Is The Infrastructure Falling Apart?

[molson_golden2002]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...id=opinionsbox1

 

Are we investing enough in America or is this a BS issue?

 

 

Worse yet, as Wall Street turned its back on America, so did government. The Bush administration and congressional Republicans (John McCain among them) kept American incomes low by opposing hikes in the minimum wage; helping employers defeat unionization; and shunning policies to modernize infrastructure, make college more affordable, and boost spending on basic science and research.

 

Today, it's the Democrats who sound like Lincoln's Republicans. In recent months, the Obama campaign and liberal think tanks in particular have generated numerous proposals for heightened public commitment to infrastructure and education. Unlike tax cuts, which chiefly bolster our ability to consume imported goods and commodities, infrastructure investments make us more productive and have a multiplier effect that creates more jobs over and above those that the government funds directly. Congressional Democrats have included major infrastructure investments in their pending new stimulus bill, which Bush and GOP leaders oppose.

 

Someone needs to invest in the United States of America. For the past decade and, in a broader sense, for the entire duration of the Reagan era, both government and Wall Street have opted not to. Should Barack Obama win, the era of neglectful government will probably come to an end. No matter who wins, Wall Street is vanishing before our eyes. And by the measure of their contribution to America's economic strength and well being, both Reagan-age government and Wall Street's investment banks plainly deserve to die.

[finknottle]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...id=opinionsbox1

 

Are we investing enough in America or is this a BS issue?

 

We need to invest more in infrastructure, but the Democrats are coming dangerously close to seeing the issue as a giant jobs program. If Japan is any guide, it may mire us even deeper in recession.

[olivier in france]

There is one thing that surprises ALL europeans the first time they travel in the USA: The sad state of american roads/ railroads/public transportation systems.

[molson_golden2002]

We need to invest more in infrastructure, but the Democrats are coming dangerously close to seeing the issue as a giant jobs program. If Japan is any guide, it may mire us even deeper in recession.

What happened in Japan?

[PastaJoe]

What happened in Japan?

 

Godzilla keeps destroying their infrastructure, and they can't keep up with rebuilding it.

[/dev/null]

Godzilla keeps destroying their infrastructure, and they can't keep up with rebuilding it.

 

[bills_fan_in_raleigh]

There is one thing that surprises ALL europeans the first time they travel in the USA: The sad state of american roads/ railroads/public transportation systems.

we have railroads and public transportation????

[finknottle]

What happened in Japan?

 

They have never really pulled out of the recession following the real estate collapse in the 1990. This in turn wrecked havoc with their banking institutions, which had a lot of bad loans on their books... sound familiar yet?

 

They turned to the tried-and-true philosophy of increasing social spending to prime the economy, engaging in massive public works projects over the years with no effect. The economy stagnated, and the 1990's are refered to in Japanese business circles as 'the lost decade.' The stock market, which had reached it's all time high in late 1989, ground steadily downward before turning around in 2003. Even in the past few years, the excitement over the Japanese economy has been less about it's modest return to adequate performance than simple hope that they might have finally ended their recession.

[molson_golden2002]

They have never really pulled out of the recession following the real estate collapse in the 1990. This in turn wrecked havoc with their banking institutions, which had a lot of bad loans on their books... sound familiar yet?

 

They turned to the tried-and-true philosophy of increasing social spending to prime the economy, engaging in massive public works projects over the years with no effect. The economy stagnated, and the 1990's are refered to in Japanese business circles as 'the lost decade.' The stock market, which had reached it's all time high in late 1989, ground steadily downward before turning around in 2003. Even in the past few years, the excitement over the Japanese economy has been less about it's modest return to adequate performance than simple hope that they might have finally ended their recession.

And the lesson learned is: don't build infrastructure? I'm sure all of Japan's problems did not come down to the building of roads, bridges and other thing

[finknottle]

And the lesson learned is: don't build infrastructure? I'm sure all of Japan's problems did not come down to the building of roads, bridges and other thing

 

No - and that's my point. I am in favor of rebuilding infrastructure, carefully planned out. It is IMO one of the competative economic advantages that the US has and must be maintained.

 

But rebuild what we need, because we need it, not because it creates jobs. I am against hijacking the cause to be sold as a palliative for our economic woes. Once you go down that path you begin to ignore real economic issues and focus on 'government contracts for the district.' Before you know it you're spending a good portion of the GDP paving and repaving the beltway in an endless loop, and making alot of construction unions happy. It is the kind of thinking that say's natural disasters are good for the economy because of all the jobs they create.

 

It also reminds me of India; the pressure is so create to create jobs that they pay millions of people to walk around the streets in the morning with a branch, sweeping dust; and companies are forced to hire people that do nothing but serve tea. It is difficult to break out of a cycle of government-funded dependency once it takes root.

 

Japans problems were not caused by the construction. Funding construction allows them to show they are doing something. But in a society that has become pain-averse, it also allows them to ignore fixing the real corporate and banking problems. Construction spending has become a sort of 'third rail;' they no longer need it, it doesn't stimulate consumer spending as intended, but any pull-back meets harsh resistence.

[olivier in france]

No - and that's my point. I am in favor of rebuilding infrastructure, carefully planned out. It is IMO one of the competative economic advantages that the US has and must be maintained.

 

But rebuild what we need, because we need it, not because it creates jobs. I am against hijacking the cause to be sold as a palliative for our economic woes. Once you go down that path you begin to ignore real economic issues and focus on 'government contracts for the district.' Before you know it you're spending a good portion of the GDP paving and repaving the beltway in an endless loop, and making alot of construction unions happy. It is the kind of thinking that say's natural disasters are good for the economy because of all the jobs they create.

 

It also reminds me of India; the pressure is so create to create jobs that they pay millions of people to walk around the streets in the morning with a branch, sweeping dust; and companies are forced to hire people that do nothing but serve tea. It is difficult to break out of a cycle of government-funded dependency once it takes root.

 

Japans problems were not caused by the construction. Funding construction allows them to show they are doing something. But in a society that has become pain-averse, it also allows them to ignore fixing the real corporate and banking problems. Construction spending has become a sort of 'third rail;' they no longer need it, it doesn't stimulate consumer spending as intended, but any pull-back meets harsh resistence.

 

 

Good analysis on Japan. But something that is very different in the USA is demography. An important problem Japan has and that the USA has not is that they're an aging country. Culturally and politically they have stayed totally closed to welcome any immigration and without any "new blood" i can not see how they gonna rebound...

[Alaska Darin]

The Democrats are actually planning on doing something Constitutional? What pillar of their social program platform will be cast aside for that to happen? After all, you can't really have everything.

[molson_golden2002]

The Democrats are actually planning on doing something Constitutional? What pillar of their social program platform will be cast aside for that to happen? After all, you can't really have everything.

Especially when you are spending hundreds of billions of dollars nationalizing the economy

[molson_golden2002]

No - and that's my point. I am in favor of rebuilding infrastructure, carefully planned out. It is IMO one of the competative economic advantages that the US has and must be maintained.

 

But rebuild what we need, because we need it, not because it creates jobs. I am against hijacking the cause to be sold as a palliative for our economic woes. Once you go down that path you begin to ignore real economic issues and focus on 'government contracts for the district.' Before you know it you're spending a good portion of the GDP paving and repaving the beltway in an endless loop, and making alot of construction unions happy. It is the kind of thinking that say's natural disasters are good for the economy because of all the jobs they create.

 

It also reminds me of India; the pressure is so create to create jobs that they pay millions of people to walk around the streets in the morning with a branch, sweeping dust; and companies are forced to hire people that do nothing but serve tea. It is difficult to break out of a cycle of government-funded dependency once it takes root.

 

Japans problems were not caused by the construction. Funding construction allows them to show they are doing something. But in a society that has become pain-averse, it also allows them to ignore fixing the real corporate and banking problems. Construction spending has become a sort of 'third rail;' they no longer need it, it doesn't stimulate consumer spending as intended, but any pull-back meets harsh resistence.

 

I was only interested in the issue for in and what it is, building new things, not for jobs, but simply for improving the country. But with credit tightening, the housing market in the dumps and unemployment rising, Congress and the next president might just turn to it for a jobs project.

[finknottle]

I was only interested in the issue for in and what it is, building new things, not for jobs, but simply for improving the country. But with credit tightening, the housing market in the dumps and unemployment rising, Congress and the next president might just turn to it for a jobs project.

 

Not impuning with your motives, simply warning against what I see is a dangerous temptation to politicians.

 

As I said, I myself am in favor of infrastructure rebuilding, particularly the energy and communications infrastructure. Even though the latter is fine, we get 'leap-frogged' technologically by the emerging countries. That's one of the reason the Asian 'small tigers' become so attractive for technology companies. And conversely, one of the things that stem the flood of high-tech jobs from the US to places like India is our reliable energy supply and fast delivery support generally.

[ExiledInIllinois]

There is one thing that surprises ALL europeans the first time they travel in the USA: The sad state of american roads/ railroads/public transportation systems.

 

Tell them to take a "canal holiday" (inland rivers/Great Lakes)... We are sitting on a time bomb in more ways than one. For years we have been putting out the "fires" while the preventative gets passed over.

[ExiledInIllinois]

The Democrats are actually planning on doing something Constitutional? What pillar of their social program platform will be cast aside for that to happen? After all, you can't really have everything.

 

 

The Constitution was ratified in 1787... Does it really cover newer infrastructure?

[Chilly]

The Constitution was ratified in 1787... Does it really cover newer infrastructure?

 

Have you ever read it?

[ExiledInIllinois]

Have you ever read it?

 

Yes. A few things come to mind...

 

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads.

 

This is interesting:

 

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

 

Hmmm. Anyway, I go off on a tangent... Back on track... First off:

 

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

 

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

[olivier in france]

Yes. A few things come to mind...

 

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads.

 

This is interesting:

 

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

 

Hmmm. Anyway, I go off on a tangent... Back on track... First off:

 

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

 

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

 

 

How do you dare?!! One more word and the conservatives of this board are gonna say the US Constitution is socialist BS!!