NJ Republican Gov must pay 271 Mil for canceling tunnel project

[K1052]

Why are the feds funding this at all? If they are willing to fund such large projects. Why not just fund them and be done? This kind of built in inefficiency is just absurd imo. Either all in or all out. If the feds deem this a worth project then build it. Dont give money to the states and allow them to meddle. If it isnt a worthy project then let the states raise the capital to build the project. IMO this is an example of the the typical fed\state relationship where the feds coerce the states into doing what they want to be done by entcing them with money.

The Feds didn't coerce NJ into building this. It was NJ's idea because years ago they knew they were approaching the physical limitations of the current infrastructure. The Feds looked at it and decided to support it along with the Port Authority.

 

[Phokus]

while I agree building up infrastructure is a good thing, even if it means going into debt(sometimes), that doesn't mean Christie didn't make the right move. To have NJ shoulder 100% of the cost-overruns when we all know it's going to overrun(even if just a little) is silly.

Why on earth should the Feds be responsible for cost overruns when they're contributing money to the project already? You're essentially saying you want MORE federal money involved. You conservatives make no sense.

 

[MrX8503]

Why are the feds funding this at all? If they are willing to fund such large projects. Why not just fund them and be done? This kind of built in inefficiency is just absurd imo. Either all in or all out. If the feds deem this a worth project then build it. Dont give money to the states and allow them to meddle. If it isnt a worthy project then let the states raise the capital to build the project. IMO this is an example of the the typical fed\state relationship where the feds coerce the states into doing what they want to be done by entcing them with money.

Are you insane?

These types of projects are financially impossible to be solely funded by the state alone. You need federal support for these kinds of projects.

 

[Phokus]

It is absolutely hilarious that conservatives are only looking at the overall cost of the project and completely ignoring the economic gain that completing it would give NJ and also the economic ruin it would entail if they don't complete it.

Talk about penny wise/pound foolish. But hey, if that means more economic benefit to CT where i live at the expense of NJ, i'm for NJ's foolishness in electing this GOP moron.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

110% BULLSHIT

Have you ever driven from New Jersey to New York?

Do you know how much in revenue they are taking in from the tolls?

They can pay for a dozen tunnels with the money they are raking in.

Hell the toll takers are making $100K a year to take the $20 bills out of your hands.

link to $100 salary?
but i agree their jobs should've been eliminated decades ago with the advent of EZPass.

and the MTA is far worse than the PA.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

It is absolutely hilarious that conservatives are only looking at the overall cost of the project and completely ignoring the economic gain that completing it would give NJ and also the economic ruin it would entail if they don't complete it.

Talk about penny wise/pound foolish. But hey, if that means more economic benefit to CT where i live at the expense of NJ, i'm for NJ's foolishness in electing this GOP moron.

easy for you to say when the cost overruns won't be paid for out of your pockets right?

 

[Genx87]

Are you insane?

These types of projects are financially impossible to be solely funded by the state alone. You need federal support for these kinds of projects.

Hogwash. You telling me NY and NJ couldnt finance 8-10 billion over 30 years? These two states have sizeable economies. NJ about 450 billion, NY 1.1 Trillion in gdp. Furthermore both states already commited 3 billion with cost overruns each to get it done. Now one re-evaluated their position.

That said I still say if the feds felt it a necessary infrastructure project. They should fund it all. If the states felt it worthy then they should fund it. Sounds to me like one of the states has decided it isnt worthy enough for their 3+ billion.

 

[theeedude]

Screw NJ, if they don't want the federal money, fine, make them repay what they spent already and use it for CA high speed rail.

 

[Thump553]

Why are the feds funding this at all? If they are willing to fund such large projects. Why not just fund them and be done? This kind of built in inefficiency is just absurd imo. Either all in or all out. If the feds deem this a worth project then build it. Dont give money to the states and allow them to meddle. If it isnt a worthy project then let the states raise the capital to build the project. IMO this is an example of the the typical fed\state relationship where the feds coerce the states into doing what they want to be done by entcing them with money.

Philisophically this is very appealling and our country experimented with that system back in the early days. For example, New York state paid for and got all the huge benefits of the Erie Canal. If the modern fed money grant procedure was in place then, odds are the canal would have been built at least a decade earlier and the midwest and west would have been opened up that much earlier as well (the Erie Canal was basically the only low cost way to move bulk cargo east or west until the railroads came along).

We wouldn't have our interstate system today (developed by GOP President Eisenhower) without the federal grant system. Without the interstate system much of the second half of the twentieth century development and prosperity wouldn't have existed.

As a CT resident, I once again applaud Christie's sabotaging of his state.

 

[dmcowen674]

link to $100 salary?
but i agree their jobs should've been eliminated decades ago with the advent of EZPass.

and the MTA is far worse than the PA.

My bad, I was going from memory from when I lived there in 2007, apparently wages went up $220,000 more in the last three years:

http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/traffic/...-perks-for-nj-turnpike-employees-20101019-apx

10-20-2010 - NJ Toll booth operators net $321,985 wages

Auditors say the New Jersey Turnpike Authority wasted $43 million on unneeded perks and bonuses. In one case, an employee with a base salary of $73,469 earned $321,985 when all payouts and bonuses were included.

The audit says that toll dollars From the New Jersey Turnpike and the Garden State Parkway were spent on items ranging from an employee bowling league to employee bonuses for working on birthdays and holidays.
It took place as tolls were being increased.


The biggest expense uncovered in the audit was $30 million in unjustified bonuses to employees and management in 2008 and 2009 without consideration of performance.


One example was paying employees overtime for removing snow and working holidays and then giving additional "snow removal bonuses" and "holiday bonuses."


The Comptroller's Office audit released Tuesday says taxpayers also paid $430,000 for free E-ZPass transponders for employees to get to work and nearly $90,000 in scholarships for workers' kids.


The audit shows turnpike authority employees got bonuses and overtime for working their birthdays and holidays.


Comptroller Matt Boxer says tolls are set for another increase in 2012.

 

[Throckmorton]

This is a govt project. Take a wild guess if there will be cost overruns.

Two words: Private contractors

 

[Phokus]

easy for you to say when the cost overruns won't be paid for out of your pockets right?

It is easy because i'm not a GOP moron who only looks at the cost without looking at the benefit. There's a reason it's called a 'cost/benefit' analysis. You don't think our interstate highway system was expensive as fuck? Infrastructure is vital to economic development (see also: Internet). If we didn't have the internet or our highway, we'd be living in the dark ages right now.


This was a cheap political ploy to be seen as a 'fiscal conservative' and get elected and now NJ residents have sacrificed their economic future. Again, as a CT resident, i applaud this, especially since i purchased a house recently.

 

[Jadow]

Two words: Private contractors

Yeah, and the government just needs to put language in their contracts with those contractors that addresses cost overruns. A good ironclad contract is a great way to eliminate waste, cost overruns, etc...

 

[lothar]

Why should the federal government be forced to pay for the cost overruns? Do defense contractors have to come up with the difference when they overrun their cost projections?

Are you suggesting that defense contractors shouldn't have to bear anything for cost overruns?
I don't understand your line of argument.

 

[Pulsar]

No, you don't get the point.

Everyone agrees there is 'bad debt', and 'too much debt'.

The topic is, is there any such thing as 'good debt'?

That's the topic. He said no, and I said yes.

Try to follow the point, instead of wrongly posting 'more to the point'.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said there was no such thing as good debt. I have debt on my mortgage, and it's good.

However, our country as a whole is sinking in debt. At this point, for our government, there IS no good debt. I can manage my debt. They cannot. They are addicted to it. Much like an alchoholic, the only solution at this point that I see is to cut them off entirely. Pay our debts off, get back where we SHOULD be, then start to try to make distinctions again.

We have no money. It's funny, you know, no one refutes that when I say it. They are completely willing, however, to continue to build up more debt. It's like watching a car crash in slow motion.

 

[MrX8503]

Hogwash. You telling me NY and NJ couldnt finance 8-10 billion over 30 years? These two states have sizeable economies. NJ about 450 billion, NY 1.1 Trillion in gdp. Furthermore both states already commited 3 billion with cost overruns each to get it done. Now one re-evaluated their position.

That said I still say if the feds felt it a necessary infrastructure project. They should fund it all. If the states felt it worthy then they should fund it. Sounds to me like one of the states has decided it isnt worthy enough for their 3+ billion.

Yes that's what I'm telling you.

$3B of that money towards the ARC was from the Federal Government. What makes you think that the states can foot this bill alone when Christie cancelled the project due to overruns?

NJ can't even fund the ARC project with the help of NY/Feds all the while having a flat broke highway trust fund.

Cost overruns is not the Federal Government's responsibility, this project was proposed by NY/NJ.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said there was no such thing as good debt. I have debt on my mortgage, and it's good.

However, our country as a whole is sinking in debt. At this point, for our government, there IS no good debt. I can manage my debt. They cannot. They are addicted to it. Much like an alchoholic, the only solution at this point that I see is to cut them off entirely. Pay our debts off, get back where we SHOULD be, then start to try to make distinctions again.

We have no money. It's funny, you know, no one refutes that when I say it. They are completely willing, however, to continue to build up more debt. It's like watching a car crash in slow motion.

I think the recession we're in is a bit more complicated than your house mortgage.

 

[theeedude]

We have plenty of money and plenty of ability to borrow more money at record low interest rates. If there was any doubt in the government's ability to pay back what it borrowed with interest, bond prices would reflect that. In our position to not borrow money to stimulate the economy out of this recession would be fiscal negligence.

 

[Pulsar]

We have plenty of money and plenty of ability to borrow more money at record low interest rates. If there was any doubt in the government's ability to pay back what it borrowed with interest, bond prices would reflect that. In our position to not borrow money to stimulate the economy out of this recession would be fiscal negligence.

Can you please define "We"?

Go read some news. China's getting sick of purchasing our debt, and we've had trouble on several recent bond offerings.

Our debt has reached levels unseen since the 1940's - when we in a serious war and devoted the entire country to it. (Last I checked Detroit isn't turning out bombers for Iraq / Afghanistan).

The gross debt is 93.2% of GDP. Public debt is 62% of GDP.

Please substantiate your claims. Where is our "plenty of money"? Last I checked we have been printing money to devalue it. We have plenty of paper I suppose, if that's your standpoint.

I'm really not interested in arguing this unless you can come back with a little bit of data to back up your claims that everything is just fine and the $14 trillion we owe really doesn't mean anything.

 

[Pulsar]

Yes that's what I'm telling you.

$3B of that money towards the ARC was from the Federal Government. What makes you think that the states can foot this bill alone when Christie cancelled the project due to overruns?

NJ can't even fund the ARC project with the help of NY/Feds all the while having a flat broke highway trust fund.

Cost overruns is not the Federal Government's responsibility, this project was proposed by NY/NJ.




I think the recession we're in is a bit more complicated than your house mortgage.

More complicated? You think so? Only if you want to make it that way. Playing financial games and claiming that debt isn't really debt and that everything's ok as we run up a $14 trillion dollar problem is how we've gotten here. Financial tricks are what's put us in this hole.

People who want to close their eyes and argue that "it's complicated"... well... I've never had much problem managing my checkbook. Why is it all the bigwig brokers and financial gurus have such trouble? Perhaps it's a bit simpler than they'd have you believe.

 

[Throckmorton]

More complicated? You think so? Only if you want to make it that way. Playing financial games and claiming that debt isn't really debt and that everything's ok as we run up a $14 trillion dollar problem is how we've gotten here. Financial tricks are what's put us in this hole.

People who want to close their eyes and argue that "it's complicated"... well... I've never had much problem managing my checkbook. Why is it all the bigwig brokers and financial gurus have such trouble? Perhaps it's a bit simpler than they'd have you believe.

When you have to use debt to buy food in order to not starve, that is good debt.

 

[werepossum]

There is 'good debt'. If you don't think so, you will drive your society into the ground until it's a debt-free wasteland.

Or maybe we should not have borrowed when WWII started, and just stayed out of the war until Hitler and Japan defeated our small paid-for forces.

I don't know the tradeoffs on this project, but I suspect the transportation and Senators who favored it might have a point.

Let's all take a moment to ponder what would have happened had America entered World War II with the kind of debt we now have.

Then let's ponder whether Americans would now be speaking German, Japanese or Russian.

 

[fskimospy]

Let's all take a moment to ponder what would have happened had America entered World War II with the kind of debt we now have.

Then let's ponder whether Americans would now be speaking German, Japanese or Russian.

Yes, lets ponder that.

Ok, the answer is no.

 

[MrX8503]

More complicated? You think so? Only if you want to make it that way. Playing financial games and claiming that debt isn't really debt and that everything's ok as we run up a $14 trillion dollar problem is how we've gotten here. Financial tricks are what's put us in this hole.

People who want to close their eyes and argue that "it's complicated"... well... I've never had much problem managing my checkbook. Why is it all the bigwig brokers and financial gurus have such trouble? Perhaps it's a bit simpler than they'd have you believe.

Yes that's what I'm saying, it's more complicated than you managing your checkbook. Its hard to believe but the US economy is quite a bit larger than your mortgage.

We arent in a recession because we spent trillions of dollars. We spent trillions because we are in a recession. We were going to lose no matter what, whether it be jobs or increased debt.

With the housing market crashing from millions defaulting and banks going bankrupt, what the hell did you expect to happen? The government is the only entity that can keep revenue flowing through the system until it can sustain itself.

 

[brencat]

It is absolutely hilarious that conservatives are only looking at the overall cost of the project and completely ignoring the economic gain that completing it would give NJ and also the economic ruin it would entail if they don't complete it.

Talk about penny wise/pound foolish. But hey, if that means more economic benefit to CT where i live at the expense of NJ, i'm for NJ's foolishness in electing this GOP moron.

It's you who don't understand the dynamics of NJ at all. I've lived here my whole life. In CT your upfront housing cost is higher but property taxes MUCH lower. NJ residents pay the highest property taxes per capita in the nation followed closely by NY. $70 billion in wealth has left the state over the past decade. Nobody in retirement stays here because of the state's policy that taxes pension and social security retirement income. PA meanwhile does not, FL does not, NC and SC do not either. All that wealth gone! My parents...the day my Dad retired, they made plans to move out of the state - now live just over the border in PA.

Who the fvck is going to be paying for the cost overruns? That's right...people like me who actually make money and pay real taxes. Not the residents of Camden, Newark and other shithole cities that take without giving back. Christie just had to close a $10 billion budget gap for this year...much of it by foregoing the annual contribution to the already broke NJ pension system (at least $40 billion underfunded at this point).

We have so much corruption in this state there is NO WAY this project would just come in 'modestly over' budget. Actually it had the potential to be another MA Big-Dig style fiasco filled with cronyism and taxpayer funded shenanigans by all the corrupt polls and union bigs here.

But it would provide long term benefits right? Shorter commute, higher property values, blah blah blah. No proof of that whatsoever! All heresay. Sorry, not gonna take this one on faith that "it'll all work out in the end." We've been hearing that for decades and the problems and tax burden just keeps getting worse and worse -- yet we keep electing the same corrupt bunch of Democrats, same as NY. Until we finally reached a breaking point and elected Christie. Either way, I'm not excited about the thought of having even more people coming to live here as a result of an improved transit system. It's too damned crowded as it is. And unfortunately, we've already got too many people feeding off our resources rather than contributing to them.

But even though Christie has given some of us longing for change in NJ 'hope', we are STILL at this moment flat shit broke. Until we fix other structural problems in this state...like forcing towns and municipalities to merge to save money, firing duplicative state workers, funding our pension system properly, cutting property taxes 30% across the board and lowering income taxes to keep residents and retirees from leaving, the extra train tunnel can wait.

/rant

 

[Pulsar]

Yes that's what I'm saying, it's more complicated than you managing your checkbook. Its hard to believe but the US economy is quite a bit larger than your mortgage.

We arent in a recession because we spent trillions of dollars. We spent trillions because we are in a recession. We were going to lose no matter what, whether it be jobs or increased debt.

With the housing market crashing from millions defaulting and banks going bankrupt, what the hell did you expect to happen? The government is the only entity that can keep revenue flowing through the system until it can sustain itself.

Really? Do you really believe that the "recession" is to blame for the situation we're in?

You believe that social security and other welfare plans were solvent long term before the recession?

You believe that our debt, which has been growing steadily since the late 60's (or so) is only because of this recession?

Had our government been fiscally responsible and balanced their checkbook in a simple and straightforward manner for the last 40 years we would not be in this recession. It is really that simple. We would not be 14 trillion in debt, and our first stimulous could have been 4 to 10 times what we spent and still not put is in the hole we've dug for our selves.

Are you that short-sighted?

Perhaps my home book-keeping IS too simple. Perhaps saving for the future, investing money in decent returns, and only spending what I have left over is a bad idea if it's applied to our government. I've never met anyone yet who could convince me of that.