quote:

ORIGINAL: SubtleMentor
The irony of the situation that the typical American desire to get something for nothing (roads in this case) is destroying the thing they want most.
Another example of this is energy infrastructure. America's coal and nuclear fleet are hopelessly out of date and need to be replaced. Ever since Reagan promised America everything is cheap and easy the country has abandoned investment and gone on a spending spree. Now we have a broken highway system, a broken energy infrastructure a bloated useless military, massive foreign debt from imported oil, rotten cities and a bunch of crybabies whining "But I don't WANT to pay for anything!"
The latest feel good myth is fracking: Sorry guys, the fun will be over in five years.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How much of the ailing roadways are under the authority of the Federal government?
Has the money from the gas taxes we've collected over the years actually gone to pay for highway upkeep over the years?
Outside of Federal roads, States and localities should pay for their own repair. If the Federal road repair budget isn't going solely to repair of Federal roads - that is, if there is money disbursed to States for non-Federal road repair - that practice should be curtailed. If Minnesota's non-Federal roads need taking care of, why should people living in FLA give a fuck (or have their dollars spent outside FLA)?

The road network is at this point an interdependent network. maintaining the entire thing is good for the entire economy. It does no good if a truck gets a load of watermelons from Florida to Minnesota if it can't get to the depot because the bridge to the depot has failed. 
Almost all freight in this country is eventually moved by truck along some part of its life and while a lot of that is depot to depot travel along major highways eventually it does mean local delivery along city and country roads which do need to be maintained as well.

quote:

quote:

Lucas County (Ohio) was trying to raise money for the Toledo Zoo. The Zoo wanted to expand and blah, blah, blah. The County Commissioners actually looked into forcing bordering Ohio Counties (Fulton, Ottawa, and Wood) to pass County levies to support the Toledo Zoo, on the basis that the Toledo Zoo attracted people from all over, increasing revenues in those Counties as well as Lucas County.

Toledo does have a very well thought of zoo but I have to wonder what its economic impact is on the surrounding counties. Did they offer up any evidence of hotel stays or anything to justify that?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How much of the ailing roadways are under the authority of the Federal government?
Has the money from the gas taxes we've collected over the years actually gone to pay for highway upkeep over the years?
Outside of Federal roads, States and localities should pay for their own repair. If the Federal road repair budget isn't going solely to repair of Federal roads - that is, if there is money disbursed to States for non-Federal road repair - that practice should be curtailed. If Minnesota's non-Federal roads need taking care of, why should people living in FLA give a fuck (or have their dollars spent outside FLA)?

The road network is at this point an interdependent network. maintaining the entire thing is good for the entire economy. It does no good if a truck gets a load of watermelons from Florida to Minnesota if it can't get to the depot because the bridge to the depot has failed. 
Almost all freight in this country is eventually moved by truck along some part of its life and while a lot of that is depot to depot travel along major highways eventually it does mean local delivery along city and country roads which do need to be maintained as well.

I don't disagree, but who should be doing the maintenance? Should the Feds be maintaining roads below the Federal level? I don't think they should. If the FLA watermelon people can't get their melons to the depot in MN, there is likely a different place they can unload them, I'd bet. It behooves MN to keep their infrastructure up and running in this example, than it does the Federal Government.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How much of the ailing roadways are under the authority of the Federal government?
Has the money from the gas taxes we've collected over the years actually gone to pay for highway upkeep over the years?
Outside of Federal roads, States and localities should pay for their own repair. If the Federal road repair budget isn't going solely to repair of Federal roads - that is, if there is money disbursed to States for non-Federal road repair - that practice should be curtailed. If Minnesota's non-Federal roads need taking care of, why should people living in FLA give a fuck (or have their dollars spent outside FLA)?

The road network is at this point an interdependent network. maintaining the entire thing is good for the entire economy. It does no good if a truck gets a load of watermelons from Florida to Minnesota if it can't get to the depot because the bridge to the depot has failed. 
Almost all freight in this country is eventually moved by truck along some part of its life and while a lot of that is depot to depot travel along major highways eventually it does mean local delivery along city and country roads which do need to be maintained as well.

I don't disagree, but who should be doing the maintenance? Should the Feds be maintaining roads below the Federal level? I don't think they should. If the FLA watermelon people can't get their melons to the depot in MN, there is likely a different place they can unload them, I'd bet. It behooves MN to keep their infrastructure up and running in this example, than it does the Federal Government.

Usually there isn't. That gas tax is collected on every gallon sold so some of it should go to the states for local road maintenance especially from diesel sales. That is how things have been done for decades and it worked pretty well until these nuts in the House got there and can't pass a simple transpo bill.
I'll leave you to the gratuitous Democrat bashing. 

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

Have you been following this?

> President Obama on Tuesday pressed Congress to break a deadlock over a long-term transportation spending bill, arguing that Republicans were more interested in trying to “score points on cable TV” than in fixing the country’s roads and bridges.

The debate is complicated by the structural design of the Highway Trust Fund, which is financed by gasoline taxes that are not indexed to inflation. Officials have struggled to find additional revenue sources to keep the same level of activity without the political risk of either raising taxes or even seeming to raise taxes.

The gas tax has been stuck at 18.4 cents a gallon since 1993, and during those 21 years it has lost 39 percent of its value to inflation.<

The upshot is that Republicans in Congress don't want to raise taxes to pay for the highways. So, without tax revenue, how do you fund the highway system?

Here's the NYT view:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/opinion/16wed1.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region®ion=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

Here were letters to the editor

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/opinion/Who-Should-Pay-for-Our-Highways-Gas-Tax.html?mabReward=RI%3A6&action=click&pgtype=Homepage®ion=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83
FR
I just realized the tax is 18.4 cents per gallon and not liter... ... anyway in many countries a share of the highway costs are covered by tolls.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404
It makes no difference how it's funded. Funding isn't the problem. Them raiding the cookie jar is. Until that's done, it doesn't matter how much money ou give them.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

Have you been following this?

> President Obama on Tuesday pressed Congress to break a deadlock over a long-term transportation spending bill, arguing that Republicans were more interested in trying to “score points on cable TV” than in fixing the country’s roads and bridges.

The debate is complicated by the structural design of the Highway Trust Fund, which is financed by gasoline taxes that are not indexed to inflation. Officials have struggled to find additional revenue sources to keep the same level of activity without the political risk of either raising taxes or even seeming to raise taxes.

The gas tax has been stuck at 18.4 cents a gallon since 1993, and during those 21 years it has lost 39 percent of its value to inflation.<

The upshot is that Republicans in Congress don't want to raise taxes to pay for the highways. So, without tax revenue, how do you fund the highway system?

Here's the NYT view:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/16/opinion/16wed1.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=c-column-top-span-region®ion=c-column-top-span-region&WT.nav=c-column-top-span-region

Here were letters to the editor

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/opinion/Who-Should-Pay-for-Our-Highways-Gas-Tax.html?mabReward=RI%3A6&action=click&pgtype=Homepage®ion=CColumn&module=Recommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How much of the ailing roadways are under the authority of the Federal government?
Has the money from the gas taxes we've collected over the years actually gone to pay for highway upkeep over the years?
Outside of Federal roads, States and localities should pay for their own repair. If the Federal road repair budget isn't going solely to repair of Federal roads - that is, if there is money disbursed to States for non-Federal road repair - that practice should be curtailed. If Minnesota's non-Federal roads need taking care of, why should people living in FLA give a fuck (or have their dollars spent outside FLA)?

The road network is at this point an interdependent network. maintaining the entire thing is good for the entire economy. It does no good if a truck gets a load of watermelons from Florida to Minnesota if it can't get to the depot because the bridge to the depot has failed. 
Almost all freight in this country is eventually moved by truck along some part of its life and while a lot of that is depot to depot travel along major highways eventually it does mean local delivery along city and country roads which do need to be maintained as well.

I don't disagree, but who should be doing the maintenance? Should the Feds be maintaining roads below the Federal level? I don't think they should. If the FLA watermelon people can't get their melons to the depot in MN, there is likely a different place they can unload them, I'd bet. It behooves MN to keep their infrastructure up and running in this example, than it does the Federal Government.

Usually there isn't. That gas tax is collected on every gallon sold so some of it should go to the states for local road maintenance especially from diesel sales. That is how things have been done for decades and it worked pretty well until these nuts in the House got there and can't pass a simple transpo bill.
I'll leave you to the gratuitous Democrat bashing. 

Whatever, Ken. You still don't get it. If we keep making up the shortfall with gas taxes, what happens when we can't tax fuel enough to pay for stuff? What happens when transportation trucks are the only thing still using gas in great quantity? They aren't the only ones using the roads. They aren't the only ones causing road damage. They may be putting the greatest strain on the roads, but, they are also paying a higher tax, aren't they?

We are pushing ever higher gas fuel efficiency standards. That's not exactly a bad thing to desire, but look at what happens when you start getting buy-in. Revenues for roads drop, while costs don't drop. How ludicrous is it to use gasoline sales as a tax base with your right hand, while your left hand is trying to reduce the quantity of gas consumed?

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies

the roads aren't going to fix themselves, just pay some fucking tax you right wing morons.

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Everything you want done costs money so either pay for it with taxes or shut the fuck up and live with the consequences

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
How much of the ailing roadways are under the authority of the Federal government?
Has the money from the gas taxes we've collected over the years actually gone to pay for highway upkeep over the years?
Outside of Federal roads, States and localities should pay for their own repair. If the Federal road repair budget isn't going solely to repair of Federal roads - that is, if there is money disbursed to States for non-Federal road repair - that practice should be curtailed. If Minnesota's non-Federal roads need taking care of, why should people living in FLA give a fuck (or have their dollars spent outside FLA)?

The road network is at this point an interdependent network. maintaining the entire thing is good for the entire economy. It does no good if a truck gets a load of watermelons from Florida to Minnesota if it can't get to the depot because the bridge to the depot has failed. 
Almost all freight in this country is eventually moved by truck along some part of its life and while a lot of that is depot to depot travel along major highways eventually it does mean local delivery along city and country roads which do need to be maintained as well.

I don't disagree, but who should be doing the maintenance? Should the Feds be maintaining roads below the Federal level? I don't think they should. If the FLA watermelon people can't get their melons to the depot in MN, there is likely a different place they can unload them, I'd bet. It behooves MN to keep their infrastructure up and running in this example, than it does the Federal Government.

Usually there isn't. That gas tax is collected on every gallon sold so some of it should go to the states for local road maintenance especially from diesel sales. That is how things have been done for decades and it worked pretty well until these nuts in the House got there and can't pass a simple transpo bill.
I'll leave you to the gratuitous Democrat bashing. 

Whatever, Ken. You still don't get it. If we keep making up the shortfall with gas taxes, what happens when we can't tax fuel enough to pay for stuff? What happens when transportation trucks are the only thing still using gas in great quantity? They aren't the only ones using the roads. They aren't the only ones causing road damage. They may be putting the greatest strain on the roads, but, they are also paying a higher tax, aren't they?
We are pushing ever higher gas fuel efficiency standards. That's not exactly a bad thing to desire, but look at what happens when you start getting buy-in. Revenues for roads drop, while costs don't drop. How ludicrous is it to use gasoline sales as a tax base with your right hand, while your left hand is trying to reduce the quantity of gas consumed?

Yes, eventually as we push up fuel standards we'll have to find different sources for highway maintenance funds but for right now simply indexing the gas tax to inflation seems like a good idea.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies
the roads aren't going to fix themselves, just pay some fucking tax you right wing morons.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
Everything you want done costs money so either pay for it with taxes or shut the fuck up and live with the consequences

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy

The upshot is that Republicans in Congress don't want to raise taxes to pay for the highways. So, without tax revenue, how do you fund the highway system?

sexy car wash on the highways verges

Plus, that would create jobs . . .

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404
It makes no difference how it's funded. Funding isn't the problem. Them raiding the cookie jar is. Until that's done, it doesn't matter how much money ou give them.

Not sure if that's true or not. If you have proof that Federal Highway Trust funds aren't used for road repair, maintenance, and expansion, show it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: blacksword404
It makes no difference how it's funded. Funding isn't the problem. Them raiding the cookie jar is. Until that's done, it doesn't matter how much money ou give them.

Not sure if that's true or not. If you have proof that Federal Highway Trust funds aren't used for road repair, maintenance, and expansion, show it.

http://airwolf.lmtonline.com/news/archive/031205/pagea8.pdf
Why is highway money being used on mass transit, bike path and horse trails instead of the roads that vehicles use?
http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=b7b23f66-2d60-4d5a-8bc5-8522c7e1a40e
Look at the first part.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)