Thursday, August 02, 2007
Bridges Or Iraq?
U.S. taxpayers have paid more than $600 billion to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which includes tens of billions of dollars to rebuild bridges, roads and other infrastructure improvements. NBC News reported tonight that 13% of our nation's bridges are "structurally deficient." The cost for making all those bridges safe? $65 billion. Looks like a bargain to me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
3 days of the cost of the War on Iraq would totally cover all property taxes in Marion County this year.
The war is paid for by ALL American taxpayers, not just the people from Indiana. Typical Wilson to expect others to pay for the mess his Dems made.
stick to the topic, people
Cost to repair bridges. Cost to fight war.
Good point AI
Well it isn't JUST the bridges! The WHOLE infastructure is falling apart and the number is in the TRILLIONS.
The U.S. debt has increased $3.1 trillion since G. W. Bush took office. The Congressional Research Service has estimated the total cost of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to be one trillion dollars so far...
3 days of the cost of the War on Iraq would totally cover all property taxes in Marion County this year.
And 1 "dirty bomb" set off by a terrorist would make Marion County un-inhabital for the next 500 years!
We should be taking care of our own first.
We started something in Iraq that we need to finish. More trops and one last "shock and awe" bombing campaign. Then bring our men and women home to rebuild our own infrastructure.
Iraq War vs. dirty bombs? Where is the connection?
The point here is that our own infrastructure is in sad shape while we spend unfathomable sums of money to destroy and then rebuild that of another country.
No "shock and awe" campaign is going to make a difference. You have a nation of people who are choosing Islamic extremism over democratic rule. They don't like us. They don't appreciate anything we've done over there. And they don't want us there. We're paying $78 a barrel for their oil for what? Getting rid of Saddam was one thing, but we've now created another extremist Islamic country which his hell-bent on bringing doom to the U.S. Who benefits from this war other than Halliburton and the other defense contractors bleeding our nation of its collective wealth and transferring it to nations who want to do us in. It makes no sense to me.
If it is such a great "deal", why not expect the state to sign up for it? If Minnesotans aren't prepared to pay to keep their own bridges safe, why should anyone else be willing to pay?
Let's not forget, INDOT took a lot of flak for closing the 96th St. bridge after it was hit by that truck and for doing emergency repairs on Westfield Blvd. Nobody's complaining now I notice. INDOT deserves some kudos for being aggressive here.
Also don't forget, all that money we pump into federal boondoggles other than Iraq like the National Endowment for the Arts and PBS could have been going into bridge repairs too. Instead of replacing that bridge in Minnesota, we were funding Piss Christ.
That's an excellent point. I think it's pretty safe to say the #1 responsiblity of the government should be the safety of the citizenry. While I think it should also be incumbent upon everybody to do their part, um, yeah...
Anyway, maybe if they cut some pork out of the budget they'd be able to provide for basic civil services such as road/bridge repairs. I think it's a very good point about the war taking up more money than they had probably initially estimated, but I don't think that's the only part of the problem.
The same civil engineers' report indicated that over 1,000 damns and dikes are similarly unsafe. The report is over 18 months old.
I read the report yesterday online. It doens't sound like a report meant solely to schill for engineering business. This is serious people examining a very serious topic.
It's scary.
"3 days of the cost of the War on Iraq would totally cover all property taxes in Marion County this year.
And 1 "dirty bomb" set off by a terrorist would make Marion County un-inhabital for the next 500 years! "
Yeah.....# of people killed by a falling bridge: ~30. Number of people killed by a dirty bomb in the world, let alone marion county: ZERO. Let's keep our priorities straight.
"Also don't forget, all that money we pump into federal boondoggles ... like the National Endowment for the Arts and PBS could have been going into bridge repairs too."
He shoots! He scores!
"Yeah.....# of people killed by a falling bridge: ~30. Number of people killed by a dirty bomb in the world, let alone marion county: ZERO. Let's keep our priorities straight."
Number of people killed in falling skyscrapers: ~3000. Your point?
I got with Hailstone on this one. Could you imagine that happening in Indianapolis? Or anywhere? The preventive costs far outweigh the potential ramifications of something like that happening here, even above and beyond the lives that would be saved.
I would say thousands die initially and thousands more from exposure, the Dow would probably drop 20 to 30% at least in one day, given that rebuilding would be impossible, I would say the economic impact would be in the quadrillions.
Lives are lost in Minneapolis and we should do everything we can to keep this from happening again. Minneapolis will rebuild and the lives lost will be remembered. However, the effect of a dirty bomb going off in a major American city doesn't draw comparison.
And the War in Iraq is doing exactly what to stop Osama bin Laden in Pakistan from plotting and planning a dirty bomb?
Hmmm. Now he's parroting Barrack Obama's latest talkign points. Best check with Julia...she's not endorsed him.
In answer to the question posed by your ehadline: Bridges.
And levees, dikes, underground infrastructure, etc.
Hands down.
""Yeah.....# of people killed by a falling bridge: ~30. Number of people killed by a dirty bomb in the world, let alone marion county: ZERO. Let's keep our priorities straight."
Number of people killed in falling skyscrapers: ~3000. Your point? "
YAWN....you made it for me....
Post a Comment