing public work corps will never happen again. As for the Interstate... Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to fund roads ;and there was a national security component to it's logic. It constitutes about 2 % of the road system in the country . Are you saying it's the Federal Government's responsibility to fund and build all our roads ?

NeedKarma · Nov 28, 2012, 01:20 PM

Are you saying it's the Federal Government's responsibility to fund and build all our roads ?

I give up, who's responsibility is it?

tomder55 · Nov 28, 2012, 02:36 PM

Most roads are local jurisdicition ;some town ,some County ,some State ,many are private owned .Most major routes are state owned and managed ;even many sections of the Interstate system are State owned and managed . I can say that the major states in the North East collect tolls on the Interstate system roads that are designated state Thruways . There is a Federal Excise tax on gasoline that is supposed to pay for road infrastructure maintenance. Theoretically if that money is being used for it's intended purpose there is plenty of money for maintenance. Tolls on highways and bridges are also supposed to be used for that purpose .

NeedKarma · Nov 28, 2012, 02:51 PM

So some level of government is involved for the vast majority of the roadwork in the country. Right?

paraclete · Nov 28, 2012, 02:56 PM

Obviously

tomder55 · Nov 28, 2012, 05:58 PM

To repeat myself... I asked " Are you saying it's the Federal Government's responsibility to fund and build all our roads ? " I neve implied that there was no level of government involved .
I also said that most construction projects run by the government are boondoggles and I stand by that too.The higher the level of government the more waste and inefficient .

paraclete · Nov 28, 2012, 06:47 PM

So you are saying all this government largesse benefits nobody, so you have some potemkin roads over there, roads to nowhere, or at least nowhere anyone would want to go. Tom I have a curious question? Who built the Chigago hump. Was that a capitalist exercise in stupidity or a boondoggle

Wondergirl · Nov 28, 2012, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

who built the Chigago hump. was that a capitalist exercise in stupidity or a boondoggle

What's that? I live there.

paraclete · Nov 28, 2012, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

What's that? I live there.

Apparently there is a rail freight facility there through which most of the rail frieght in the US must pass, it consists of a large marshalling yard and sorting facility with an artificial hill at its centre. The rail system is so designed that all freight must pass through Chigago

Wondergirl · Nov 28, 2012, 09:46 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

apparently there is a rail freight facility there through which most of the rail frieght in the US must pass, it consists of a large marshalling yard and sorting facility with an artificial hill at its centre. The rail system is so designed that all freight must pass throught Chigago

I've lived here since 1963 (and my husband was born here). We've never heard/seen reference to that as the "Hump." It has always been called "The Clearing Yard," and is just south of Midway Airport, our second largest airport. My husband said one probably has to really be into trains to be calling it "the hump."

Have you ever heard of the Chicago Loop?