The devastating collapse of a Minneapolis bridge should raise concerns anew about the nation’s aging infrastructure. A full 26 percent of the nation’s 600,000 bridges — including 22 percent of those in Kansas — were rated "structurally deficient" in a 2006 Department of Transportation study, according to USA Today.
Most aren’t going to fall down tomorrow, but with increased traffic and loads, significant and costly repairs can’t be postponed indefinitely.
"We need more responsible understanding that the infrastructure issue is a crisis today," said one engineer expert. "If we don’t believe it, we just need to start looking around."
Posted by Randy Scholfield
158 Comments
America’s infrastructure is falling down
Gee, it took a bridge to fall to come to this conclusion. Real rocket science here. Hard investigative work that one.
And just as predictable as the news always is. See the three networks last night? Thirty minutes of the bridge is falling. Followed by the hero’s. Followed by glimpses of the people affected. Followed by the finger pointing. Followed by all the other bridges.
What’s next? Surprise me.
On yes, and on a final note.It’s all ultimately President Bush’s fault.
The cost of the Iraq War is currently $200,000 per minute.
Just think of the number of US interstate highway bridges that could be fixed with this money.
Just think about it.
‘Gov. Pawlenty can’t dodge ownership in bridge collapse’http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_kathlyn__070802_gov__pawlenty_can_t_.htm
As this issue blooms into what is sure to become a finger-pointing contest, my thought on this is that while there is much “glamor” to have one’s name associated with a new bridge, a new tunnel, a new highway, any new piece of infrastructure, there’s nothing glamorous about being associated with the necessary but mundane task of proper maintenance of the infrastructure once in place. The cynic in me would label it “I’ll bring home the pork as long as I can get the glory”.
Thirty years of GOP government-bashing and knee-jerk tax cuts are coming home to roost.
If you want a country that works, it costs money. If you don’t, the Republican Party will be happy to privatize access to those items (health care, infrastructure) that used to be part of the common good, and to do away with others altogether (regulation and enforcement) that stand between big capital and big profits.
CF2K
Just when, exactly, did any Democrat come up with funds to FIX this bridge?
When did any report say this bridge was dangerous?”Structurally deficient” does not mean that it is dangerous.
You are a political opportunist! Everything wrong is the Republicans fault, every good thing is the result of Democrats.
Predictable and boring!—–By the way;My brother, Kevin, lives in MN. He sells manufacturing software programs, and only by a series of events was he NOT on the bridge at the time of the collapse.
VTYou are right.We have the “Senator Byrd” Highway, Park, fountain, visitor center, training center ect, in the Appalachia mountains. One of the poorest areas of the country, but Byrd “brings home the bacon” as long has he gets to put HIS name on it.Oh, and Byrd is a Democrat.Can’t recall Senator Byrd ever bringing up any measures concerning MAINTENENCE!
“[Republican Minnesota Governor] Pawlenty twice vetoed a bi-partisan bill to increase the gas tax to pay for the state’s transportation infrastructure needs and took no steps to heed numerous warnings. Failure.
“I’d stand with President Bush if his approval rating was 2 percent. I won’t abandon my leader just because times are tough.” Gov. Tim Pawlenty, October 20, 2005“
=========
Econ,
How many Kansas interstate bridges have collapsed during the Sebelius administration?
I drive all over this state on a regular basis (you may notice I don’t post for a few days at a time; that usually means I’m on the road). Kansas has _fantastic_ highways and roads - some of the best I’ve ever driven on. Why? Because our government pays to keep them in good repair.
What do Republican governors do? If Minnesota is any example, they spend their time kissing up to Bush instead of maintaining their infrastructure.
I disagree on “Who is not funding” the infrastructure issue. This is BOTH Democrats and Republicans, nay, yet POLITICO in totality.
Whomever is in power wants their “name in lights” with a “successful” project. Look at what goes on in Washington DC, naming Post Offices?
The truth is that this is LOCAL and STATE influence. The local politicians want NEW MALLS, they want A RED LOBSTER and 29 damn places around town to buy that same shoe or the same “tickle Me Elmo”.
Our infrastructure is only “updated” or “Built” when there is a developer involved. IF there is no developer there is usually no expenditure. Look at Lawrence, Manhattan, Salina, Wichita. Go and look at the curbs around town and potholes. You see all the hell we raise about a “pet project” but say nothing about the “sewer line replacement and maintenance” project. Not a big vote getter there, but one of the most necessary.
We as “consumers” of the political parties tripe and BS, end up funding infrastructure that makes certian politically connected developer, and that worship of that situation of BOTH POLITICAL PARTIEs is out of hand.
That is “symbolism over substance”.
These developers need to fund and bulid their own infrastructure so the infrstructure for the public roaqds is not diverted any longer.
That is what occurs, and it occurs at the local level… our cities, and our states. Watch the investigation of the Bridge collaspe in MN, and you will see the local politicians get implicated as pressuring state and city employees to “look the other way”.
Our State and City employment system needs to be upgraded as well to get people that are productive, results oriented, and have a damn backbone.
There is not one politically biased statment in my post here, and it is the answer and the reality.
BTW, if you are gonna lay blame of a bridge collapse or condition at the feet of those currently in Office, you are laying blame at the wrong place.
THis type of infrastructure crisis only occurs out of long term and total ignorance of the need for continuing maintenence on structures and infrastructure.
ALL politicians do not like to spend any money on maintenence.
We pass funding to BUILD the $16 million dollar bridge, but politicians fail to understand and to communicate to the public paying for that $16 million bridge that maintenence necessary will be $20 million more over the lifetime costs.
Something politicians of both parties fail to have these days, long term visin and an understanding of long term needs and maintenence.
This is NOT a Bush or Clinton argument, or even a R and D argument.
BOTH Parties blinked on this one because the “Sewer Infrastructure Maintence Bill” is not a top vot getter nor is it ppolarixzing enough in our current political system to be useful to anyone…..any one but the taxpayer that is!
Tyler,
What part of:
“[Republican Minnesota Governor] Pawlenty twice vetoed a bi-partisan bill to increase the gas tax to pay for the state’s transportation infrastructure needs and took no steps to heed numerous warnings.”
do you not understand?
Tom.careful.. lets take a look at New orleans.. what do Democrats do. they ignore reports for the last 30 years that the levys would fail.. better pick a better example
also you post say’s the kansas government pays for the roads, thats false we pay they just send money where it’s needed which is because we have a good DOT to tell them where it’s needed..
BG,
Oh, really? And whose job was the reinforcement of the levys? Would that be…the Army Corps of Engineers? And would that be, a FEDERAL agency?
gee isn’t it the local government to make sure it gets done.. like senators, governors and mayors..
lets see, we knew for 30 years it would not witstand a cat 3 hurricane. Democratic all the around..
good article about how stupid our senate and house members are.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/10/AR2005081000223.html
Tyler in a totally non-partisan way you have hit the nail on the head. I have been trying for 2 years to get the intersection at Harry and Greenwich fixed. It is a suicide trap. City council people have told me that engineers have marked it as very dangerous and moved it to the top of the list in March of 2006. Since then it has been downgraded several times and Greenwich from Central to H96 has been widened. They have added traffic signals for restaurant traffic on 13th between 96 and Greenwich but we can’t get a signal at Lincoln and Greenwich to help aleviate the school traffic from Seltzer. On any school day you will see up to eight buses trying to get out onto Greenwich but unable to because of the Hawker Beechcraft traffic is backed up from Kellog to Harry. This is from 3 to 6 each evening.
It isn’t one party it is both. Big money talks louder than little money.
Tom you are right in most cases about our roads. And our reststops are the cleanest I have seen in the many states I drive in but to give the credit to Sebelius would be misleading. She did help but other govs started the projects going on now as will the projects she starts go on after she leaves.
Do people really not understand what a VETO is? Do people really not understand that the REPUBLICAN MN Gov VETOED highway repairs???
Good grief.
CF2K was partly incorrect: the New Orleans Levee Boards were tasked with maintenance of the levees that were designed and built by the Army Corps of Engineers.
“Investigations after the disaster revealed that the levee and flood wall system was apparently mis-designed by the Army Corps of Engineers, and that the inspections by the board were perfunctory at best. As of December 2005, legal investigations of possible criminal negligence are ongoing.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orleans_Levee_Board
CF2K
The Army Corps of Engineers was taken to court, repeatedly, by leftist green groups, whenever they tried to do any maintenence of the NO levy system.
Also, more than one Levy District was in court receivership, prior to Katrina.—-
TomDid you LOOK at the bill vetoed by the MN Governor? Was any funding for the I35/MS River Bridge IN those particular bills that were vetoed?
This bride WAS receiving Maintence, it was being worked on, at the time of the collapse.
—Where did that money come from?
Econ,
I haven’t read the bills; I don’t live in Minnesota. My quote is coming from published news sources. Also, my understanding is the bridge was being resurfaced, not reconstructed.
Econ 101,
True in part, but not entirely true, either. The ACOE’s own study concluded that their design was fatally flawed. Subsequently, as you say, various groups (environmental, municipal water, levee, and sewage boards) blocked the ACOE’s efforts at shoring up the levees.
“According to the report, the Corps designers failed to anticipate the way that the floodwalls would fail as water climbed high against them: in several breaches, including the one at the 17th Street Canal, the force of the water pushed the floodwall back slightly, opening a gap deep into the earthen levee below that allowed water to course down under high pressure and push the wall aside.
General Strock did not go so far, however, as to apologize on behalf of the Army Corps for the decades of decisions that went into the system. “I really try to stay as unemotional as I can on this,” he said. For engineers, he said, “It’s not about confessions, it was about analytics that led us to conclusions about what occurred.”
So, he said, “It is what it is. Call it a mea culpa, or call it a dry recognition, or admission, or whatever — but we’re not ducking our accountability and responsibility in this.”
Nonetheless, he made it clear that he believed outside influences played a role in the problems of the flood protection system, though that did not absolve the Army Corps. As one example, he cited the Corps’ plans in the 1970’s to put large barriers at the narrow openings between Lake Pontchartrain and the Gulf of Mexico. The Corps backed off from that plan after a court challenge from environmental groups, and then proposed floodgates at the city’s drainage canals — but local officials of the levee boards and sewerage and water boards blocked that plan as well, and so the Corps went with the next fallback plan of building floodwalls in the canals.
“Each time, we backed off,” General Strock said. “Each time we did that, we assumed an increment of risk. I don’t think anybody looked back and said risk, risk and risk adds up to unacceptable levels.”
He added that this was not an attempt to lay blame at the feet of others, because ultimately the Corps has responsibility for what it builds.
“At the end of the day, we have to stand by the decisions,” he said. If the Corps builds floodwalls, those floodwalls have to stand up to the test and the system has offer the intended level of protection. “And we didn’t get there,” he said.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/01/us/01cnd-corps.html?ex=1306814400&en=b9efc87587be0e40&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
According to numerous articles, the issue has been around since the early 1990’s, and it is unlikely that the Rep. Gov. veto would have seen this patch targetted first unless it was highest on the list (with a 50% rating, that is unlikely.
On the levees, they broke when a ship hit them about 17 to 18 hours before Katrina (strong Cat. 2 when it hit N.O.) since the 2 eyes hit further west into MS (BSL/Pass Christian areas). At that point, they could not safely be fixed. Afterwards, they do what levees do, they keep water where it is. I read where some were opened to alleviate the flooding when it was possible after the repairs were done.
As to fingerpointing on the levees, the corruption in NO/LA exceeds that in DC by a huge factor and has for many decades (rivalling the UN in its size). The money that kept getting set aside for levee repairs kept getting confiscated by LA politicians for other uses (that is politicians of both parties).
Tyler is correct, both parties are to blame and until party members grasp this fact, nothing will change. If you think it won’t happen, review the 1860 and 1856 elections as to which two parties were in power before and after.
Tom
The Gov. vetoed a tax increase at a time when the state budget was running a 2 BILLION dollar surplus.
Why raise taxes? Oh, thats what some politicians do best.
Heckler,
How much of that surplus was used to fund bridge repairs?
Most states use gasoline & other designated taxes for highway infrastructure. I’m curious what MN uses.
The ACOE has been known for many years as not the best choice to design or build city stuff; leave them to the military stuff and they are usually great. Phoenix (I think it was Phoenix) used not to flood before the ACOE “fixed” the problem, and now it floods badly.
Tom, it would appear that Minnesota (like many other states) uses the gas tax to fund roads, this taken from the piece you posted from earlier today.
…which begs the question, How much of our Federal fuel taxes, originally intended to pay for transportation infrastructure, actually get spent on tansportation infrastructure?
Answer anyone? (you won’t like the answer)
It’s Bush’s fault.
Vaughn,
Yeah, I know what was in the quote…but there could be other funding mechanisms in Minnesota besides the gasoline taxes. I was trying to give Heckler’s point some benefit of doubt.
Y’all seem pretty upset about one bridge falling down.
Watta y’all gonna do when the Big One hits San Francisco and tens of thousands of people die, and $2 Trillion will be needed to rebuild the burned-up town?
Is ANY political leader today calling for any action to prevent the Great San Francisco Quake Disaster part II?
PS, Just remember, Max told you so!
Typical Dumbass,
If the definition of LIBERAL is safe highways and bridges, then I’m happy to wear the label.
Now run along and stop being a dumbass.
Max,
It’s not “one bridge falling down.” It’s a pattern of neglect of critical infrastructure that puts our way of life at risk.
And regarding SF: They rode out the Loma Prieta quake pretty well. The part of the city that burned was in the Marina District, which was landfill created by debris from the 06 quake. There are bridges all over the SF Bay Area, and the only damage was one section of the cantilevered span, which is currently being replaced in its entirety. FYI, only one person died on that bridge during the 7.1 quake…
Tom
I don’t know what the $2 billion got spent on. But why raise taxes to pay for something when you have a surplus like that?
Hell they are building the Vikings a new stadium. You can’t tell me they don’t have money to keep the roads up. It’s a matter of priority.
Y’all seem pretty upset about one bridge falling down.
Posted by: Max | August 03, 2007 at 02:54 PM
You got that right Max. It’s like the old saying - you can build 100 bridges, but one falls down and suddenly you are the worst bridge builder in the whole wide world.
Can we all over react a little more?
Tom,
Perused the Minnesota DOT site a bit (www.dot.state.mn.us), and didn’t find a concrete (no pun intended) answer to the question of funding of road improvements/maintenance/ repair there. Did find that in 2006 there was an amendment to the state constitution that permits 100% of sales tax revenues from sale of all new and used vehicles (apparently, from something else I read, also includes all sales tax revenues from leasing of vehicles) to be used for transportation; no more than 40% thereof to be used for public transportation; no more than 60% thereof for highway repairs/maintenance/construction. Also noted a one-time General Fund transfer of $100 million, 95% to be devoted to roads. By implication, it appears that previously, the gas/fuel tax was the major, if not the only, source of revenue used by Minnesota for these purposes.
Perhaps Minnesota could have spent the 3.5 BILLION they were given already by Congress in 2004-09
Seems MN was given 3.5 Billion highway money already - 46% increase Was it used for the highways….When this Bush bashing starts…as it already has, here is the true numbers on the last highway bill….MN gets 3.5 billion for 04-09
See MN DOT site
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/newsrels/05/08/10highwaybill.htmlU.S. President George Bush signed a $286.4 billion six-year transportation reauthorization bill Aug. 10, 2005 that covers federal fiscal years 2004-09.
Minnesota state and local governments can expect to receive about $3.5 billion in federal transportation funding through 2009, an increase of about 46 percent (or about $1.1 billion) over the previous six-year bill.
If they desire more all they have to do is raise their taxes in MN. Which should be easy since its a good leftist state. Never seen a tax that couldnt be raised.
Or they could actually use the gas tax money for what it is gathered for rather than putting it into the general fund to be pissed away on some “social justice” feel good program.—–
I wonder how many arenas were built in Minnesota before bridges were repaired?
And how many State Casinos were built in MN instead of fixin bridges?
Here is a nationwide map of Bridge status.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/199403/decrepit-bridges
Yeah this is one of those DUH things. Just like your car…if you don’t change the oil often enough, you’re going to eventually have a dead car. It’s just a matter of time. But with regular maintenance, that car could last forever.
I know nobody wants to make this a dems/republican thing..but who are always the ones asking for budget cuts on everything.
When it comes to what you want worse, usually the DOT is the first to go. It aint just potholes.
BUSH cut the taxes, and whether you like it or not, that put WAY more stress on individual states to try to come up with that money on their own. Remember all the outcry from even Republican Governors who said they couldn’t make up the differences?
Looks like Missouri, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Mississippi need to think about their bridge maintenance huh?
And gee, only one of those is even remotely close to a Democratic state.
Make a list of the 100 bridges in America that need to be “fixed” right away.
Number them from 1 to 100.
No matter who does the list, chances are that #100, or some bridge close to the bottom of the list, will have problems before we get to it.
Priorities are based on probabilities and we just don’t know, for sure, which bridges need to be repaired.—-In MN, it is so cold that many people never even, really, go outside in the winter. Most have attached garages, most have an “engine block heater” or gadget that they place in the engine to keep it warm. Most have parking garages, at work, with underground walkways into work.
What is the stress on steel, in these conditions? How can inspections detect cracked re-bar and cracked steel supports, if those structures are covered by concrete?
Folks, we have very few construction accidents, these days.
How many people died working on the Hoover dam? People used to die, routinely, working on skyscrapers.
Yes, it is progress that we insist on more safety and improve our systems, when we can.
However, it is absurd to think that we can remove all risk from our lives.
Yes, we can make things better.
NO, we can never make things perfect.
The big one to worry about is when St. Louis/ Memphis gets caught by the 500 year earthquake. Very few of their buildings are even remotely earthquake proof, and that fault is semi-active enough to be a big issue.
Also, consider that big hurricanes typically come in twos, about 5 - 10 years apart.
A weak, 2-eyed Cat. 3 hit MS (w/ strong Cat. 2 blasting NOLA). The Gulf Coast (non-Atlantic Side - TX to FL panhandle) has not seen a major ‘cane since Camille until 2 years ago. Camille was a BIG Cat. 5. Had the builders used 1/10 of the recommendations after the storm, Katrina would have been a lot less damaging.
Politicians on both sides chose to ignore the reality and people died. Same with MN.
Consider the stats from many years ago (sometime between Carter or Reagan and Clinton), for every 2 miles of NEW Interstate built, 3 miles of old Interstate needs repaired and isn’t getting it.
Roads aren’t being built to last, look at Wichita where 6 months after being built, they are having to fix them. These people think they will run out of jobs if they make a road to last 40+ years. My hometown has vast stretches of roads that over 40+ years old, and have survived 2 major hurricanes and numerous minor ones.
We can not afford to fix our infrastructure because we are tapped out paying Haliburton to rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure. And, a bang up job they are doing there, they can’t even run their ac in 117 degree weather! That alone would cause a rebellion in the U.S.!
Cut-off the funding for the murdering spree today.
“The Army Corps of Engineers was taken to court, repeatedly, by leftist green groups, whenever they tried to do any maintenence of the NO levy system.
Posted by: Econ101 | August 03, 2007 at 02:19 PM
You’re still pushing LIES, like you did on May 26.http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/05/dont_count_on_f.html#comment-70756324
You should learn the TRUTH, instead of posting false talking points.
‘BLAMING ENVIRONMENTALISTS FOR KATRINA: WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW!’http://www.sierraclub.org/pressroom/releases/pr2005-09-13a.asp“Save Our Wetlands v. Rush - 1977BOTTOM LINE: There was widespread local opposition. This project risked replacing one major threat with another. A Federal Judge demanded that the Army Corps provide more info, it never did, and it abandoned the project years later on its own.
Mississippi River Basin Alliance, et al. v. H. Martin Lancaster — 1996BOTTOM LINE: The project was 100 miles away from flood area and wouldn’t have made any difference with Katrina.”
The biggest single cause for the catastrophic effects of Katrina was the decisions made by the Corps to (a) remove protecting wetlands between New Orleans and the Gulf and to (b) lower the City by several feet.
You can blame the Republican Party. They have neglected America to build new bridges in Iraq. I heard today that the cost to replace or repair ALL the older bridges in the USA would be about $150 billion. That is what we spend in SIX MONTHS in Iraq! Imagine that- using that money to fix things here and put people to work.
Remember when bush fired that economic adviser because he stated the Iraq war would cost 200 bil.! Boy was he ever wrong! I wonder how much ww2 cost in today’s dollars?And these soldiers doing 3 and 4 rotations in Iraq is just disgraceful. If you don’t have the money to pay for an elective war, nor the troop strength to fight it, you should just take a pass.
This is the problem:
“Hell they are building the Vikings a new stadium. You can’t tell me they don’t have money to keep the roads up. It’s a matter of priority.”
AND,
“And how many State Casinos were built in MN instead of fixin bridges?”
THAT IS EXACTLY RIGHT!!!
GOod for those that posted it.
The Politicians (of whatever stripe and flavor you choose) want to point to something like the Wichita “Water Place” and say “I did this for this Town”. THe Water Place spent MTENS of MILLIONS of dollars on something pretty, INSTEAD of spending it on cleaning up the groundwater. We should hav had 30 or so seperate pump and treat stations, recovered the water and sent it into the Public water treatment, not discharged it to the Ark River. Same short sided political thought. The politicians will not do what is need or what is right UNLESS there is a catastrophe! They want a building in their name.
A sewer Project or Bridge Maintenence does not get one that “forever” recognition these mal adjusted “leaders” think they need.
QUIT MAKING THIS a I HATE BUSH thing or an I HATE LIBERALS THING.
There is enough money, look at all the crapola we spend money on for public use.
We need better prioritization of needs LIKE BRIDGES that affect all of us, and WE NEED CIVIL SERVANTS that are PRODUCTIVE!
Only then will we have enough money.
In today’s climate of politicians, AND the climate of the Public Civil Servants we employ and their effectiveness, we can raise taxes to 100% and we would not have enough money!
Kev wrote:
“You can blame the Republican Party. They have neglected America to build new bridges in Iraq. I heard today that the cost to replace or repair ALL the older bridges in the USA would be about $150 billion. That is what we spend in SIX MONTHS in Iraq! Imagine that- using that money to fix things here and put people to work.”
No Kev, the politicians (Dems and Repukes) would find something stupid and unecessary to spend it on. Like they would probably give it to illegal aliens, one thing for sure, no matter the party, there would be no bridges built, no sewers and water systems built and no power grid upgrades built.
They simply will not do what is necessary to do what is needed and necessary for the country.
That is the state of our politics.
Calling each other names here will not solve that point, we all agree this issne is LONG overdue to be addressed.
It is the result of neglect of MANY administrations and MANY congresses controled by both parties, ans STILL IT WAS NOT ADDRESSED.
Calling each other names here will not solve that point
And yet you…”the politicians (Dems and REPUKES) ??
Does anyone really understand the political system?This isn’t a matter of “The Iraq money should be going to….”because the Iraq money wouldn’t be being spent on anything BUT Iraq.When was the last time some kind of funding for infastructure (other than disaster restoration i.e. Katrina) was sent to the floor of the House?Politicians are NEVER going to fix a problem BEFORE it’s a problem.The best you can hope for is less Government. That is all.
Cosmos
So, you blame it on the Corps of Engineers when local, corupt politicians do not spend levee “maintenence” money like they are supposed to?
So, you blame it on the Army Corps of Engineers when YOUR green friends file lawsuits and the ACOE just gives up?
That is the POINT of most lawsuits against government projects: getting the Government to back down!
Then, when the ACOE does what you want, you blame the ACOE for doing what YOUR friends wanted, after disaster strikes?
No Cosmos, it does not work that way in real life.
How convenient Paul likes to blame everyone and everything else but the real culprits for the mess our country is in, including our infrastructure.
When will Paul and his gang learn to question companies like Halliburton that have been on the public dole for years over-charging the military and then giving inferior service?
Why all the billions going to build Iraq’s infrastructure and yet Paul has time only to blame the New Orleans black Democrats for their misdeeds?
Why not apply your wrath to all people who are fleecing the American taxpayers? Why not go after each and every crooked politician - not just those that Paul finds offensive.
Interesting kate shows up within the past few days and already knows econ101 first name. Can we say Fister in disguise?
“So, you blame it on the Army Corps of Engineers when YOUR green friends file lawsuits and the ACOE just gives up?”
Posted by: Econ101 | August 03, 2007 at 07:36 PM
FALSE! Environmental groups had **NOT** filed any lawsuits against the levee system that failed in New Orleans.
Can’t you understand that? NO LAWSUITS.
And the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ITSELF admitted that the levees that failed had DESIGN FLAWS, such as the “I” walls.Another flooding factor was the Mississippi River Gulf Outlet.
Back up your opinions with FACTS, instead of LIES.
“Interesting kate shows up within the past few days and already knows econ101 first name.”
Posted by: the many-named Republican | August 03, 2007 at 07:59 PM
So “lurking” is prohibited on the WE Blog? Only posters can read the archive threads?
I know Ben’s first name.
Not real sure who anyone else is, not even Kev, who went to East High with me!
Cosmos,
You are playing word games.There were lawsuits against the Army Corps of Engineers.Who filed the suits?Just because YOUR name was not listed as a Plaintiff does not mean your side of the argument was not involved!
And the levee boards are still not spending the money right, they just spent $2.4 million on a FOUNTAIN!http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9342186
And there were some failures by the ACOE, but corruption by local officials played a HUGE role:http://www.saveourwetlands.org/corruption.html
And, Cosmos, your green buddies are threatening MORE lawsuits now, to stop MORE life saving levees:http://www.saveourwetlands.org/sowlplan2sueleaky.html
This is how it works, you threaten a lawsuit, never file the lawsuit, the ACOE backs down, then you CLAIM you never filed suit!
And Cosmos —
“Save the Wetlands” DID file suit, prior to Katrina!
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=8283
Cosmos Dictionary:
LIAR: Anyone who disagrees with Cosmos!
Econ101,
You need the flooding to save the wetlands. The wetlands reduce the damage of storms like Katrina. That movie at the cosmosphere made a valid point; the same point was made in the media pre-Katrina landfall.
Best solution would be to follow the advice from much of that movie, but go at least one step further. Not rebuild the flood prone areas of the city. Let nature have back those areas. Do the flood buy out like was done after the 1993 flood.
Sierra Club I thought used to be a friendly organization.
They are full of legal hounds itching to sue anything government.
” “Save the Wetlands” DID file suit, prior to Katrina!”Posted by: ECON101 | August 03, 2007 at 10:36 PM
That was in * 1977 *, almost THREE DECADES earlier — I posted that upthread, at 4:31 PM
‘BLAMING ENVIRONMENTALISTS FOR KATRINA: WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW!’http://www.sierraclub.org/pressroom/releases/pr2005-09-13a.asp“Save Our Wetlands v. Rush - 1977BOTTOM LINE: There was widespread local opposition. This project risked replacing one major threat with another. A Federal Judge demanded that the Army Corps provide more info, it never did, and it abandoned the project years later on its own. ”
And the New Orleans levees failed in 2005 because of BOTH design AND construction flaws.
Now Paul… list the environmental groups lawsuits against the levee system that failed in New Orleans.
Or… since you cannot, just admit that you are a LIAR.
Here’s a recording of a phone call of a 10 year old who was a victim of the bridge collapse:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=207_1186154027
Another victim of Republican governing.
Making more threats, troll? Are you going to beat Cosmos up?
First you were going to stalk Farmgrrl. Then you were going to burglarize my office. Now you’re threatening bodily harm.
And those are just the threats I’ve seen you make. What else is there?
Cosmos?
dont need to punch him, if he is anything like Cosmo Kramer he will just fall down or run into something on his own, like:
A rational, logical argument?
NAH!
and— a lawsuit from 30 years ago would pretty much STILL cause some projects to not be built.
And a levee built 30 years ago, had there been NO lawsuit, might have helped, perhaps?
Yeah Tom let’s make up stuff now.
let’s try to make something out of nothing.
Nice try but no one listens to you anymore Tom, you have sold your soul to the devil to get a cookie out of the jar.
Econ,
Are you defending the troll here? Please tell me you’re not condoning the troll’s threat of violence against another blogger.
Careful econ, Tom will have it escalated to I planned a nuclear attack against him before the night is over.
And if Tom is so convinced that is meaningful, turn me in, I’m sure Brownlee needs a good laugh.
Especially a laugh at someone who takes himself so seriously.
Garrison Keillor once said “Republicans made their peace with hypocrisy long ago.”
That isn’t political, that’s just perceptive.
Unfortunately that hypocrisy has created a “tax the poor, and the middle class, but never the rich” mentallity that led to the bridge collapse in Minneapolis.
Anyone who tries to defend the Republicans against accusations of failure to maintain infrastructure, needs to get some de-brainwashing treatment.
You are deaf and blind to your own detriment
So, then, isn’t it clear, “what’s the matter with Kansas?” Deaf sheep led by blind goats owned by hungry wolves…
While they cut taxes and veto infrastructure funding, they gladly spend 10 billion a month on war and murder and no-bid book-cooking embassy projects from hell, (read the headlines today, another soldier convicted of MURDER in Bush’s big-little “war” and talk of Tillman getting snuffed by not-so-friendly friendly fire, and our taxes paying for Phillipinos to get kidnapped and shanghied by Kuwaiti contractors)
Also, as for the “war”, the old Latin phrase that really works here is “cui bono.”
Lets enumerate the primary beneficiaries…1. Halliburton2. Halliburton3. Halliburtonoh, did I leave out Halliburton?
I think I’m gonna like hanging out here for a while.
Thank you JEP for the “DailyKos” moment. Go put on your Hitlery and Obamama videos now.
“The Army Corps of Engineers was taken to court, repeatedly, by leftist green groups, whenever they tried to do any maintenence of the NO levy system.”Posted by: Econ101 | August 03, 2007 at 02:19 PM
“Typical cosmos, constantly trying to get people to prove negatives so he can call them liars.”Posted by: the many-named Republican | August 03, 2007 at 11:51 PM
I’d say that Paul, aka Econ101, claimed a “positive”.
Republican, aka ‘Kansas’, aka (a long list) will NOW prove Paul’s “positive” and FALSE claim…
Crickets chirping… chirp… chirp, chirp…
“And a levee built 30 years ago, had there been NO lawsuit, might have helped, perhaps?”Posted by: Econ101 | August 04, 2007 at 12:09 AM
It was NOT built, because it was a BAD idea.
Now, AGAIN Paul… list the lawsuits that YOU claimed that the environmental groups filed against the levee system that failed in New Orleans.
Or… since you cannot, just admit that you are a LIAR.
actually cosmos, I could care less about the wetlands in Louisiana.
I was hoping for a massive oil spill there, so they could mound them up in to large dirt piles.
Crickets chirping… chirp… chirp, chirp…
“You are a political opportunist! Everything wrong is the Republicans fault, every good thing is the result of Democrats.”
So simple, huh? Republicans CUT TAXES, and in theprocess neglected infrastructure. And they are proud of it, weren’t you proud of it when Bush gave you back those tax dollars back in 2002?
So which is it, are you proud to be a tax-cutting Republican or are you ashamed of being an infrastructure neglecting Republican?
But to argue now that you (yes YOU) Republicans aren’t responsible, after so many years of blatant, arrogant pride in your habit of cutting tax, just goesw with what Keillor waid about your pact with hypocrisy.
And now when we all point out that obvious link between those tax cuts and this bridge collapsing, we are “political opportunists?”
No, we are noit opportunists, and just that you suggest it means you are hypocrite.
This Minnesota tragedy may have exposed just how nekkid your Emporer and his entourage really are.
But it is really up to you to decide whether you are part of that crew of shameless, delusional streakers… obviously being wrong over and over again, so consistently, suits many of you quite well.
NO I am not defending violence or the threat of violence.
I clearly said that punching wasnt necessary — wow, lighten up!
“Go put on your Hitlery and Obamama videos now.”
Actually, I’m an Edwards supporter.
But any of the Dems is a better choice than what your GOP has to offer. And since I was raised in a very powerful Iowa Republican family, I thin, Nixon-connectedI can speak quite exclusively. I still have the invitation to the Nixon/Agnew in 72 inauguration…
While I think Brownback’s sincere, he’s cklearly misguided, and he’s such a long shot, it looks like you might just have another Bob Dole on your hands.
Romney, the lifelong varmint hunter, Rudy (which wife this week) Giulliani, McCain the political trainwreck, I don’t need to make up silly names for them, their actions speak more loudly than all the sarcasm in the world.
And the Brownback Girl should surely get a laugh from even Republican trolls.
“Baptists for Brownback!”
LOL!!!
How could a savvy, Rove-inspired genius party like yours fall for such a stupid trick?
Or do you have any idea of what I’m talking about…
I doubt it.
“actually cosmos, I could care less about the wetlands in Louisiana.”
Is that a “Pelican Brief” comment?
Bet you don’t get that one, either…
It would be easier to understand JEP if you could put together a coherent statement that lasted more than two phrases before jumping to different topic.
Perhaps your writing style indicates why you admire Edwards…you know the guy who charges $50,000.00 to make speeches on poverty.
NO I am not defending violence or the threat of violence.Posted by: Econ101 | August 04, 2007 at 12:39 AM
Thanks for the clarification, Econ. While you and I disagree on about 90% of everything, I didn’t figure you’d sign on to that kind of behavior.
Pelican Brief - a boring, poorly made movie, but a nice try JEP on obscure association.
Just look at that Tom boy go!
He has added a second string to his victim guitar.
JEPThe “Rich” pay MOST of the taxes in this country.Would you PLEASE get a clue?
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes.guest.html
The top 50% of wage earners are paying over 96% of the income taxes in this country!
“It would be easier to understand JEP if..”
LETS fill in the blanks!
“…you had a brain that wasn’t stuck like an old 45 with a skip in it…”
“..if you knew how to read with an open mind instead of a lifetime of prejudice…”
“I WASN’T SUCH A BUSHBOY…”
Also, Republicans should never use the word “poverty”it just makes the rest of us chuckle.
JEP thinks he’s clever. He hasn’t even reached the minimal standard of loutish clown moves yet.
“The top 50% of wage earners are paying over 96% of the income taxes in this country!”
Since when was the top 50% considered “rich?”
Maybe the top 25%, if even that large a number, might fit your model.But actually, your numbers should embarrass you, you are basically including middle class incomes with executivce incomes, as if they are all the same category.
Just more obfuscation of the inequality.
Riddle me this; what percentage of their income does that top 50% income “bracket” pay, for retail, food and local sales taxes?
For a lower-middle class or poor person, that percentage is so much higher, it represents a sham…
And, considering that the wealthy class tends to own our government, especially in the Republican Party, that suggest to me the poor are suffering taxation without representation.
“He hasn’t even reached the minimal standard of loutish clown moves yet.”
Well, I’ve certainly got a good coach for that problem, huh (R.)
PS Con 101;
Your reference to Rush Limbaugh as some sort of authority, after the way he won Missouri for Claire McKaskill, brings joy to my heart.
The thought that anyone would EVER again respect the deluded, doped-up opinions of that Cuban cigar smoker just proves some people can be wrong FOREVER and never climb out of it.
Pride is a very dangerous sin.
The top 1% of taxpayers now pay about 30.5% of the income tax in this country.
Tax RATE cuts actually INCREASE tax revenues.
Tax RATE cuts actually INCREASE the percentage of total taxes paid by the “rich!”
Think of it this way:
When a deparment store has a “sale” does the revenue go up or down?
If you inherited a business, would you inrease prices to increase revenues? YOU probably would. — I would then show up at your “liquidation” sale, as you went OUT of business!
Taxes are a COST. Raising prices (taxes) on profit reduces profit. Raising prices on labor reduces labor. Raising prices on income reduces income.
Another word for “tax” is “strain’.
Any tax is a strain on the economy.
Reduce that stain, and the economy will grow!
Of course, there is an equilibrium somewhere, an efficient place where the GREATEST public good can be achieved.
NO, I don’t claim to know exactly where that point is, but Arthur Laffer currently supports a “flat tax” which would indicate that the inventer of the Laffer Curve thinks we arent low enough, in rates, just yet.
Liberals, however, kinda like poverty and unemployment, because those things tend to empower the government.
What is best for government is not always what is best for the people.
Reasonable people should try to figure out the best tax structure to maximize employment, maximize economic growth, and maximize revenue. It is entirely possible to do all three things at once!
It is called “supply side economics.”
“Only full employment can balance the budget, and tax cuts will pave the way to full employment!” JFK
Ah, JEP is arguing the “pro rata” apportionment argument with econ101.
A demonstration of what happens when rookies try to decipher complex economics.
“Riddle me this”
Someone watches too much TV to utilize that phrase.
JEP is definetely a scroll over.
Boring, not an original thought shown and for the most part an “empty hook” trying to catch a fish.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_19_56/ai_n13673328?lstpn=article_results&lstpc=search&lstpr=external&lstprs=other&lstwid=1&lstwn=search_results&lstwp=body_middle
1% pays over 30% of income taxes—-JEP
Can you stay on point, please? You just shotgun blast anti-Bush, anti Republican talking points, then when you are challenged you evade the topic that YOU brought up!
Property tax and sales tax are STATE issues. YOU brought up the income tax topic!
And JEP
Limbaugh NEVER makes anything up. He provided his sources. They werent, exactly, “right wing” — he was quoting the NEW YORK TIMES, if you would bother to read!
Limbaugh was more a symptom of our cultural division, than he was a progenitor of it. It was like a chicken-egg conundrum, Rush was more an opportunist than he was a mover and shaker, and much more than any of us who point out the bridge failure as a Republican-created tax-cut.
Rush was never original, he took his talking points from others, particularly from Rove and just juiced them up with his personal brand of vitriole, which was his only real tool.
Logic and reason were never part of his influence, he depended on blind ignorance and negativism for his success. Your reference to Rush’s mysterious economic position just proves how much he depends on spin, rather than fact, to keep all you dittoheads following in lemming compliance.
Not a very worthy resume, in the history of journalism. None of you can even name a single worthwhile program he has honestly supported, his entire schtick is hate.
And the copycats like O’Rielly, Hannity, Coulter, Drudge, Malkin, Borscht, and now Beck The Feckless, all subscribe to the same hatefulness to keep their ratings up.
Rush is not powerful, but hatefulness is, so he has co-opted it for his identity. He’s a big wimpy chickenhawk who hides behind his microphone. Rush would wet his trousers if he ever had to face someone like John Edwards or Chris Dodd in a serious debate.
Rush was just willing to personify that evil hatefulness, more than any other hack in the media, so now people attribute his success to some quality of character on his part, and it was his very lack of any quality of character that gave him his delusions in the first place. And his oxycontin addiction and McNab bigotry only proved his ultimate hypocrisy.
Now that he’s contributed so mightily to the Democrats’ majority in Congress, no one should be bragging about his influence creds. Even the smart R’s turn red when you mention Rush’s name anymore. Like Beck, he’s a joke, to anyone with an IQ over 80.
JEP is all yours econ101, he’s putting me to sleep with his incoherent blithering.
“JEP is definetely a scroll over.”
Wanna make a bet on that?
“A demonstration of what happens when rookies try to decipher complex economics.”
Oh, you Republicans do so own the economy!!!
My how you have succeeded.
Curious, isn’t it, despite its recent problems, the stock market has grown more since the Democrats won back the gavels in November than it did the whole time the Republicans held the power.
But that’s just Clinton’s fault, huh?
That “blithering”has been in more than one Congressional candidate’s speech, it is one of the things I “do”.
So get your old English teachers to read it for you, guys, they can help you understand if it is too hard to follow.
“he’s putting me to sleep…”
Actually, I’d bet your adrenalin is up pretty good, and you will toss and turn because, as often happens to R’s who actually read what I write, my “blithering” will eat away at you, because it is logical and reasoned, not based on prejudice or dogma or someone else’s talking points (dittoheads).
Especially that question, “are you proud you are a Republican tax cutter or are you ashamed you are a Republican infrastructure neglecter?”
I would guess, as always, pride, not humility will win out.
Sleep on it “R”, and may you have pleasant dreams of elysian fields. Where bridges never collapse.
“Curious, isn’t it, despite its recent problems, the stock market has grown more since the Democrats won back the gavels in November than it did the whole time the Republicans held the power.”
Econ, you disappoint me, I expected some serious economiclessons in response to that one, a rookie like me needs some learnin’ from someone who’s a REAL expert!
“Limbaugh NEVER makes anything up.”
Poor soul, get some help. I’ll be posting this comment on a few other blogs, people need a good laugh right now.
so Rush was speaking “truth” about Michael J. Fox?
I wonder which expert gave Rush all that medical information about Fox’s illness?
OK, I’ll stop…
Nite all, see you again tomorrow.
“It is called “supply side economics.”
Lets see, what was Bush 1’s name for that economic model for book-cooker’s?
VOODOO economics!
Nothing has changed.
U.S. bridges are falling down, falling down, falling down. My fair Bush.
Calling each other names here will not solve that point
And yet you…”the politicians (Dems and REPUKES) ??
Talk about America’s Infrastructure falling down:
Over the 75-year period, the Trust Funds would require additional revenue equivalent to $4.7 trillion in today’s dollars to pay all scheduled benefits. This unfunded obligation is about $100 billion higher than the amount estimated last year.
http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/pr/trustee07-pr.htm
I think I’m gonna like hanging out here for a while.
Posted by: JEP | August 04, 2007 at 12:14 AM
JEP, pull up a chair and make yourself at home.
Welcome to WE Blog.
“”Structurally deficient” does not mean that it is dangerous.”Posted by: Econ101 | August 03, 2007 at 01:34 PM
hahahahahahahaha!
Welcome to Bizarro republican world.
Yes, welcome JEP. Nothing special about your new name. I like that. Good one.
Hey, doesn’t JEP have to use a Troll #?
Troll2358547, you are not allowed to use your troll number. It is a form of identification. Illegal aliens could replicate your Troll Service Number and make fake ID’s.Worse, dead liberals could utilize your number to search death records and use your number to vote. Incognito troll, or face disciplinary action under the UCMJ(Troll Version).
Troll Control
The cost of the Iraq War is currently $200,000 per minute.
Just think of the number of US interstate highway bridges that could be fixed with this money.
Just think about it.
Posted by: Tom
How much money is spent on so called “mental health” issues?
How much money is spent on welfare, food stamps, Social Security for so called “disabled” persons?
How much money is spent on so called “art”?
ALL OF WHICH IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION AS BEING THE JOB OF GOVERNMENT.
Just think how many interstate bridges that could buy, JUST THINK.
Gee Gene R, do you have to drag in a straw-man everytime someone points out the truth?
Who is to say that these “mental health issues” and the Arts are any less important than you and your kind trying to grab everyone’s money in profit?
This country is based on doing what is right for the common man, not making a profit.
How much money is being spent on “mental health” issues? I don’t know, Gene. Let’s ask the soldiers returning from Iraq with post-traumatic stress disorder how much money is being spent on their care and treatment. Let’s compare that to the way the VA treats veterans, especially those with mental health problems.
How much money is spent on welfare? I think I answered that: $200,000 per minute on corporate welfare. Halliburton, Blackwater, and all the other military “contractors” are the direct beneficiaries of that $200,000 per minute. Where do you _think_ that money goes?
How much money is being spent on food stamps? Let’s ask our brave young men and women on the front lines in Iraq how many of their families are barely surviving on the _crap_ pay they get for putting their lives on the line every minute of every day. Let’s ask them how they feel about their President, who opposes raising their pay a miserly one-half of one percent.
How much money is being spent on Social Security? You mean: How much of MY money in MY Social Security account has been diverted into the general fund, and transferred directly into the pockets of Halliburton? Is that the question you’re asking?
Ah, you raise a good question with “art.” How much money is being spent on the art of spin? How much on the art of stonewalling? How much on the art of daily lying to the American people, the art of unnecessary fearmongering, the art of personal smear? In dollars and cents, probably not much. But the outcome? Priceless.
Gene R–How much money is spent oin “so-called art”?Practically none, thanks to Republican administrations who see no value in it.
How much money is spent on the war in Iraq, Gene?A hell of a lot more than the arts (although I did note that you only said “art,” implying visual art, because that’s an easy target that no one gets, unlike music, theater, poetry, and dance).
How much money for the war in Iraq, again?
They will defend their emperor to their last breath.
Doesn’t that sound like Hitler and the 3rd Reich?
Tom
There is no money in your social security account.
There is no money in any social security account.
The “Social Security Trust Fund” does not increase or decrease the taxpayer liability for future SS obligations.
The “Social Security Trust Fund” is an actuarial and accounging fiction.
Since that “Trust Fund” invests in US Treasury Bonds, it does not really exist, except on paper.
When you buy a Treasury Bond or a US Savings Bond, for that matter, every dime of that bond purchase goes to the General Fund.
When the Social Security Administration “BUYS” a Treasury Bond, where does the “money” go? Same place, to the General Fund!
The primary purpose of the Social Security Trust Fund is to transfer funds from Social Security to the General Fund, when Social Security funds are in “surplus”.
This means that Social Security is no more than a Flat Tax, on the first $94,200 of earnings. The tax is not levied on anything but employment income.
However, before you call this tax “regressive” understand that the “poor” get most, or all, of it back in the form of the “earned income credit” while working.
Also understand that the “rich” or those making more than $25,000 single or $32,000 married will have to pay taxes on 50% to 85% of their Social Security income.
Soon enough, 100% of Social Security income will probably be taxable. The public barely protested when it became partially taxable, so why won’t Congress go all the way?
Anyway, there is no real money in “your account”.
There is, instead, an actuarial promise, by the government, that Social Security will pay you back at least some of your money if you live long enough.
There is also a good chance that Congress and the IRS will take that Social Security check away from you in the form of higher taxes on the benefit itself.—-By the way, Halliburton was, at one time, controlled by the LBJ family. Also, Carter and Clinton used Halliburton.
By the way, I did not index for inflation, used old tax charts but the process is the same.
Econ,
Please don’t take my previous post out of context. Raston was implying that SS was some sort of “gift” to which the recipients aren’t entitled, even though we all pay for it. Whatever surplus funds there are in the system _have_ been diverted into the general fund, and are being used to pay for this war while critical infrastructure in this nation crumbles.
By the way, LBJ’s dragging us deep into Vietnam is one of the reasons I registered as a Republican many years ago. But for the life of me, I can’t recall Carter or Clinton dragging this nation into a quagmire on the other side of the planet for no damned good reason.
I also don’t recall them picking Halliburton’s President to be their Vice Presidents. And how many multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts were awarded to war profiteers during the Clinton or Carter administrations? Or during the Reagan/daddy Bush years?
Paul defends Halliburton and even twists it into somehow a Democrat-controlled company. Paul will go to any lengths to spin for Bush and gang. My problem is not with what Halliburton’s services are to be. My problem with Halliburton is that they have been caught over-charging and there is that matter of unaccounted 1.2 billion dollars that no one seems to know where that went?? This does not bother any of you Republicans? This does not in any way cause you any concern that 1.2 billion dollars was paid to a company and we have no record as to why that money was paid to Halliburton?
1.2 billion dollars would go a long way to fixing our own infrastructure but yet Bush and his fellow Republicans are content with paying this amount to a company who is already over-charging us. This makes absolutely no sense.
Doe
I can’t recall Carter or Clinton dragging this nation into a quagmire on the other side of the planet for no damned good reason.
Bosnia was a good reason. Somolia was a good reason?
“Lest we forget” has already forgotten that GHW Bush is who got the US _into_ Somalia.
“Lest we forget,” tell us, how many US troops died in Bosnia?
How many have needlessly died in Iraq?
Tom
The POLICY of Bill Clinton was “regime change” in Iraq. Clinton was also at war with Iraq.
How do you suppose we could have ended the war with Iraq, without removing Saddam?
BILL CLINTON!! BILL CLINTON!!
Who instituted the “no fly zone” policy?
GHW Bush.
And what’s this “Clinton was at war” with Iraq?
Technically, we’re not even at war with Iraq _now._ There’s never been a declaration of war, just an “authorization to use force.” An authorization that has, in a narrow reading, been fulfilled. An authorization, in a broad reading that has been abused.
Is BILL CLINTON!! BILL CLINTON!! all you’ve got?
C’mon, Econ.
BlackHawk Down, good movie, ever see it Tom?
Wow, the Dems just can’t concentrate on the topic header.
They are all over the place.
By the way,I have my disagreements with former Republican Governor Mike Hayden, but the man DID make highway construction and maintenence a primary goal of his administration.
Also, do you remember how the Interstate Highway System started?
President Eisenhower, fresh from his WWII experience, realized how much trouble the United States had in moving troops and equipment across the country, quickly. Much of our defense logistics were through rail, and barge, not roads.
Therefore, the “National Defense Highway System” — the brainchild of Republican President Eisenhower!
We have great highways BECAUSE of Republicans and BECAUSE of National Defense needs!
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/ndhs.htm
Republican
I just tied the topics together.
How did you like that?
Econ,
Eisenhower pushed the interstate system through. He kept NASA a civilian agency, even though he was pressured to turn it over to the military. He sent the 101st Airborne into Alabama to enforce civil rights and desegregation. At the end of his administration, he warned us all about the “military/industrial complex.”
You know. The one that is getting paid $200,000 a minute in no-bid contracts, while Eisenhower’s greatest achievements crumble into ruin.
If modern “Republicans” had the intelligence and wisdom Eisenhower had, I probably would still _be_ a Republican.
But modern “Republicans” don’t have the intelligence God gave a turnip.
Tom
The Veterans Administration says that those who served in the military from 9/2/1990 to PRESENT qualify for “Wartime” service.
Lebanon Occupation is not counted.Cuban Missle Crisis is not counted. Bay of Pigs, Grenada, Panama, Central America and Libya also do not count.
Iraq COUNTS!——However, “Afganistan, Kossovo, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti and Rwanda DO qualify (Because Congress hasn’t yet ened the Gulf, Bosnia, Kossovo, Afghanistan, Terrorist or Iraq Wartime periods.)——-This is lifted from a VA document. It is a couple of years old.
VA benefits are based on Congressional Action, and Congress does NOT agree with you!
ended
Econ,
Calling something “wartime” doesn’t mean a war has been, as required by the Constitution, declared. No matter how much Bush tries to say we’re “at war,” Congress has _never_ declared it. If you can find the official declaration, I’d be happy to read it.
“Only full employment can balance the budget, and tax cuts will pave the way to full employment!” JFK
Posted by: Econ101 | August 04, 2007 at 01:05 AM
The marginal tax rate was 91% (NINETY-ONE %!) when Kennedy said that. He cut it to 70%.
‘JUST LIKE AL [GORE] SAID! Russert pushed them RNC points. Somebody go wake Fred Barnes!’http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh120202.shtml
And I’m still waiting re the levee lawsuits. Crickets chirping…
Where should the tax rates be Cosmos?
Top 1%?Top 2-5%?Top 6-25%?Top 26-50%?Top 51-75%?Top 76-100%?
Econ101, very good post above on Social Security, right on the money I think.
And if Social Security isn’t part of American Infrastructure…it is a critical part of American life for sure.
I’m amazed at how much of the Social Security debate is about whether there is a problem, instead of debates about solutions.
This same trend of denial is what has gotten the US to this point of Fiscal Crisis, and it appears the trend will continue….
Cosmos,
You keep quoting the top rate, when Supply Sider JFK proposed rate cuts. That top rate did NOT apply to very many people.
Many people who’s rates were lower than the top rate