It's just a ploy by the ‘History Chanel’ so they can promote programming for idiots who don't know diddly about history!!!
It’s all about increasing government spending.
That increases government borrowing.
That keeps the government dependent on the banking syndicate.
It also keeps up the need for ever increasing taxes on the sheeple.
These taxes mean mr. banker, at the end of the day, gets a percent of everything everyone produces.
Mr. banker controls the world by controlling government leaders and business leaders.
Mr. banker determines how capital is allocated, i.e., what we will work on producing every day and how we go about it.
Mr. banker, of course, means the heads of the most powerful elite financial interests in the world.
It's just a ploy by the ‘History Chanel’ so they can promote programming for idiots who don't know diddly about history!!!
1. Divorce “mass transit” funding from the federal funds/revenue derived from fuel taxes.
2. Divorce spending of federal fuel tax revenue, or from any fund supported by such revenue, from being spent for anything other than the federal interstate highway system and any bridge or tunnel crossings that cross state-lines AND are supportive of interstate commerce.
3. Require all other currently approved uses of federal revenue from federal fuel taxes to be the responsibility of the states themselves.
I would also like to penalize states for the diversion of fuel taxes to uses other than roads, highways, bridges and tunnels, but cannot come up with a legitimate way to enact such penalties as offsets against any federal funding allocation the states would otherwise be entitled to. I imagine that would have to be left to the voters in the states.
The one argument that I would make with the authors statistical analysis is the use of “per-capita” comparisons between states. It has little to do with their highway requirements. Farmers in sparsely populated states have as much need to get their products transported, around & completely across their own state, and beyond it - no matter how many miles long and wide the state is, just as much as do industrialists in more heavily populated and possibly smaller states. A better comparison is between states with similar number of miles of roads and bridges, not people.
If a trillion plus of stimulus in 2007, 2008 and under Obama didn’t fix the infrastructure, then you can’t trust these people to fix infrastructure. Ergo, don’t give them the money.
I’ve driven about 2,000,000 miles in my lifetime and I HAVE YET to land in a river due to a failed bridge. In fact, the TOTAL DEATH TOLL of people going off a failed bridge in that time is likely under 100 people - well under the number MURDERED in a typical Chicago summer.
Yes, it would be good to fix our highways, as some are wearing out. BUT NO, the idea of tolling people 20 cents PER MILE to do so is simply NOT NECESSARY.