We need the stimulus...doncha know.

Post #310,680 by beepster 7/9/09 1:10:07 PM Reply	We need the stimulus...doncha know. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,685 by hnick 7/9/09 1:59:59 PM Reply	No, that was so last week. The stimulus plan has been thoroughly discredited. That was based on the false assumption that we need a cohesive society. It turns out that we can do without a lot of those panicky weenies. The new plan is to have everybody think happy thoughts, assume that the recession is just a computer glitch, and allow everyone to shoot anyone who annoys them. The population will plummet and the dead can be eaten by those too lazy to loot stores. The backup to this plan is to have everybody click their heels while saying "there's no place like home" and the world will go back to the alternate dimension it came from where none of this happened. I'm surprised the Beep and Box show didn't get the memo. I'd rather assumed you guys were the architects of the plan. It certainly seems as utilitarian as any of your other suggestions.
Post #310,687 by boxley 7/9/09 2:07:07 PM Reply	well ATL is already full of zombies and vampires after all its the only major metropolitan center with only 2 grocery stores. We could always shoot people that annoyed us, nothing new here. Now as far as getting the memo I see and hear a lot about what people want or dont want. The local libs are getting nervous and backpeddling away goin "we didnt know it would get this bad, its the republicans fault, they created the backlash" The dems could write a book, how to squander a willing majority in only 1 term thanx, bill
Post #310,700 by beepster 7/9/09 4:22:01 PM Reply	What... suggestions like spend money on things that are >real<...i believe I covered that ad nauseum when they were passing that trash...only to be shouted down that the money was needed there too...because of reason x, reason y. So it went there. And it didn't work. And now they want more. Simple economics...its not the spending levels..its WHAT you spend it on that counts...war brings economies back because it puts people to work NOW and builds things that have a real value...not promises better things to come by maintaining or increasing the already wasteful infrastructure. But longpork probably isn't bad given enough of the right kind of bbq sauce. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,707 by hnick 7/9/09 9:09:03 PM Reply	Glimmel... WAR brings economies back? Bush's Iraq adventure did us in for up to 3 TRILLION scooterpies, with absolutely no return to anybody other than the military interests. It did squat for those saddled with the debt. We can't manufacture war materials profitably in this country so we farmed most of it out. I didn't say somebody didn't turn a tidy profit on the war. Ninety five percent of us got to take the bull by the tail and face the situation. So, yes, you're correct: it really is what you spend it on. Trouble is, we have to clean up a train wreck with a broken broom. So... what d'ya think? Try to fix it? Go straight to barbarism? Hope to circle the porcelain until you die of old age? Take hypnosis until you are comfortable that the old economics really worked really slashing well? Me? I've been to cooking school and my whole life has been improv. I think I'll avoid snuffing neighbors, even obnoxious ones, and see if society can hang together for just a little longer. I've got some sick dogs to take care of and I need a qualified vet. You? Gang at yer ain gait...
Post #310,735 by mhuber 7/10/09 9:30:38 AM Reply	"War...builds things that have a real value" Like what? The only things of value that are made in war that I can thing of are technological advances that can later be used in other ways. Swords that can be beaten into plowshares, as it were. But those are "promises better things to come". Wars fix economies by straight, stupid, money-dumping stimulus. On a big enough scale to work. That's the key - the ridiculous scale of spending. It would probably work better, as a way of fixing the economy, if we used an equivalent amount of money to pay people to burn down their own houses and then get them rebuilt.
Post #310,736 by boxley 7/10/09 9:35:17 AM Reply	can we start with mine? Not sure of your age but when the govenment was pumping a ton of money into vietnam jobs were easy to come by, Its a trickle down effect.
Post #310,737 by Andrew Grygus 7/10/09 10:04:18 AM Reply	Yes, but a huge amount of money . . . . . is dumped out of the economy, never to return. It does not recirculate and eventually the drain starts to show. With Iraq it's definitely showing, because the economy was already weakened by continuous warfare (hot and cold). Now there's not even enough money to finance jobs and material to replace the ordinance we're using up. Here's just a little corner of it. http://www.clovegard...m/ajg/junk01.html but unlike most this is recoverable - at about $0.01 on the dollar spent. A lot more is scattered about in foreign lands, at great expense for getting it there. Any "value" created in war is tiny compared to the monumental waste and drain on the economy.
Post #310,776 by mhuber 7/10/09 9:38:13 PM Reply	What were you making? When the government pumps out lots of money, jobs trickle down. But you (no, wait, it was Beep. Sorry. I confuse easily. And sometimes I catch myself before I hit Save. Still...) said that war "puts people to work NOW and builds things that have a real value...not promises better things to come". You were there. I was too but I wasn't paying attention due to being a kid. What worthwhile things were built - not including "promises [of] better things to come" like the Internet and other technological advances - because of the Vietnam War? I'm actually curious. I've seen war cause lots of things to be made, but mostly things that are of very little value compared to their cost. Except for "promises [of] better things to come by maintaining or increasing the already wasteful infrastructure".
Post #310,781 by beepster 7/11/09 12:47:08 AM Reply	Trickle down? Did you just say that? Isn't that voodoo economics? When you have a demand for real >durable< goods RIGHT NOW, jobs don't trickle down. The get created right now. Then more jobs get created and "saved" when they spend their money on things they need...right now. How hard is that. Where is the trickle from buying servers for Medicare? Think Dell is gonna have to hire 50000 to build them? Think, man. It really isn't that hard to figure out. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,786 by Another Scott 7/11/09 7:08:53 AM Reply	Yup, not so hard to figure out. Where is the trickle from buying servers for Medicare? Think Dell is gonna have to hire 50000 to build them? The Economic Recovery Act has lots of aspects - http://www.recovery.gov/?q=content/act The Act * Save and create more than 3.5 million jobs over the next two years; * Take a big step toward computerizing AmericansÂ health records, reducing medical errors, and saving billions in health care costs; * Revive the renewable energy industry and provide the capital over the next three years to eventually double domestic renewable energy capacity; * Undertake the largest weatherization program in history by modernizing 75 percent of federal building space and more than one million homes; * Increase college affordability for seven million students by funding the shortfall in Pell Grants, increasing the maximum award level by $500, and providing a new higher education tax cut to nearly four million students; * As part of the $150 billion investment in new infrastructure, enact the largest increase in funding of our nationÂs roads, bridges, and mass transit systems since the creation of the national highway system in the 1950s; * Provide an $800 Making Work Pay tax credit for 129 million working households, and cut taxes for the families of millions of children through an expansion of the Child Tax Credit; * Require unprecedented levels of transparency, oversight, and accountability. In the face of an economic crisis, the magnitude of which we have not seen since the Great Depression, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act represents a strategic -- and significant -- investment in our countryÂs future. The Act will save and create three to four million jobs, 90 percent of them in the private sector. It will provide more than $150 billion to low-income and vulnerable households -- spurring increased economic activity that will save and create more than one million jobs. These measures are necessary to help the millions of families whose lives have been upended by the economic crisis. But, this Act will do more than provide short-term stimulus. By modernizing our health care, improving our schools, modernizing our infrastructure, and investing in the clean energy technologies of the future, the Act will lay the foundation for a robust and sustainable 21st century economy. To view the full bill, click here. - http://www.recovery....ineId=tb_external HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #310,789 by boxley 7/11/09 7:44:40 AM Reply	Re: Yup, not so hard to figure out. no jobs saved or created that anyone can point to electrify our medical records so government can tell our doctors what treatment will be approved revive renewable energy on hold weatherization completely on hold as no one wants to pay davis bacon to workers, want to keep the money for themselves dunno how that collitch thing creates jobs no spades turning yet on roads as the money is currently covering state money shortfalls well its not clear if you need to already have a job to get the make work pay credit transparency accountability? bwahahahahaha so far not worth a tinkers damn
Post #310,802 by beepster 7/11/09 7:38:44 PM Reply	Nothing stated in there creates a job with the possible exception of weatherizing buildings. Not one thing. All talk, no action. I've seen and read the bill. I know where the money is going. Its NOT going to create 4M jobs. Not a chance. In fact, he's now at 4.6M since he's still losing (something he said would NOT happen if the bill passed) I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,805 by Another Scott 7/11/09 8:30:29 PM Reply	Categorical statements are (almost) always wrong. Obama was very careful to say "create or save". That's a big part of what the stimulus plan does. The GAO will have numbers in October. The latest GAO report on the Stimulus: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-829 Across the United States, as of June 19, 2009, Treasury had outlayed about $29 billion of the estimated $49 billion in Recovery Act funds projected for use in states and localities in fiscal year 2009. More than 90 percent of the $29 billion in federal outlays has been provided through the increased Medicaid Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) and the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) administered by the Department of Education. GAO's work focused on nine federal programs that are estimated to account for approximately 87 percent of federal Recovery Act outlays in fiscal year 2009 for programs administered by states and localities. Increased Medicaid FMAP Funding All 16 states and the District have drawn down increased Medicaid FMAP grant awards of just over $15 billion for October 1, 2008, through June 29, 2009, which amounted to almost 86 percent of funds available. Medicaid enrollment increased for most of the selected states and the District, and several states noted that the increased FMAP funds were critical in their efforts to maintain coverage at current levels. States and the District reported they are planning to use the increased federal funds to cover their increased Medicaid caseload and to maintain current benefits and eligibility levels. Due to the increased federal share of Medicaid funding, most state officials also said they would use freed-up state funds to help cope with fiscal stresses. Highway Infrastructure Investment As of June 25, DOT had obligated about $9.2 billion for almost 2,600 highway infrastructure and other eligible projects in the 16 states and the District and had reimbursed about $96.4 million. Across the nation, almost half of the obligations have been for pavement improvement projects because they did not require extensive environmental clearances, were quick to design, obligate and bid on, could employ people quickly, and could be completed within 3 years. State Fiscal Stabilization Fund As of June 30, 2009, of the 16 states and the District, only Texas had not submitted an SFSF application. Pennsylvania recently submitted an application but had not yet received funding. The remaining 14 states and the District had been awarded a total of about $17 billion in initial funding from Education--of which about $4.3 billion has been drawn down. School districts said that they would use SFSF funds to maintain current levels of education funding, particularly for retaining staff and current education programs. They also said that SFSF funds would help offset state budget cuts. Accountability States have implemented various internal control programs; however, federal Single Audit guidance and reporting does not fully address Recovery Act risk. The Single Audit reporting deadline is too late to provide audit results in time for the audited entity to take action on deficiencies noted in Recovery Act programs. Moreover, current guidance does not achieve the level of accountability needed to effectively respond to Recovery Act risks. Finally, state auditors need additional flexibility and funding to undertake the added Single Audit responsibilities under the Recovery Act. Impact Direct recipients of Recovery Act funds, including states and localities, are expected to report quarterly on a number of measures, including the use of funds and estimates of the number of jobs created and the number of jobs retained. The first of these reports is due in October 2009. OMB--in consultation with a broad range of stakeholders--issued additional implementing guidance for recipient reporting on June 22, 2009, that clarifies some requirements and establishes a central reporting framework. It's still early in the program, but money is being spent on infrastructure and jobs are being created and saved. A quick example, Florida: http://gao.gov/recov...fl/fl-july-09.php U.S. Department of Education State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) FloridaÂs request for stabilization funds was approved on May 12, 2009, and the state received $1.8 billion of its total SFSF allocation of $2.7 billion. Almost $1.5 billion is for education stabilization, and $329 million is for government services. Based on FloridaÂs approved application, it will allocate 79 percent of the education stabilization funds to local education agencies (LEA) and 21 percent to institutions of higher education (IHE). Florida will make the funds available to LEAs and IHEs on July 1, 2009, the beginning of the school budgeting year. Florida will be using these funds to restore state aid to LEAs, helping to stabilize their budgets and, among other uses, retain staff. For example, Miami-Dade school district officials estimate that the Recovery Act funds will allow them to save 1,919 positions or 10 percent of the districtÂs teacher workforce. [...] Highway Infrastructure Investment Funds The U.S. Department of TransportationÂs Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) apportioned $1.4 billion in Recovery Act funds to Florida. As of June 25, 2009, the federal government obligated about $1 billion. According to Florida Department of Transportation officials, the state has received bids for nine highway construction projects, and is currently advertising 39 additional Recovery Act projectsÂfunded with $555 million in Recovery Act funds and $945 million in other federal, state, and local funds. Funding from the first round of FHWA obligations are being used for resurfacing projects, bridge repairs, and new construction. For example, in Hillsborough County, a major interstate projectÂcosting over $445 million and using over $105 million in Recovery Act fundsÂwill connect a major expressway to FloridaÂs Interstate 4 to improve the flow of traffic and create a truck-only lane to provide direct access to the Port of Tampa. HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #310,806 by beepster 7/11/09 8:48:54 PM Reply	Wow. Its great when you can reclassify on the fly. You've linked to about 1% of the stimulus..and less than 1% of that has been spent. Don't use FL as an example of fiscal anything. They should have enormous trust funds based on the growth in prop taxes...but they blew it all. True gov't in action. Free money...lets spend it! Its obvious you think the man walks on water. I'm not going to change your mind. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,807 by Another Scott 7/11/09 9:05:50 PM Reply	Hardly. I don't think he walks on water. Rather, I know how long it takes for money to be spent. We've known all along that the tax reductions would come first, then aid to the states, then money for transportation and the other things. Don't be a perpetual cynic. Let's see how things turn out, 'K? A cynic is a man who, when he smells flowers, looks around for a coffin. - Henry Louis Mencken ;-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #310,808 by beepster 7/11/09 9:44:07 PM Reply	What I see is them lining up to do it again. Its hard not to be a cynic in this environment. Box hits it pretty squarely when he says this was simply a gambit to forward a social agenda (not a stimulus). Now you have folks claiming it wasn't big enough and wanting a do over. That doesn't inspire a ton of confidence. Besides, pessimists are generally never disappointed. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,809 by Another Scott 7/11/09 10:35:07 PM Reply	Who is "them"? It's hard to have a fruitful argument with you when you don't deal in specifics. :-( Obama's ruled out a 2nd stimulus for now - he said today that it was a 2 year program and needs time to work. Reid has ruled it out as well. Who is this "them" that's going to get it past those two? Box hits it pretty squarely when he says this was simply a gambit to forward a social agenda (not a stimulus). Now you have folks claiming it wasn't big enough and wanting a do over. 1) The stimulus bill was large and covered a lot of things, many of which were inadequately funded under Bush and the Republicans. 2) Social spending is stimulative because it gets money in the hands of people who will spend it, quickly increasing economic activity. It's possible to kill many birds with one stone if the bill is structured in a reasonable way. 3) Since so much money needed to be spent to fill the hole, one couldn't efficiently do it by dumping it all into infrastructure. Most of those projects take a long time to get going. So, the efficient thing to do is to invest in a lot of areas, yes like electronic medical records, where there's a need and a long-term payoff. Saying it's "simply pork" or similar is a deliberate attempt to minimize the extent of the economic crisis the country was (and still is, in many respects) facing. It's posturing by those in the Republican party who cannot offer sensible solutions. I'm disappointed that you and Box apparently fall for this stuff. :-( 4) There you go again with "now" and "do over". Krugman and many others were saying before Obama took office that the hole in the economy was over $1T a year and a 2-year $750B stimulus wasn't big enough. There's no sudden realization that it was too small by those who are getting additional visibility now. Adding more stimulus isn't a "do over". Besides, pessimists are generally never disappointed. Optimists live, on average, 19% longer. ;-) http://www.encyclope...G1-129020518.html Cheers, Scott.
Post #310,810 by beepster 7/11/09 11:30:44 PM Reply	Ok, fine all federal spending is equal, there are no programs that are more effective than any other at creating jobs and growth. (no, I don't believe it...but I give up. You win by attrition). I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,812 by Another Scott 7/12/09 12:03:28 AM Reply	Beep! Leave Lineland! Join the rest of us here on the surface of the sphere! Three dimensions are so much more interesting than 1! http://www.geom.uiuc...anchoff/Flatland/ :-/ Am I really so obtuse that you take me as arguing anything like that? Cheers, Scott.
Post #310,813 by beepster 7/12/09 12:23:55 AM Reply	Sometimes it seems like it going on and on about the social stuff creating jobs, trickling down into the economy..as opposed to the more direct public works programs which are more now now now. I thought that, if we had to do it, the latter would be preferential Even better, just cut everyone a check for 100k and tell them they have 6 months to spend it. I would have enjoyed that stimulus check better than the 20 bucks I'm getting every other week :-) I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,830 by boxley 7/12/09 12:57:49 PM Reply	yeah, invest in medical records, sure you betcha http://www.wnd.com/i...iew&pageId=103419 , doctors have to give up autonomy and 'learn to operate less like solo practitioners,'" the lawsuit said. "The National Coordinator will be able to enforce his decision as to what is appropriate treatment through sanctions against health care providers. Health care providers that are not 'meaningful users' of the new system will face penalties. 'Meaningful user' is not defined in the Stimulus Act. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose 'more stringent measures of meaningful use over time.'" The result is that penalties that could be imposed against doctors that would "deter the plaintiff's health care providers from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols should (a medical) condition become atypical," the lawsuit said. Further, the demand that all health records be kept electronically would put the plaintiff's personal information "a mouse-click away from being accessible to [strangers]." That amounts to an unconstitutional release of her personal and private health information, the lawsuit says.
Post #310,842 by Another Scott 7/12/09 3:57:25 PM Reply	Anyone can file a lawsuit. Film at 11:00. The bill (407 page .pdf): http://www.google.co...Kepc1_lJlu5Qrp8dA page 116 of the document ÂÂSubtitle AÂPromotion of Health Information Technology ÂÂSEC. 3001. OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL COORDINATOR FOR HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. ÂÂ(a) ESTABLISHMENT.ÂThere is established within the Department of Health and Human Services an Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (referred to in this section as the ÂOfficeÂ). The Office shall be headed by a National Coordinator who shall be appointed by the Secretary and shall report directly to the Secretary. ÂÂ(b) PURPOSE.ÂThe National Coordinator shall perform the duties under subsection (c) in a manner consistent with the development of a nationwide health information technology infrastructure that allows for the electronic use and exchange of information and thatÂ ÂÂ(1) ensures that each patientÂs health information is secure and protected, in accordance with applicable law; ÂÂ(2) improves health care quality, reduces medical errors, reduces health disparities, and advances the delivery of patientcentered medical care; ÂÂ(3) reduces health care costs resulting from inefficiency, medical errors, inappropriate care, duplicative care, and incomplete information; ÂÂ(4) provides appropriate information to help guide medical decisions at the time and place of care; ÂÂ(5) ensures the inclusion of meaningful public input in such development of such infrastructure; ÂÂ(6) improves the coordination of care and information among hospitals, laboratories, physician offices, and other entities through an effective infrastructure for the secure and authorized exchange of health care information; ÂÂ(7) improves public health activities and facilitates the early identification and rapid response to public health threats and emergencies, including bioterror events and infectious disease outbreaks; ÂÂ(8) facilitates health and clinical research and health care quality; ÂÂ(9) promotes early detection, prevention, and management of chronic diseases; ÂÂ(10) promotes a more effective marketplace, greater competition, greater systems analysis, increased consumer choice, and improved outcomes in health care services; and ÂÂ(11) improves efforts to reduce health disparities. ÂÂ(c) DUTIES OF THE NATIONAL COORDINATOR.Â ÂÂ(1) STANDARDS.ÂThe National Coordinator shallÂ ÂÂ(A) review and determine whether to endorse each standard, implementation specification, and certification criterion for the electronic exchange and use of health information that is recommended by the HIT Standards Committee under section 3003 for purposes of adoption under section 3004; ÂÂ(B) make such determinations under subparagraph (A), and report to the Secretary such determinations, not later than 45 days after the date the recommendation is received by the Coordinator; and [...] It seems to me that unless Heghmann can show that those sections of the law aren't being followed, then it's likely that her lawsuit will quickly be thrown out. HTH. ;-) Cheers, Scott.
Post #310,853 by boxley 7/12/09 6:56:26 PM Reply	2,3,4 and 10 are where the argument lies
Post #310,855 by Another Scott 7/12/09 7:30:00 PM Reply	How can having better records give poorer results? I look at it this way - We know that 100 years from now people aren't going to be pushing paper medical records around in the US - it's too expensive, too inefficient, too wasteful, too prone to errors. Why not accelerate the transition? I don't know about where you are, but when we had to take the oldsters into the hospital we always had to fill out the same paperwork. Name, address, insurance policy numbers, ever had surgery, heart attacks, strokes, cancer, infectious diseases, drug allergies, family history of same, etc., etc. It was a colossal waste of time and money. Just recently, they finally started rolling out a computerized system with the staff able to call up old records instantly. It's nice to be able to just give your insurance card and they can call up your records - "Oh, you were here X months ago. How did that go?..." Cheers, Scott. (Who thinks the lawsuit is about other issues than the benefits of a computerized system.)
Post #310,866 by boxley 7/13/09 8:23:42 AM Reply	bingo on the last sentence I have worked with quite a bit of medical software. Its nice that the feds are spending money on an eds for medicine. Sit down with ins co's docs and feds to determine fields, queries, reports and exchange medium. Makes billing, patient recall an awesome task. However when the aim of the project is to rein in medical choices as the suit alleges, then its gone beyond eds and into a medical decision tree controlled by government bureaucrats and not the dr giving the treatment
Post #310,871 by Another Scott 7/13/09 10:10:35 AM Reply	We'll see. No doubt that there should be strong oversight.
Post #310,858 by a6l6e6x 7/12/09 8:19:57 PM Reply	Did you miss the Obama quip (borrowed from Newt) on records? ÂAs Newt Gingrich has rightly pointed out, and I donÂt quote Newt Gingrich that often, we do a better job tracking a FedEx package in this country than we do tracking a patientÂs health records." Alex
Post #310,738 by beepster 7/10/09 10:21:47 AM Reply	Think, man tanks, bombs, airplanes, boats, radios... Iraq was/is a skirmish..fought largely with inventory and existing services. Not at all suggesting that we need to start a world war to work out the economy...the word here is "public works". Think its obvious that some bridges need to be fixed (given the disaster in MN). Won't even talk about the disaster waiting to happen in NYC because of theirs. Been on the PA turnpike lately? Could use ALOT of repair and a 3rd lane. How about getting the US a high speed rail system? These are things with real value that create jobs immediately. Show me this http://contexts.org/...timulus_large.gif here. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,762 by jake123 7/10/09 2:33:13 PM Reply	I agree 100% This is crucially important for the long term prospects for your country. Esp. the high speed rail, as oil heads back up into auto da fe territory for airlines. FWIW, we're having troubles getting that train out of the station up here... the guy running the show up here is as regressive and reactionary as they come.
Post #310,765 by drook 7/10/09 4:16:02 PM Reply	Forget high-speed, how about commuter rail In the 60s and 70s they paved over most of the commuter rail lines in Cleveland. They used to have a nice system, and even had voter approval on a referendum to build a subway system downtown. But the wrong people on city council supported it, so the rest of council killed it with red tape. Now we have two-and-a-half spokes connected to a hub downtown. One spoke goes to the airport, one goes to University Circle (major medical center) and the half branches off to go into one of the worst neighborhoods in Cleveland. About 15 years ago they added a spur to go down to the entertainment district ... and only ran until midnight on Friday and Saturday, guaranteeing no one would ride it. Then they came in and killed the entertainment district anyway, so a friend of the mayor could turn everything into condos. If they added two more spokes east and west along I-90, and a loop heading south that connects the ends of all the spokes, they'd have plenty of riders. But it's very chicken-and-egg. They won't build it because no one takes the train; no one takes the train because it doesn't go where they need it. -- Drew
Post #310,768 by beepster 7/10/09 4:52:38 PM Reply	because they expect it to be profitable which it will never be, which is why gov has to build it. (which even the libby in me understands) I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #310,770 by drook 7/10/09 5:10:13 PM Reply	True, unlike roads There was that recent story about Michigan un-paving some rural roads, turning them back into gravel because they couldn't afford to maintain them. There's got to be a way to use that to influence people. Stop pouring millions of dollars into extending freeways farther and farther into rural areas, enabling people to move farther out. Increase gasoline taxes to reflect the true cost of maintaining that infrastructure. Maybe if people had to bear the full cost they would choose to live closer to the city. And with increased population density the financials for light rail start to make more sense. (Yes, this is pretty much Kunstler's main thesis of the last few years.) -- Drew
Post #310,787 by static 7/11/09 7:12:00 AM Reply	Governments don't understand public transport. Almost without fail, they seem to expect public transport systems, especially train systems, to make money hand over fist. But usually they don't, particularly in the sort of urban density most of the western world live in. :-) Wade. Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers? A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.

Welcome to IWETHEY!