PRI.ORG: If the US wants to fix its infrastructure problem, it'll have to cut through the red tape (http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-03-24/if-america-wants-fix-its-infrastructure-problem-itll-have-cut-through-red-tape)
QuoteIn the United States, bigger is better. America goes stronger, faster and further than everyone else. Right?
QuoteWrong.
QuoteYou don't need to look hard to see America's infrastructure is crumbling. Look no further than Flint, Detroit, Cincinnati, Newark, Boston and Los Angeles, though the list can go on.
QuoteIt's something even the presidential candidates agree on – Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have all said that America needs to fix its roads and bridges, and invest in the physical framework of the United States.
QuoteSo with so much agreement, why isn't anything happening?
^^ One of the biggest problems is the number of hoops we make people jump through just to go from stage to stage in the planning of a piece of infrastructure. These hoops need to be streamlined in order to make it work better.
QuoteSo with so much agreement, why isn't anything happening?
Because they pull exceptions rather than the majority.
Trillions of dollars have been spent on infrastructure improvements.
But even if you plopped every penny available to fix everything today, every infrastructure improvement that needs to be done won't happen. Not enough people with the know-how to do it all. And projects take time. How often do we say improvements are needed, but we don't want to deal with the effects of the detours and lane closures? Start doing a few projects in close range, and those detour routes are impacted by other projects. And those projects won't be completed by 5pm today. They take months...or years.
Combine it all, and there's just too much work that needs to be done, and all the available resources simply aren't there to get it done.
To be honest, we just have the TIME to do it, and the resources, it's just that there's not enough red tape. Detroit has been in the hole since about the '50s, and even now it's only climbing back out.
Flint is trying, but they keep running into a problem.
Here's what I think: We could try and do a massive housekeeping when a new president or a new Congress comes, and review what we've done, and whatever problems need to be weeded out we'll send the money or reform the problem to fix it. However, we'll also need to grow and expand, due to debt problems we're having ($19 trillion in debt, not as bad as other countries), and fix up the economy in both the country and cities.
I know I sound like hot air, but I'm not the greatest in finding a solution.
A 10 year plan to build up the workforce as the infrastructure rebuilding goes on will create an avalanche of activity. One year is enough to train people how to operate heavy equipment and trucks, two years to make them competent mechanics and surveyors, four years to be managers and instructors, six years to be engineers/planners, eight years to get them up to the R&D level and as we address the human side of the equation, we reopen factories to build the equipment and supplies. By the time we get to Year Ten, we will have put in place the infrastructure foundation.
The second ten years then uses these human and material resources to rebuild America's cities. We then have a third ten year plan which gets us into the Solar System using the wealth we have created here on Earth to make us richer than ever before. Within three decades we could be on our way to the kind of Golden Age that would make even the biggest dreamers of today seem like small thinkers and that is only using the tech levels we have now.
Add in accelerating forces like nanotech, genetic tech, advanced physics and who knows what else comes along to see it can be done even quicker and better. It is all a matter of focusing resources and having honest competent leaders people believe in.
Yeah, fat chance of that ever being the case...LOL!
Rick
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
Quote from: hm insulators on March 30, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
Sing it, brother.
Quote from: hm insulators on March 30, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
Yep. It doesn't help that some politicians lead this charge that there's plenty of infrastructure money that's just being wasted on stupid shit, when that's not really the case; there really is not enough money.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 31, 2016, 12:40:44 AM
Quote from: hm insulators on March 30, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
Yep. It doesn't help that some politicians lead this charge that there's plenty of infrastructure money that's just being wasted on stupid shit, when that's not really the case; there really is not enough money.
Or that some of the public thinks that if welfare was eliminated that we could afford everything (cut off all those welfare queens! Oh wait...most people that use it are only on it temporarily as intended...hm...). Heard this argument last night, as a matter of fact.
A lot of the people who make these arguments don't seem to understand how transportation is funded. Obviously it varies from state to state. But I had to deal with a guy in the last several months who "wanted to know where all the money Minnesota gets from gas and vehicle registrations is going". He stated that Minnesota had plenty of transportation money but was simply choosing to spend all its money on Twin Cities transit projects. He did not seem to understand that:
1. user fees are only a small chunk of road funding
2. in Minnesota those particular fees are constitutionally dedicated to be used for road funding only
3. that there are multiple sources of transportation funding, not just one big pot to be divided up
4. the state is responsible for far more miles of road than it appears
I tried to take him to task but he didn't seem to get it.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 31, 2016, 12:40:44 AM
Quote from: hm insulators on March 30, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
Yep. It doesn't help that some politicians lead this charge that there's plenty of infrastructure money that's just being wasted on stupid shit, when that's not really the case; there really is not enough money.
Yeah... related to that, I'll hear/read that if we just eliminated waste & corruption in the DOTs (and other agencies, like the PTC / other toll roads and such) we'd have enough money. While getting rid of such wasteful spending would be a good thing, it would still be a drop in the bucket.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 31, 2016, 05:37:34 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 31, 2016, 12:40:44 AM
Quote from: hm insulators on March 30, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
Yep. It doesn't help that some politicians lead this charge that there's plenty of infrastructure money that's just being wasted on stupid shit, when that's not really the case; there really is not enough money.
Yeah... related to that, I'll hear/read that if we just eliminated waste & corruption in the DOTs (and other agencies, like the PTC / other toll roads and such) we'd have enough money. While getting rid of such wasteful spending would be a good thing, it would still be a drop in the bucket.
Makes me want to scream. Corruption in the DOT? If anything, by far the closest I've witnessed are pressures by politicians and general contractor lobbying groups to put projects in NYSDOT's programs that did not meet engineering merit. DOT ain't corrupt; the people pulling the strings are!
(personal opinion expressed)
Unfortunately, Kentucky has has a number of Transportation Cabinet employees caught doing no-no's. Everything from construction inspectors being bribed by contractors to employees caught masturbating while driving a state vehicle to selling drugs from a state vehicle while on the job. So yeah, there's corruption and waste.
Quote from: Rothman on March 31, 2016, 11:17:30 PM
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 31, 2016, 05:37:34 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 31, 2016, 12:40:44 AM
Quote from: hm insulators on March 30, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
Yep. It doesn't help that some politicians lead this charge that there's plenty of infrastructure money that's just being wasted on stupid shit, when that's not really the case; there really is not enough money.
Yeah... related to that, I'll hear/read that if we just eliminated waste & corruption in the DOTs (and other agencies, like the PTC / other toll roads and such) we'd have enough money. While getting rid of such wasteful spending would be a good thing, it would still be a drop in the bucket.
Makes me want to scream. Corruption in the DOT? If anything, by far the closest I've witnessed are pressures by politicians and general contractor lobbying groups to put projects in NYSDOT's programs that did not meet engineering merit. DOT ain't corrupt; the people pulling the strings are!
(personal opinion expressed)
Plus the civil service system being abused, and sometimes even outright violated, so that upper management can promote their pets ("athletes", as Pete and I have started calling them) while bypassing everyone else. Used to be only upper management was political... then it spread down to grade 27... now even grade 23!
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2016, 01:21:13 PM
Plus the civil service system being abused, and sometimes even outright violated, so that upper management can promote their pets ("athletes", as Pete and I have started calling them) while bypassing everyone else. Used to be only upper management was political... then it spread down to grade 27... now even grade 23!
For most of the past 50 years, the primary qualification to get a KYTC job in a county garage, district office or section engineer's office has been to be a registered Democrat.
Quote from: hbelkins on April 02, 2016, 11:01:54 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 01, 2016, 01:21:13 PM
Plus the civil service system being abused, and sometimes even outright violated, so that upper management can promote their pets ("athletes", as Pete and I have started calling them) while bypassing everyone else. Used to be only upper management was political... then it spread down to grade 27... now even grade 23!
For most of the past 50 years, the primary qualification to get a KYTC job in a county garage, district office or section engineer's office has been to be a registered Democrat.
Then how did you get a job? :p
One of the infrastructure problems in my neck of the woods is the railroad. Over the past year, Union Pacific has parked nearly 100 locomotive engines and laid-off hundreds of employees in Grand Junction, CO and other cities because their biggest customer, the area coal mines, have either closed or were forced to close because of all the tree-hugging global-warming nutjobs/politicians that are getting their way with closing coal-burning power plants in favor of more expensive, greener options. In addition, the recession has reduced the amount of large manufactured products needed to be transported over rail.
Before the recession, there was a call to improve the rail system to enable trains to go faster. Now that the frequency of train traffic has greatly been reduced, now is the time to give money to the railroads to make the necessary improvements on the main regional/national lines so when things pick up they can be competitive with the trucking industry, have less construction delays & projects and in effect be more "green" since railroads can move more freight per gallon of diesel than trucks can. Plus it keeps railroad employees employed doing something.
Government needs to fund or grant loans to these future investments in leaner times. Same with highway projects. I know in the short run we cannot afford it, but it saves us money in the long run.
This is a colossal decision - this will change our country, I'd even say. If we decide to at least try, we have to carry it out over multiple generations, and the next generation will have to pay increased taxes.
We haven't even started yet, and nobody wants to start.
I'm all for streamlining the planning and review process since it does take too long - though I must ask: how much does it really add to the dollar cost of a project?
It's no secret that construction costs more than it used to, and that that hampers improvements, but there isn't only one reason why. Consider the following:
- other countries are now building more than they used to. By supply and demand, this drives up the cost of raw materials.
- there are more people than there used to be, but the amount of available space has not changed and property values in developed areas have increased - this means ROW acquisition costs have gotten more expensive.
- besides the tortuous review process, there is red tape we have now and didn't have then which isn't going to and shouldn't go away: OSHA regulations protect worker safety but cost money to implement. And while measures to mitigate impacts on wetlands, air quality, noise pollution, etc. do add to the cost of projects, these things have implications for human health and well being and to neglect them would be penny wise/pound foolish.
- the dollar value comparison itself, even adjusted for inflation, doesn't really give the whole picture because the ways inflation is measured are flawed and perpetually underestimate it. So the relative increase in construction costs is not as large as we think it is, but we don't have as much money as we think we do. The net effect is the same but the nature of the underlying problem is disguised by this.
Quote from: hm insulators on March 30, 2016, 04:40:59 PM
Quote from: kkt on March 26, 2016, 03:17:45 PM
it'll have to be willing to pay taxes.
And that's the crux of the problem. People want the infrastructure improvements but they're not willing to pay for them.
i thought tax cuts for the wealthy were supposed to pay for everything </sarcasm>
SGH-I337
Pretty good segment on this subject from John Oliver