Do you support Trumps infrastructure improvement position?

[Linux23]

In Trump we trust.

 

[MongGrel]

Is that a Jon Stewart 'believe me' you're referencing there?

 

[K1052]

It's not so much a plan than it is an idea. The GOP is unwilling to appropriate much, if any, money for it so all that leaves is private companies charging fees bolstered by government seed money and likely favorable terms if something goes tits up. Since congress has about 15 other things it really needs to get to this year I'd be shocked if anything was presented before 2018 at the earliest.

 

[fskimospy]

Oh god no, no sane person should support it. It's basically a way to give away public infrastructure to rich people in exchange for them fixing it up.

If he ACTUALLY wanted to invest in infrastructure I'd be all for it but this is yet another scam.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Echo this, but...

Where was this when we had high unemployment and super low interest rates???

But all of a sudden Rs want to spend $1T on infrastructure when we are at nearly full employment and rates are rising?!

How dumb is this planning?

This is when we need to be cutting back and restocking the piggy bank, not making massive spending plans and potentially crowding out private investments. This is not 2010.

Interest rates are rising but they are still extremely low. Infrastructure is an investment that pays off in economic activity over time, taking advantage of the low interest rates is a good idea. This is something that Obama should have done, and I get for a lot of his presidency Congress wouldn't allow it. We aren't at full employ yet, and many of those "employed" are waiting tables or something. Construction work pays well, this would be a benefit to many people.

 

[K1052]

This is something that Obama should have done, and I get for a lot of his presidency Congress wouldn't allow it.

The GOP said no to everything he asked for on infrastructure. Trump will likely get the exact same response when it comes to direct government spending. Private companies won't build anything without a good chance at a sizable return on their investments which will mean fees, lots of them, on supposedly public infrastructure.

 

[brycejones]

Oh god no, no sane person should support it. It's basically a way to give away public infrastructure to rich people in exchange for them fixing it up.

If he ACTUALLY wanted to invest in infrastructure I'd be all for it but this is yet another scam.

Socialize the costs, privatize the profits.

 

[fskimospy]

Interest rates are rising but they are still extremely low. Infrastructure is an investment that pays off in economic activity over time, taking advantage of the low interest rates is a good idea. This is something that Obama should have done, and I get for a lot of his presidency Congress wouldn't allow it. We aren't at full employ yet, and many of those "employed" are waiting tables or something. Construction work pays well, this would be a benefit to many people.

Trump is not looking to actually borrow much money to finance infrastructure. If he were I would support it. Instead his plan is basically to sell off US infrastructure in exchange for improvements. In effect we get a one time boost and then are paying for it forever. It's just selling out regular people and helping the ultra rich, as usual.

 

[Brainonska511]

Trump is not looking to actually borrow much money to finance infrastructure. If he were I would support it. Instead his plan is basically to sell off US infrastructure in exchange for improvements. In effect we get a one time boost and then are paying for it forever. It's just selling out regular people and helping the ultra rich, as usual.

On top of it all, the only projects that would get funding are those that could lead to a return on investment for a private company. Many necessary infrastructure projects would be utterly neglected thanks to a low or no ability to generate a return.

 

[woolfe9998]

I'm for building infrastructure. I could support that initiative. However, in the context of also wanting to raise defense spending and impose a big tax cut, a trillion dollar infrastructure bill is not realistic. For Trump to impose this and not touch SS of Medicare as promised, he'd have to cut everything else down to zero.

 

[mect]

Trump is not looking to actually borrow much money to finance infrastructure. If he were I would support it. Instead his plan is basically to sell off US infrastructure in exchange for improvements. In effect we get a one time boost and then are paying for it forever. It's just selling out regular people and helping the ultra rich, as usual.

Trump has this amazing ability to take a good idea and somehow fuck it up.

 

[BoomerD]

Take that $54 Billion he wants to spend on the military...use THAT as a start for infrastructure improvements. It won't go a LONG way...but it would be a good start.

 

[hal2kilo]

I strongly support infrastructure improvement, but Trump's plan is a scam where government sells off the public highway system to private owners at extremely generous terms. The potential for corruption is more or less certain. But hey, I hope everybody likes toll roads.

Yes, the red flag was when he said "public/private partnerships"

 

[hal2kilo]

I wasn't going to make a list, it should be obvious atm I guess.

But he likes the cheers for his ego, while still promising pie in the sky.

The speech writer did a good job he should get an Oscar, Trump just had to stick to the script.

So you don't believe Pence when he said it was all Trump....neither do I.

 

[1sikbITCH]

Interest rates are rising but they are still extremely low. Infrastructure is an investment that pays off in economic activity over time, taking advantage of the low interest rates is a good idea. This is something that Obama should have done, and I get for a lot of his presidency Congress wouldn't allow it. We aren't at full employ yet, and many of those "employed" are waiting tables or something. Construction work pays well, this would be a benefit to many people.

Waitresses do not want to be construction laborers, and the road and bridge crews do not want people that cannot perform construction tasks like operating jackhammers, digging ditches, or running wheelbarrows full of cement or dirt all day. And I certainly don't want to see most waitresses anywhere near a nail gun. There is always the exception.

At least in this city and I imagine most cities there are currently construction jobs available to men, and there are plenty of unemployed men not applying for those jobs. That's not going to change. What will happen instead is the status quo, meaning the Hispanics and other immigrant workers will continue filling those positions.

At least the roads will be fixed.

 

[echo4747]

I think Trump hinted that a lot of the req'd infrastructure $$ would be obtained from money given out as foreign aid/gifts/loans/etc. to other countries

 

[Bitek]

I think Trump hinted that a lot of the req'd infrastructure $$ would be obtained from money given out as foreign aid/gifts/loans/etc. to other countries

Oh, so $1T over the next century then.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

He has my partial support on this issue. Some items such as interstate highways and bridges, some federal water projects etc. Usually i'd want to see matching funds from the States.

 

[sdifox]

US is due for infrastructure refresh. I just worry about this being a big privetization push.

 

[zinfamous]

So, like Obama's plan to improve infrastructure...but now it's Trump's plan?

Oh, OK.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Waitresses do not want to be construction laborers, and the road and bridge crews do not want people that cannot perform construction tasks like operating jackhammers, digging ditches, or running wheelbarrows full of cement or dirt all day. And I certainly don't want to see most waitresses anywhere near a nail gun. There is always the exception.

At least in this city and I imagine most cities there are currently construction jobs available to men, and there are plenty of unemployed men not applying for those jobs. That's not going to change. What will happen instead is the status quo, meaning the Hispanics and other immigrant workers will continue filling those positions.

At least the roads will be fixed.

You've obviously never worked in a restaurant. I waited tables through college, there are all sorts of people that work in restaurants. It's not just ditzy little girls and old lady's that smoke too much.

 

[zinfamous]

Interest rates are rising but they are still extremely low. Infrastructure is an investment that pays off in economic activity over time, taking advantage of the low interest rates is a good idea. This is something that Obama should have done, and I get for a lot of his presidency Congress wouldn't allow it. We aren't at full employ yet, and many of those "employed" are waiting tables or something. Construction work pays well, this would be a benefit to many people.

Fine idea, comrade. I recall my girlfriend's stories about her family, how when the Russians invaded and occupied her country and several of them were deported off to labor camps, simply for being landowners. They were then replaced by about a dozen Russian families forcibly relocated from BFRussiashithole, to occupy her family's single-family home. Of course, these farmers and cobblers were then given jobs.Jobs the government decided that they needed to do.

The People needed dentists, fast, so illiterate Russian farmers were given dentistry positions. Here's some tools, comrade: get to work! Then they actually needed farmers, so the remaining cobblers were given some land and some corn seeds (lol--corn doesn't grow so well in Northern Europe, eh, but wtf--The People need corn!).

I've heard your plan before. It didn't work.

 

[werepossum]

Waitresses do not want to be construction laborers, and the road and bridge crews do not want people that cannot perform construction tasks like operating jackhammers, digging ditches, or running wheelbarrows full of cement or dirt all day. And I certainly don't want to see most waitresses anywhere near a nail gun. There is always the exception.

At least in this city and I imagine most cities there are currently construction jobs available to men, and there are plenty of unemployed men not applying for those jobs. That's not going to change. What will happen instead is the status quo, meaning the Hispanics and other immigrant workers will continue filling those positions.

At least the roads will be fixed.

Maybe. I could support spending a billion on infrastructure, but with Obama's plan we were looking at Chinese companies using illegal immigrant labor. Now we have Trump, so we're probably looking at TrumpCon hiring those Chinese companies hiring those illegal aliens.

You make a fair point about waitresses, but lots of capable people have been forced out of construction due to illegal (and to an extent, legal) immigrants who simply work harder for less money. Ditto for the drop in construction in many areas. If we truly had a ten year plan and some reasonable guarantee of employment, we have plenty of people willing and eager to work construction. The inner cities alone have plenty of unemployed young people willing to work hard for a fair wage; they just aren't willing to work hard for a wage that leaves them little better off than not working at all.

 

[werepossum]

Fine idea, comrade. I recall my girlfriend's stories about her family, how when the Russians invaded and occupied her country and several of them were deported off to labor camps, simply for being landowners. They were then replaced by about a dozen Russian families forcibly relocated from BFRussiashithole, to occupy her family's single-family home. Of course, these farmers and cobblers were then given jobs.Jobs the government decided that they needed to do.

The People needed dentists, fast, so illiterate Russian farmers were given dentistry positions. Here's some tools, comrade: get to work! Then they actually needed farmers, so the remaining cobblers were given some land and some corn seeds (lol--corn doesn't grow so well in Northern Europe, eh, but wtf--The People need corn!).

I've heard your plan before. It didn't work.

That's a left wing government applying the ludicrous left wing belief that people are interchangeable and thus all employment is random. (i. e. Whether one is a dentist or a farmer is based purely on who one knows - sound familiar?) Here we are talking about individuals freely making decisions based on their own abilities, preferences, and best interests. The two situations are diametrically opposed.

 

[fskimospy]

That's a left wing government applying the ludicrous left wing belief that people are interchangeable and thus all employment is random. (i. e. Whether one is a dentist or a farmer is based purely on who one knows - sound familiar?) Here we are talking about individuals freely making decisions based on their own abilities, preferences, and best interests. The two situations are diametrically opposed.

I've never heard this 'ludicrous left wing idea' that employment is random before! Can you provide a source?