Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Yes, its a common joke on this board, but is Trump ever going to actually turn towards infrastructure?  Its the one thing from his campaign that got near 100 percent support.

Thus far, AFAIK, all he has done is stall and almost kill the NY-NJ rail tunnel that had already been funded and permitted.  And he did it for entirely political reasons.  Its also perhaps the most immediately needed new infrastructure project in the country.  We need to get the tunnel back on track, and we also need to get on track with infrastructure rebuilds throughout the nation.  A turn toward infrastructure could even boost his polling with centrist voters.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/06/gateway-tunnel-new-york-city-infrastructure-218839

Posted

I supported spending a lot on upgrading our aging infrastructure *before* he went and blew the budget deficit up and started a trade war. Now I think we will just get a bunch of monuments to trump that will take our debt to unimaginable levels.

Posted

If he had started his presidency with this, he'd have gained a ton of political capital at the beginning of his presidency. Infrastructure spending had so much support on both sides of the aisle.

Dumbass.

Posted (edited)

All talk, no action. The Trumpkins slurp it up too.

Think about what an average day is for him. Executive time tweeting on the shitter, asking aides about invading Venezuela, repealing anything Obama touched, inflicting pain on immigrant children, and then flying out to a rally at night. The WH doesn't have any interest or time for fixing real problems. It's all about throwing a grenade in the room and watching people panic.

 

Edited by retread
  • Like 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

If he had started his presidency with this, he'd have gained a ton of political capital at the beginning of his presidency. Infrastructure spending had so much support on both sides of the aisle.

Dumbass.

They whole point of his presidency has been to pay his base back with three things:

1. Liberal tears

2. Supreme court

3. Liberal tears

Working on bipartisan issues to build a coalition of support in a reasonable manner blows up his entire objective.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

They whole point of his presidency has been to pay his base back with three things:

1. Liberal tears

2. Supreme court

3. Liberal tears

Working on bipartisan issues to build a coalition of support in a reasonable manner blows up his entire objective.

4.  Borrowing money to transfer wealth to his cronies. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

They whole point of his presidency has been to pay his base back with three things:

1. Liberal tears

2. Supreme court

3. Liberal tears

Working on bipartisan issues to build a coalition of support in a reasonable manner blows up his entire objective.

It's actually only 1 and 3.  All liberal tears.  The Supreme Court just gives his supporters something to point to rationalize their support for a corrupt toddler that sounds more adult than "liberal tears."

Posted
3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

4.  Borrowing money to transfer wealth to his cronies. 

But you see, an infrastructure plan can do this.  He's a real estate tycoon, I've been told.  His cronies might have to actually build something for the wealth transfer, but they are supposed to be businessmen, are they not?  With actual businesses and what not.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

4.  Borrowing money to transfer wealth to his cronies. 

...which leads to liberal tears...the rights to which are owned by Halliburton.

Posted
8 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

I supported spending a lot on upgrading our aging infrastructure *before* he went and blew the budget deficit up and started a trade war. Now I think we will just get a bunch of monuments to trump that will take our debt to unimaginable levels.

To be fair it looks like the actual deficit will fall short of projections for FY18.  Not great of course but better than expected so far. 

Also, so far the tax cuts have not had a negative impact on revenue. 

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/mts0418.pdf

The first 4 months of CY18 totaled $1.236 trillion ($361B, 155, 210, & 510) compared to $1.186 ($344B, 171, 216, & 455) for the the same period in CY17.  Thats a 4.28% increase. I used the CY for comparison as the tax cuts started in Jan rather than Oct. 

The projected deficit for FY18 was $832B. 7 months thru FY18 and we stand at $385B which would trend to about $660B for FY18. 

Not great but better than projected. 

 

Posted
9 hours ago, retread said:

All talk, no action. The Trumpkins slurp it up too.

Think about what an average day is for him. Executive time tweeting on the shitter, asking aides about invading Venezuela 

 

Jose-Altuve-joins-Astros-at-White-House-

  • Like 2
Posted

Senate won’t pass any Trump legislation prior to November elections.

I don’t see House Freedom Caucus lining up to support additional infrastructure spending in light of current budget deficit forecasts. Ryan won’t bring up legislation that his caucus doesn’t fully support.

So my take is infrastructure spending legislation is currently dead in both Legislative chambers regardless of Trump’s desires.

Posted
13 hours ago, dOUblewide said:

To be fair it looks like the actual deficit will fall short of projections for FY18.  Not great of course but better than expected so far. 

Also, so far the tax cuts have not had a negative impact on revenue. 

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/mts0418.pdf

The first 4 months of CY18 totaled $1.236 trillion ($361B, 155, 210, & 510) compared to $1.186 ($344B, 171, 216, & 455) for the the same period in CY17.  Thats a 4.28% increase. I used the CY for comparison as the tax cuts started in Jan rather than Oct. 

The projected deficit for FY18 was $832B. 7 months thru FY18 and we stand at $385B which would trend to about $660B for FY18. 

Not great but better than projected. 

 

I truly hope you are correct and that the numbers hold up. I have my doubts, especially if we get involved in a trade war. 

Posted

CA infrastructure challenges along with the high speed rail situation:  VDH gives the CA state of the state:

Fresno intellectual farmer historian gives his analysis of CA infrastructure, as CA population reaches 40 million, from past to present. Water, roads, rail, etc, etc.

  • 3 months later...
Posted
1 hour ago, SimonBolivar said:

I think he's right. It's about the only thing the Ds and Rs can agree on right this second.

I don't expect Ds to pass anything that gives R/Trump a win.

  • 1 year later...
Posted

Infrastructure includes the capacity to handle a pandemic. Production of masks, gloves, respirators, ventilators, treatment facilities (respirator farms for those dependent on ventilators) . . . 

We don't even manufacture penicillin in the US. We are dependent on foreign actors - friend or foe - for our infrastructure. That is a national defense failure. 

  • 10 months later...
Posted

Reading reports it’s the next big bill after the COVID bill. ETA mid-March. 2-4 trillion price tag. Unions want 4T+. Emphasis on transportation and rural broadband but Pete has said heavy emphasis on shovel-ready projects. Obviously this TX disaster is going to give Biden a lot of momentum to get this done, FINALLY. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
10 hours ago, Bruh Man said:

Reading reports it’s the next big bill after the COVID bill. ETA mid-March. 2-4 trillion price tag. Unions want 4T+. Emphasis on transportation and rural broadband but Pete has said heavy emphasis on shovel-ready projects. Obviously this TX disaster is going to give Biden a lot of momentum to get this done, FINALLY. 

If we knock down every building that has "Trump" written on it I'd easily agree to pay another trillion or two.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Bookman said:

If we knock down every building that has "Trump" written on it I'd easily agree to pay another trillion or two.

I haven't looked around since we've been busy dealing with the power issues, but didn't they knock one of his buildings down this week? I feel so out of touch with the news the last several days.

Posted
Just now, Mrs Whiggins said:

I haven't looked around since we've been busy dealing with the power issues, but didn't they knock one of his buildings down this week? I feel so out of touch with the news the last several days.

His AC casino got demolished 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Bruh Man said:

Already seeing some R's arguing against the price tag citing that the debt just exceeded the size of the economy for the first time in history.

Fuck 'em

We do it without them.  

  • 3 months later...
Posted

We will have to see what the "bipartisan framework" is but there was a statement issued today with Dems and 10 Republicans who say they've agreed on the framework for infrastructure without raising taxes.  This could be the "roads and bridges only" bipartisan bill and the Dems would tackle the rest in reconciliation for the FY2022 bill. 

Burr (NC) - retiring
Cassidy (LA) - probably in his last term (voted for impeachment the second time)
Collins (ME) - was just re-elected
Graham (SC) - was just re-elected
Murkowski (AK) - up for re-election in 22
Portman (OH) - retiring
Romney (UT) - probably in his only term (voted for impeachment twice)
Rounds (SD) - was just re-elected
Tillis (NC) - was just re-elected
Todd Young (IN) - up for re-election in 22

  • 3 months later...


×
×
  • Create New...