- #71
FlexGunship
Gold Member
- 426
- 8
WhoWee said:8: University in Indiana studying why young men do not like to wear condoms ($221,355)"[/I]
They got money for that study?! Give me $30 and I'll lecture you on the topic.
WhoWee said:8: University in Indiana studying why young men do not like to wear condoms ($221,355)"[/I]
Oltz said:To tell you the truth I am more worried about our Water, Sewage and Electric lines then the roads. They are equally important and in worse shape and people do not see them everyday. The point is we do not need to borrow more when funding already exists for these projects we just need to use it more wisely.
FlexGunship said:Locally, our power lines seem to be well served by PSNH. I haven't heard of water or sewage problems in my area, but winter wreaks havoc on small roads. So I guess the problems vary from area to area.
WhoWee said:Our local power companies also do a good job. As for water and sewer - the housing boom was accompanied by improvements to the various systems - wasn't it?
Oltz said:For some data about the state of our infrastructure
http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/report-cards"
Check out some of the specific field reports
Oltz said:The problem is most major cities have a sewage system that was desgined for a smaller population and built to last ~75 years and are over capacity and over age limits. For instance a bunch of pipes in the Pittsburgh area are over 100 years old and could fail at any time. In all areas things need worked on and it is location specific as to what the "major" issue is.
WhoWee said:Energy needs $10 Billion LESS than parks and recreation?
mheslep said:If Pittsburgh needs a new sewer system why doesn't Pittsburgh pay to put one in?
mheslep said:If Pittsburgh needs a new sewer system why doesn't Pittsburgh pay to put one in?
And a community of 4000 does not need much of a water works.WhoWee said:A community of 4,000 with 2,000 retirees, 1,000 Section 8 tenants, and 1,000 (250-500 working) people - have difficulty maintaining a water works.
Cost more than where? New York city? San Francisco? I don't think so.WhoWee said:The City of Pittsburgh has unique challenges as per geography - costs more to do everything.
mheslep said:And a community of 4000 does not need much of a water works.
mheslep said:Cost more than where? New York city? San Francisco? I don't think so.
mheslep said:Cost more than where? New York city? San Francisco? I don't think so.
And have tidal water flows and hydraulic water tables to deal with and an extremely high land values, labor costs, etc.Oltz said:New york is mostly flat and has port access San Fran also has port access as well as a roadsystem that was designed by an engineer as the city expanded.
mheslep said:And have tidal water flows and hydraulic water tables to deal with and an extremely high land values, labor costs, etc.
Agreed.Oltz said:...problems. Regardless infrastructuire spending is important but it should not be debt spending and perferabbly not federal funding at all.
mheslep said:Agreed.
http://www.americanfuture.net/tag/european-central-bank/" New rules taking effect in the course of the decade will force banks to set aside at least minimal sums to cover the risk of government bonds. The so-called Basel III banking rules approved by the G-20 last year would require banks to hold capital reserves equal to at least 3 percent of all their holdings, regardless of the perceived risk. That rule, intended to prevent banks from taking on too much leverage or gaming banking regulations, would also apply to government bonds. But the rule, known as a leverage ratio, would not take effect until 2018 and could still change."
Greg Bernhardt said:I like the idea of capping debt to 1% under GDP.
The Republicans just tried something like that by blocking the debt limit increase for awhile. The Democrat's heads almost exploded.Greg Bernhardt said:I like the idea of capping debt to 1% under GDP.
Office_Shredder said:How did these places originally afford to build this expensive infrastructure that they're no longer capable of maintaining?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57368817/federal-budget-deficit-to-dip-to-$1.1t-cbo-says/A new budget report released Tuesday predicts the government will run a $1.1 trillion deficit in the fiscal year that ends in September, a slight dip from last year but still very high by any measure.
The Congressional Budget Office report also says that annual deficits will remain in the $1 trillion range for the next several years if Bush-era tax cuts slated to expire in December are extended, as commonly assumed.
The CBO study also predicts modest economic growth of 2 percent this year and forecasts that the unemployment rate will remain above 8 percent this year. That is based on an assumption that President Barack Obama will fail to win renewal of payroll tax cuts and jobless benefits by the end of next month.
...
The CBO report shows that the deficit dilemma would largely be solved if the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 — and renewed in 2010 through the end of this year — were allowed to lapse. Under that scenario, the deficit would drop to $585 billion in 2013 and to $220 billion in 2017.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72205.htmlCongressional Budget Office reports another $1 trillion deficit
Gokul43201 said:Latest report from the CBO:http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12699
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57368817/federal-budget-deficit-to-dip-to-$1.1t-cbo-says/
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72205.html