General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsInfrastructure: How Uncle Sam's math is making our highways crumble
Welcome to the world of zero. Weve grown used to lots of zeros these days: zero inflation (in Europe and Japan) and near-zero interest rates (at least if youre a U.S. bank, though its less than zero if youre in Europe). And now, get used to zero public investment.
Yes, the U.S. government invests nothing in our roads, bridges or buildings.
No, we didnt make that up. Its a stark reality that might sound like math trickery, but the results are as real as the pothole that just ate your tire. The government spends, say, $100 million building a new strip of highway, but elsewhere in the highway system, theres you guessed it $100 million in highway damage that goes unfixed. In other words, Uncle Sam is playing a fools game with the roads and bridges you drive your children on, instead of doing anything to prevent all those potholes and breakdowns that have real-life consequences. Can it make sense that at this moment, as I speak to you, the share of public investment in GDP
is zero? asked Harvard economist and former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers recently in a keynote speech at Princeton.
Heres a breakdown: During 2013, the most recent year full data was available, in total government spent $596 billion maintaining highways, bridges and buildings. But just like a car would, the roads depreciated or deteriorated to the tune of $506 billion, according to the U.S. Commerce Departments Bureau of Economic Analysis. Meanwhile, states spent almost $90 billion on those roads (a figure that has been in steep decline since the financial crisis broke in 2007). A spokesperson said the bureau doesnt comment on the statistics it produces (go figure!), but the bottom line for the math-challenged among us is pretty clear: The depreciation cancels out nearly all the money that the federal government spends on maintaining roads and all the other infrastructure we count on.
-more-
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/how-uncle-sams-math-is-making-our-highways-crumble/ar-BBlcn71
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)As with most things, I will blame Ronald Reagan. Maybe it's his fault, or maybe not, but I like to pick on the guy. My only regret is that he's no longer alive to receive the scorn history will pile on him. In the case of highways, what he did was deregulate the trucking industry, and the relevant part of this is allowing trucks to run much, much heavier than they did before. Of course, heavier trucks mean more road damage, and heavy trucks absolutely kill bridges, many of which were never designed for the weight and number of trucks they see now.
bullwinkle428
(20,631 posts)on infrastructure-related matters than any of this "shiny object" shit that gets so much attention.
1939
(1,683 posts)Blame LBJ and his "unified budget".
Before that, the highway trust fund could only be spent on highways and was a separate budget. After the unified budget was instituted, if congress spent less on highways, the surplus in the trust fund counted as a reduction in the deficit.
I would say lets "balkanize the budget" where everything is a separate compartment and is supported by a dedicated revenue stream. Then we can accurately see what is causing the problem and either the spending in that category can be adjusted or its dedicated revenue stream enhanced. An example would be hiving off the defense budget and making it a separate appropriation and using the corporate income tax as the only revenue stream supporting the defense budget.