In a previous post, I mentioned that the federal government's main #1 purpose is national defense (foreign and domestic). Afterwards...I mentioned that the feds SHOULD be focusing on infrastructure. Case in point was the Eisenhower Interstate BILL that helped our nation's INFRASTRUCTURE. It was successful legislation that helped the country do business better and faster than traveling down Route 66. Now, with the disaster in Minnesota, everybody is now looking at our bridges, roads, dams, etc. With all of the taxes we PAY in gasoline taxes (fed, state AND county) along with all of the tolls and taxes collected...the question I have is: WHERE and HOW is all this money being spent? [And many people want to have the federal government controlling socialized medicine??] Like the great job the feds are currently do with our infrastructure, right??
Actually, Midas, supporting a federal government roll in building infrastructure is a pretty liberal belief for a self-proclaimed conservative such as yourself.
No...quite the opposite. Infrastructure such as roads, bridges, dams, rail, airports, etc., have all paid off handsomely. Again, the interstate highway bill that Eisenhower signed during the 50's paid massive dividends with more commerce resulting in more tax revenues...hence the payoff. Look at the Hoover Dam or the T.W.A. that were completed during the Great Depression. Those two projects brought inexpensive electricity to the citizens. And those citizens became more productive and guess what? More income taxes collected. The federal government should help promote the improvement of our nation's infrastruture because EVERYBODY wins. Unless you think we should have a cross country road like Route 66 and nothing more.
Actually, infrastructure as a role of the Federal Government is basically a 20th century innovation - and a Great Depression one for the most part. Until then, it was viewed as the proper role of the state governments, and still is, in many ways. Look who does the actual work on interstates - the state highway authorities. The Confederate Constitution even had a clause forbidding the national government in Richmond from offering support for infrastructure improvement.
Can you cite the clause in the Constitution that gives the Federal Government the power to build infrastructure? Projects like the interstate highway system, Hoover Dam and TWA were some of the most liberal projects of government ever enacted. I'm not saying they were economically bad, just very very liberal. Perhaps this is you first good defense of liberalism.
In an attempt to answer your question, I looked up and found the following information. I was surprissed at what I found: The Federal tax on each gallon of gasoline or diesel is currently 18.4¢ per gallon. This is in addition to the state gasoline tax which can range all the way from 7.5¢ in Gerogia to 31.9¢ in several states including New York and Penn. The tax was started in 1932 and was to be placed in an account to be used to repair and maintain the nations highways. But in 1956 it all changed and several other areas were added to spend the money on. 2.85¢ of the tax is placed in the Mass Transit Account and used in those states that have Mass Transit. 5¢ is placed in the General Revenue Account to help pay off the Nations cost of Deficit Reduction. All in all here is how your tax is used: 23.5% to General Revenue & Administration to run the program 65.6% to Highways and Bridges 10.9% to Mass Transit The kicker is that the Tax collected has exceeded by far the profit made by the oil companies...read about that here: http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1139.html Is it any wonder our highway system is in the shape it is in.
At least you live out west. In my experience, the roads are considerably better out there. Here in Pennsylvania, the state motto is "Road narrows to one lane - next 100 miles."
You are generally right, as the state in addition to what the federal government puts into repair and upgrading the highways is almost equal to what the feds put into the pot. In some cases the state builds the state highways even better than the federal highways. But where there is no subways and/or other means of mass transit, you have to depend on highways that people will travel upon in safety.
These accidents happen under Republicans because important positions are given as political favors. Look at Katrina.
Let's look at the two states of Minnesota and Louisiana and keep in mind who controls the state spending (demo or repub) and then look into where the highaway funds have been spent over the last several years. Ah ha! on park ways and beautification along the trails and by-ways on either side of the river that had the bridge fall into it. Same goes for LA where the majority of their funds went for something other than bridgs and roads. Look it up, Danr and stop making such foolish posts.
You apparently do not interact with the fed gov't and do not know anyone who does. under Pubs key jobs are given to political appointees, under Dems everything is run in a professional way. That is just a fact.
Excuse while I laught myself sick! What is so professional about back door deals and union bosses making the decisions for the Democtatic elected officials?
Easy to answer this. Lets look at a simple stop sign. They purchase a stop sign from company "A", they then make the purchase of the post to mount it on. Now, since one of my customers actually makes the signs and has about a 3000% markup, we know that the signs are not cheap. Then we get to the point that we can start installing it. That takes 4 trucks and 10 people, (1 to do the work the rest to watch).
I happen to be very close to people who have to interact with the feds every day. Even the conservative Pubs will admit that EVERYTHING works well under the Dems and NOTHING works under the Pubs, it is simply a fact. Ask around and find someone who works with the feds they will confirm my statement. It is the philosophy of the Pubs to destroy government, they are anti-gov't.
I'll bet you are too, as most people on the take are in this catagory. As for the inti-gov statement if you are referring to not wanting to tax everything that moves, and doing away with huge federal payrolls that sit on their tail ends and collect pay......I guess you are right. I'm for getting rid of these leaches along with the would be politicians who come crawling out from under the rocks every four years to run as Democats.
