BaltACD While I have no fear the elements of the Infrastructure Spending Machine exist. I also know that the Interstate Highway system was begun in 1956, with a signifigent percentage of its mileage constructed between 1956 & 1966. In the interests of 'economy' the Interstate was constructed to a '50 year' standard level of construction. Well boys and girls 1966 was 50 years ago and the 'repairs' that have been applied over the years have, for the most part, been stop gap efforts to keep the roads 'going' , rarely going to the base levels of the constructions - sub grades deteriorate - bridges deteriorate, both with their steel and their concrete. Nothing lasts 'forever' especially when it was constructed to a 50 year standard.
While I have no fear the elements of the Infrastructure Spending Machine exist. I also know that the Interstate Highway system was begun in 1956, with a signifigent percentage of its mileage constructed between 1956 & 1966. In the interests of 'economy' the Interstate was constructed to a '50 year' standard level of construction. Well boys and girls 1966 was 50 years ago and the 'repairs' that have been applied over the years have, for the most part, been stop gap efforts to keep the roads 'going' , rarely going to the base levels of the constructions - sub grades deteriorate - bridges deteriorate, both with their steel and their concrete. Nothing lasts 'forever' especially when it was constructed to a 50 year standard.
Wow, interesting I was just about to post the same about Railroad Bridges constructed to a 100 year standard back around the turn of the century. A lot of those need replacing now.
Noticed UP RR is replacing the former C&NW steel span across I-94 in Wauwatosa or Milwaukee for their Belt line, a few years ago CN replaced the ex-C&NW span across the Fox River in Oshkosh. I think I read also that BNSF added a span across the Missouri River for regular frieghts retaining the old span for lighter weight frieghts (seriously, IMV they should replace the old span and quit being so cheap by trying to extend it's life).
CMStPnP MidlandMike That's not the way it is in Michigan. I am guessing you have some interest in Wisconsin. As I recall Gov. Walker (R) ran on a platform to kill the passenger rail service expansion to Madison, which was already approved by the previous gov (D). Republican govs in Ohio, Iowa, and Illinois did similar things. Infrastructure was part of Clinton's and the DNC's platform. While it was also included of Trump's platform, there is where he parted ways with the RNC. Ah yes the frequently misrepresented Midwestern Governors position on the HSR package that Ray LaHood was attempting to sell. It was not the HSR package itself they were opposed to, it was the strict terms that bound each state to a very high Capital Spending program or else they would be forced to pay back the original grant to the Feds and be stuck with the incomplete mess as a result if they could not finish the project. California had nothing to lose in that it already committed to a high expense HSR package so thats why a large chunk of the money was dropped there. Wisconsin and Ohio made the correct choice on the proposal. Illinois is suffering greatly for signing onto the proposal and I might add..........still not seeing HSR in that state yet as it was envisioned. It is interesting though, how many multiple billions of taxpayer money has been spent so far on HSR and still no new systems are up and running?
MidlandMike That's not the way it is in Michigan. I am guessing you have some interest in Wisconsin. As I recall Gov. Walker (R) ran on a platform to kill the passenger rail service expansion to Madison, which was already approved by the previous gov (D). Republican govs in Ohio, Iowa, and Illinois did similar things. Infrastructure was part of Clinton's and the DNC's platform. While it was also included of Trump's platform, there is where he parted ways with the RNC.
Ah yes the frequently misrepresented Midwestern Governors position on the HSR package that Ray LaHood was attempting to sell. It was not the HSR package itself they were opposed to, it was the strict terms that bound each state to a very high Capital Spending program or else they would be forced to pay back the original grant to the Feds and be stuck with the incomplete mess as a result if they could not finish the project.
California had nothing to lose in that it already committed to a high expense HSR package so thats why a large chunk of the money was dropped there.
Wisconsin and Ohio made the correct choice on the proposal. Illinois is suffering greatly for signing onto the proposal and I might add..........still not seeing HSR in that state yet as it was envisioned.
It is interesting though, how many multiple billions of taxpayer money has been spent so far on HSR and still no new systems are up and running?
Well Michigan republicans did make one consession to infrastructure-- they gladly took the federal money that Wis and Ohio turned down, and bought 100+ miles from NS, and are currently rebuilding it toward 110 mph operation on the Wolverine corridor. I guess they did not see the problems that you say the other states feared. Illinois is also incrementally increasing HrSR to 110 mph on CHI-STL.
But we are getting away from my original point, that the republican Congress considers infrastructure so low on the priority list, that after they captured the House in 2010, it took them 5 years to get out their first new "annual" transportation bill.
MidlandMikeWell Michigan republicans did make one consession to infrastructure-- they gladly took the federal money that Wis and Ohio turned down, and bought 100+ miles from NS, and are currently rebuilding it toward 110 mph operation on the Wolverine corridor. I guess they did not see the problems that you say the other states feared.
Yes both Wisconsin and Ohio just dug themselves out of multi-Billion dollar deficit budgets before the decision was made. I am not sure what Michigan's Finances are but HSR can also be viewed as a Real Estate development program and at least one city on the Chicago to Detroit corridor needs heavy real estate development and ability to attract real estate developers.
Illinios never met a spending program it didn't like and just routinely raises taxes each time to cover shortfalls. I'm not sure why they keep doing that but it has hurt them competitively in the Midwest versus surrounding states and they are hurting now for saying "yes" too many times in the past.
Stocks tanked today..
CMStPnP Yes both Wisconsin and Ohio just dug themselves out of multi-Billion dollar deficit budgets before the decision was made. I am not sure what Michigan's Finances are but HSR can also be viewed as a Real Estate development program and at least one city on the Chicago to Detroit corridor needs heavy real estate development and ability to attract real estate developers. ...
...
Th Michigan economy and State finances have been stressed for years with the auto industry problems. They just could not turn down a $100 million investment in the Wolverine corridor. There actually is much ongoing real estate development on the Woodward Ave./light rail corridor between the new Amtrak station and downtown.
BaltACD We all have heard the Campaign brags that Trump announced. What will actually get enacted going through Congress? Talk is cheap. Congress can't be fired.
We all have heard the Campaign brags that Trump announced.
What will actually get enacted going through Congress?
Talk is cheap. Congress can't be fired.
wrrsends1 BaltACD We all have heard the Campaign brags that Trump announced. What will actually get enacted going through Congress? Talk is cheap. Congress can't be fired. BaltACD - yes it can; to do it you and I and thousands of others like us only have to VOTE!!wrrsends
BaltACD - yes it can; to do it you and I and thousands of others like us only have to VOTE!!wrrsends
The problem is - we KNOW 434 of the 435 members of the House are crooks and theives. But OUR GUY brings home the pork to OUR district, so he is the ONLY good guy there - FIRE the other 434.
One small catch, I can only vote for or against 'MY' guy - I can't fire the other 434.
I used to be against term limits; however, it has become obvious that we now have a caste of Professional Politicians with individuals staying in office 20-30-40-50 years and longer. The time has come for term limits. 6 terms in the House and 2 terms in the Senate - 12 years TOTAL in national offices. If 8 years of the Presidency is enough, 12 in the other elected braches is more than enough.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD wrrsends1 BaltACD We all have heard the Campaign brags that Trump announced. What will actually get enacted going through Congress? Talk is cheap. Congress can't be fired. BaltACD - yes it can; to do it you and I and thousands of others like us only have to VOTE!!wrrsends The problem is - we KNOW 434 of the 435 members of the House are crooks and theives. But OUR GUY brings home the pork to OUR district, so he is the ONLY good guy there - FIRE the other 434. One small catch, I can only vote for or against 'MY' guy - I can't fire the other 434. I used to be against term limits; however, it has become obvious that we now have a caste of Professional Politicians with individuals staying in office 20-30-40-50 years and longer. The time has come for term limits. 6 terms in the House and 2 terms in the Senate - 12 years TOTAL in national offices. If 8 years of the Presidency is enough, 12 in the other elected braches is more than enough.
I can't say that my guy is a crook or thief, but I did try to fire him. Unfortunately I was in the minority in that respect. Tried to get rid of one Senator, too. No luck there either.
Trouble is, we seem to replace them with more of the same. Even if they start out good, too many of them seem to adapt to being career politicians. Start forgetting why they were sent there in the first place.
Jeff
jeffhergert BaltACD wrrsends1 BaltACD We all have heard the Campaign brags that Trump announced. What will actually get enacted going through Congress? Talk is cheap. Congress can't be fired. BaltACD - yes it can; to do it you and I and thousands of others like us only have to VOTE!!wrrsends The problem is - we KNOW 434 of the 435 members of the House are crooks and theives. But OUR GUY brings home the pork to OUR district, so he is the ONLY good guy there - FIRE the other 434. One small catch, I can only vote for or against 'MY' guy - I can't fire the other 434. I used to be against term limits; however, it has become obvious that we now have a caste of Professional Politicians with individuals staying in office 20-30-40-50 years and longer. The time has come for term limits. 6 terms in the House and 2 terms in the Senate - 12 years TOTAL in national offices. If 8 years of the Presidency is enough, 12 in the other elected braches is more than enough. I can't say that my guy is a crook or thief, but I did try to fire him. Unfortunately I was in the minority in that respect. Tried to get rid of one Senator, too. No luck there either. Trouble is, we seem to replace them with more of the same. Even if they start out good, too many of them seem to adapt to being career politicians. Start forgetting why they were sent there in the first place. Jeff
and political donor's bribes would only last 12 yrs. STEVEL
BaltACDThe problem is - we KNOW 434 of the 435 members of the House are crooks and thieves...
Hey - that's my line! But I agree. I recall hearing about a congressman from PA who was re-elected shortly after having been convicted of some significant crime that had to do with his position.
The same thing happens in the state houses...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Never know what congressman might be president someday.
Wow those are great pictures Wanswheel. Funny coincidence ...as I went down the halls Monday ( yesterday) morning at my college someone had put up a blown up grad picture of myself, at 21 years old with the caption..." WHO " and a prize for finding out. Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson and Ford are quite recognizable but I'm afraid I don't look much like I did at 21 any longer.
Public highways are seriously decaying. Inland navigation structures are eroding. When will this government infrastructure failure to invest shift traffic to rail?
Rail will need to make investments to handle a large shift in traffic. That will take capital. Will the rate of return and risk make rail a smart investment?
Miningman Wow those are great pictures Wanswheel. Funny coincidence ...as I went down the halls Monday ( yesterday) morning at my college someone had put up a blown up grad picture of myself, at 21 years old with the caption..." WHO " and a prize for finding out. Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson and Ford are quite recognizable but I'm afraid I don't look much like I did at 21 any longer.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy SidingAlthough, to be honest, Gerald Ford's hair looks like a cartoon mustache drawn about 8" too high.
Well he did play football without a helmet!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.