Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    67,823
    Thanks (Given)
    7315
    Thanks (Received)
    34146
    Likes (Given)
    7051
    Likes (Received)
    7758
    Piss Off (Given)
    14
    Piss Off (Received)
    19
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475724

    Default $200B for Infrastructure

    Good idea, bad idea, too much, not enough? I think infrastructure building is what we need of course, and that will also help with jobs in addition - but WTF do I know about costs? LOL

    ---

    Mulvaney: Trump Wants $200B for Infrastructure

    President Donald Trump plans to propose spending about $200 billion in taxpayer dollars on an infrastructure development plan that would leverage private financing, his budget director said -- adding that the plan won’t be ready until this fall.

    “We’re certainly going to spend some money,” Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said Thursday at an event sponsored by the Institute of International Finance. “The president wants a trillion dollars worth of work on the ground and we’re going to give it to him.”

    Trump ran for president in part on a promise to pour money into U.S. roads, airports and other public works, but he has so far disclosed few details about how he’d pay for the improvements, and how much of the money would come from public versus private sources.

    Rest here - http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/trum.../21/id/785562/
    “You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I don't know how anyone who rallied for decreasing the national debt can be behind this. I however think it's a good idea. Jobs will be temp though.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Westchester, New York
    Posts
    67,823
    Thanks (Given)
    7315
    Thanks (Received)
    34146
    Likes (Given)
    7051
    Likes (Received)
    7758
    Piss Off (Given)
    14
    Piss Off (Received)
    19
    Mentioned
    514 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475724

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    I don't know how anyone who rallied for decreasing the national debt can be behind this. I however think it's a good idea. Jobs will be temp though.
    If someone doesn't like an additional like $9 trillion in debt under Obama, or whatever the number... and if someone would like to get that under control, and maybe even reduce it over their term...

    Does that forbid them from spending altogether? Even on things we need like infrastructure? Money will ALWAYS be spent on some things, and cut on others.
    “You know the world is going crazy when the best rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy, the tallest guy in the NBA is Chinese, the Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is accusing the U.S. of arrogance, Germany doesn't want to go to war, and the three most powerful men in America are named "Bush", "Dick", and "Colin." Need I say more?” - Chris Rock

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimnyc View Post
    If someone doesn't like an additional like $9 trillion in debt under Obama, or whatever the number... and if someone would like to get that under control, and maybe even reduce it over their term...

    Does that forbid them from spending altogether? Even on things we need like infrastructure? Money will ALWAYS be spent on some things, and cut on others.
    "Needs" are always debatable. I would say PBS is a need and it's only $445M/yr.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    12,767
    Thanks (Given)
    7712
    Thanks (Received)
    7683
    Likes (Given)
    817
    Likes (Received)
    2823
    Piss Off (Given)
    8
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    42 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19919858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimnyc View Post
    Good idea, bad idea, too much, not enough? I think infrastructure building is what we need of course, and that will also help with jobs in addition - but WTF do I know about costs? LOL

    ---

    Mulvaney: Trump Wants $200B for Infrastructure

    President Donald Trump plans to propose spending about $200 billion in taxpayer dollars on an infrastructure development plan that would leverage private financing, his budget director said -- adding that the plan won’t be ready until this fall.

    “We’re certainly going to spend some money,” Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said Thursday at an event sponsored by the Institute of International Finance. “The president wants a trillion dollars worth of work on the ground and we’re going to give it to him.”

    Trump ran for president in part on a promise to pour money into U.S. roads, airports and other public works, but he has so far disclosed few details about how he’d pay for the improvements, and how much of the money would come from public versus private sources.

    Rest here - http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/trum.../21/id/785562/
    Infrastructure doesn't line up with conservative principles. But trump isn't conservative or liberal. He's trump.

  6. Thanks Kathianne thanked this post
  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    47,505
    Thanks (Given)
    23714
    Thanks (Received)
    17273
    Likes (Given)
    9550
    Likes (Received)
    6006
    Piss Off (Given)
    85
    Piss Off (Received)
    10
    Mentioned
    204 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475521

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Black Diamond View Post
    Infrastructure doesn't line up with conservative principles. But trump isn't conservative or liberal. He's trump.
    Most infrastructure work is intrastate and the states/counties/municipalities should do those. They can use a referendum, they can create tolls where applicable, perhaps the fed can be used for loans, but not my first choice.

    The real threat faced by 'infrastructure' are the grids and water supplies that serve multiple states. While much of these are under corporate control, they are interdependent and vulnerable to terror attacks. THAT is where I'd like to see some upgrades and hardening. It's not glamourous, but it's necessary and like the phone system of the 20's, 30's, something that is perhaps even more important to the government doing what it's supposed to, protect its citizens, then our the jobs the states should be doing. We don't need the country to pay for Jerry Brown's rail wet dream.


    "The government is a child that has found their parents credit card, and spends knowing that they never have to reconcile the bill with their own money"-Shannon Churchill


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums