Because it takes a CONSERVATIVE to recognize that "FREE MONEY FOR EVERYBODY", AIN'T FREE.
Posted on 03/18/2015 7:26:02 AM PDT by Rodamala
Austin,Texas — A North Texas state senator has introduced a bill in the Texas legislature that would effectively prohibit the state or any of its subsidiaries, such as cities and transit authorities, from using money from the U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) for rail mass transportation.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
The rail system they propose is just another brother-in-law scheme to spread the wealth to everyone involved while continously having cost overruns due in part to bribes (donations) and kickback (broker) fees in addition to reimbursement schemes, material losses (transfer of materials to other job sites that they charge and bill to other projects; no overhead; more profit; the taxpayers foot the thefts er I mean losses) and every other assorted type of fraud known to man...
I don’t get it. Why refuse the money?
Good. Pull away from the Fedzilla teat.
Because it takes a CONSERVATIVE to recognize that "FREE MONEY FOR EVERYBODY", AIN'T FREE.
Autonomous cars are the wave of the future. Fixed rail is so 1800s. And socialist.
But they will take Federal money for highways and road projects (not to mention zillions of other infrastructure programs)?
This doesn’t seem to be an honest attempt to eschew Federal dollars from the State (which I would agree with). If we paid out less to the Federal government, States would have the money to fund whatever infrastructure items they wanted ... at their own discretion.
But once you start taking Federal money for this, that and sundry, you’ve already lost credibility on the “don’t take Federal money” tack. At that point you’ve already established that your a whore, the only thing left to discuss is price and what you are wiling to do for the money.
It’s an irresistible appeal. The feds can borrow money and effectively never have to repay, and they can also create money out of thin air. Something like a road can be paid for at a discount from the feds compared to a state paying 100%.
First, it would help to understand that below the surface, the Austin City Council’s for the past 40-50 years HATE the generally conservative Texas Legislature. And, the Texas Legislature reciprocates every chance it gets. Living and working in the same town, the situation gets, from time to time, exacerbated, to put it nicely.
Probably the largest bone of contention historically has been Capital Metro. You see, the Marxists council men and women just have to have their little toy train running around Austin empty. And, they will not give it up!!! They have one now and want more.
See, the little toy train employs lots and lots of “government” employees which is really the goal. Ridership doesn’t matter. After all, it’s free taxpayer money.
So, Hall has devised a pretty unique and oblique attack on the Marxists.
We will see what develops in coming weeks. Remember, the Texas Legislature has a HARD close up shop date of six months, unless extended by the Governor for what is known as a “Special Session. In my opinion, Abbot won’t do that on the issue of “the little toy trains”.
I see your point however, this is my counter.
Taking federal funds for a road expansion that 70% of the people will use makes sense.
Taking federal funds to build a railroad that less than 5% of the people will use makes NO sense - at least, not to me.
I even somewhat agree with the “whores” either way, but even whores have a right to refuse to do somethings!
Those Google Cars are not running on Google Roads.
Once upon a time, private enterprise provided transportation for the freight and passengers... the automobile came and soon the Socialist dream of federal highways.
You would be blown away to see the hard numbers for how much of a taxpayer drain federal highway, airport, and marine infrastructure spending is, compared to rail.
In fact, during WWII, Fedzilla placed a tax on all passenger rail fares... under the guise of reducing wartime travel... and the tax stayed in effect, with the revenue going towards airports and highways.
You know, those railroads had shareholders. They were capitalist concerns.
Now-a-days, though, you see EVERYONE trying to "get theirs" by grabbing at annual Rail Freight Assistance Programs. Why invest your own money when you can put the taxpayer on the hook? It's disgusting.
This bill is a step in the right direction.
At the same time, maybe the federal government can demand that the interstate highways fund themselves?
We've got a better chance of seeing God.
+1
Federal money always comes with strings attached.
The ticket to states rights is stop taking Federal money.
Yes I get that.
But once you accept that money there are strings attached.
Then the Feds can start directing to States what they must and must not do and making Federal laws based on the fact that the States took the money.
Then the Congressman is not really against taking Federal money is he?
And he’s not above throwing the State’s weight around to tell cities and counties what they can and can’t do either.
Probably just trying to kill the project altogether. Lack of funding will do that nicely.
Good move. What do you suppose would happen if more states started refusing Federal money for all sorts of things?
> I don’t get it. Why refuse the money?
Probably a carrot dangling there. Nothing is ever free when you get it from the government except almost with the illegals but the clearly understand that if they are caught voting Republican they are probably going to be deported by the mist transparent administration in history
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.