Politics!!!
Any numbers thrown around in campaigns are meaningless. It never happens the way it is proposed, and probably should not be. After all Congress must instigate legislation for any such proposals to become action.
Bruce,
Your first link actually says $500 Billion in total in the paragraph after the one you highlighted...........see, that is what I am referring to. In the article in Trains it is listed as $275 billion ignoring the private money to be attracted by a infrastructure bank whereas Trumps is listed as $1 trillion which, given that Pence is his running mate from Indiana more than likely includes private money. So the two figures in the article seem to be not comparably similar to me.
I guess where I am confused is the article just showing taxpayer cost comparison between the two candidates or total size of the expected infrasture investments? Again I am not 100% sure Trumps proposal is entirely funded by tax dollars I think he took a similiar approach that Hillary did (comingling tax and private funds) but not sure and there is really not enough detail to know for sure I don't think.
Facts and figures do tend to fluctuate over time, especially during an election cycle and when it's being translated, filtered, and presented through multiple media outlets. As of today, here are just a few of the mentions to be found, and they all indicate $275 billion.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/11/30/clinton-infrastructure-plan-builds-tomorrows-economy-today/
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/hillary-clinton-100-day-pledge-infrastructure-plan/
http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-makes-a-big-push-on-infrastructure-1470433942
Someone correct me if I am wrong but I thought the Hillary Clinton proposal was $500 Billion for Infrastructure vs $275 Billion. I think Trains made a mistake or else they are correct in a very narrow sense. I believe part of the Clinton proposal was that the remaining $225 Billion would be drawn in private money vs taxpayer funds. I seem to remember long ago that her proposal was $500 Billion and roughly 50% Taxpayer funds and 50% Private Money which seemed to me at the time to be kind of copying Indiana's success with Infrastructure investment.
Anyone, am I right or reading this wrong?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.