[Alberta's Child]

Good post.

The basic problem here is that the Interstate Highway System celebrated its 50th anniversary last year -- and much of the system has reached the end of its useful life (just in case anyone has been wondering why this has become a hot topic in the last couple of years).

The cost of upgrading and rebuilding that infrastructure is going to be enormous, and fuel tax revenues simply aren't going to be an adequate source of financing for this monumental effort.

Leasing a highway to a private operator allows a state government to focus its resources on doing the "heavy lifting" in rebuilding the infrastructure, while the day-to-day cost of operating/maintaining the asset will be passed on to a private operator who can do it far more efficiently than government can.

The fact that the most vocal opponents of these lease arrangements are usually public-sector labor unions is a good reason to at least consider these deals seriously.

[4Liberty]

The folks who are screaming most about this are probably assorted US labor unions and domestic firms that want to keep the contracts. If outsourcing to reputable firms helps us lowers the cost of rehab’ing the roads, it’s called efficiency AND SHOULD BE ALLOWED.

International trade and efficient specialization across businesses located peaceful democratic countries should be encouraged. We are not talking about illegal immigration, terror money from Saudi oil, or any of that, in this piece.

[stevie_d_64]

Leasing a highway to a private operator allows a state government to focus its resources on doing the "heavy lifting" in rebuilding the infrastructure,

No, it actually frees up the government to look for new things to tax, and to perpetuate its growth and existance...

while the day-to-day cost of operating/maintaining the asset will be passed on to a private operator who can do it far more efficiently than government can.

Based upon what data where anything has run on schedule, or even on budget in any government/private sector endeavor??? Remember most of the private sector entities are foriegn owned...Why would you believe they could do it any better than a domestic firm, which should make you wonder why we don't see a lot of domestic firm taking up the lead to run these shows...Looks to me like a lot of their dealings are beyond most scrutiny from anyone in this countrues ability to snoop...Not that I believe any of this is some big conspiracy, but it does make some people think outside the box and try to determine why this is a trend in the way our goverenment is conducting business...

The fact that the most vocal opponents of these lease arrangements are usually public-sector labor unions is a good reason to at least consider these deals seriously.

I am a vocal opponent of these types of deals based upon a lot of factors labor unions couldn't give a flip about...And I am not in anyway shape or form involved with any union...So why do you think I am opposed???

[papasmurf]

Spoken like a true gov't lackey.

The fact that the most vocal opponents of these lease arrangements are usually public-sector labor unions is a good reason to at least consider these deals seriously.

That's an uninformed, at best, opinion, my FRiend.

papa