Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: rlmorel
I certainly agree that rails-to-trails projects are not direct contributors of revenue to the economy but I wouldn't not consider them luxuries in the classic definition.

Before I proceed let me quickly add that I would like to see the funding mechanism for transportation pushed down to that level where the economics of the project will be most closely felt (i.e. pare the Federal Trans Dept down to that which is only responsible for "national" level projects. Return the rest of it to the states).

I look upon my local rails-to-trails as a contributor to the local economy INDIRECTLY the same way that Central Park in NYC is an indirect contributor to the economy. Without Central Park, NYC would be a much less attractive place to live and property values would be (indirectly speaking, of course) much lower. This would certainly be the case on Fifth Avenue and CPW. NYC would also be a less attractive place to visit, ergo sales tax receipts would be less as well...again a local matter.

In other words, the park is a local matter and should be the responsibility of the local government. To the extent that the City contributes value (i.e. revenues) to the State, it should also be a responsibility of the State.

Same for rails-to-trails.

My local rails-to-trails makes my small town more attractive as a place to live and this contributes to the economy indirectly. Ergo, it should be a local matter...and in some way a state matter (to a much less degree).

But given that logic, it is not a Federal matter.

I could live with that gladly.

54 posted on 05/09/2019 7:37:40 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: RoosterRedux

I don’t think we disagree on the benefits at all, I see it much the same way.

I think where we differ is on prioritizing what monies should be spent (and I don’t think we disagree all that much...as you said, pushing it closer to the local/state level (for funding) probably would help)

Right now, the states get federal highway funds, and that is sent to the states...I know there are various strings attached (If a state doesn’t support things like seat belts or speed limits and legislate appropriately, certain amounts of Federal Highway Funds are not allocated. I had heard a while back this was a mechanism that was going to be used to get Common Core acceptance...threatening withholding Federal Highway Funds!!!!)

I think the Federal Highway Funds mechanism is constructed in such a way to diminish the power of the states to make their own law and make them more subservient to the Federal Government, but...I digress.


55 posted on 05/09/2019 8:25:12 AM PDT by rlmorel (Leftists: Can't control their emotions. Can't control their actions. Deny them control of anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson