It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Civil Engineers Give US Infrastructure D on Report Card

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   
An Interesting report card from the American Society of Civil Engineers. The report covers Aviation, Bridges, Dams, Drinking Water, Energy, Hazerdous Waste, Navigable waterways, Public Parks, Rail, Roads, Schools, Security, Solid Waste, Transit and Wastewater, and grades each category. The highest grade was a C+ and the lowest was D-.
 



www.msnbc.msn.com
A report by the American Society of Civil Engineers released Wednesday assessed the four-year trend in the condition of 12 categories of infrastructure.

The report said $1.6 trillion should be spent over the next five years to alleviate potential problems with the nation’s infrastructure.

Transportation alone requires $94 billion in annual spending, the report said, yet gets only $59 billion.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


We spend so much in areas that matter little to building our country and making it better place to live. War on Terror, etc. Things that matter the most, Good healthy drinking water, safe places for our children to play, safe waterways that support healthy environments, fish and wildlife, safe wastewater scored the lowest.

Related News Links:
www.msnbc.msn.com




posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   
Interesting report, however, the Civil Engineers group that did the grading might come across as biased. Who would stand to gain if more money was to be put into infrastructure improvment? Engineers.

I'm not saying that's the case, but it is interesting.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Good point sensfan.

One thing I would like to say is that even if the infrastructure did need that much work, much of it I feel should be done at the state level. I think part of the quandry we have gotten into in this country is that the individual states seem to have little problem turning over to the Federal Government, the power that is reserved in the Constitution for the individual states.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Good post.

Interesting follow up "analysis." Rather typical fare these days, "Problem? What problem? There is no problem. Besides, if there was a problem, it's not my responsibility." Deep stuff.

Unfortunately, this administration routinely ignores reports that conflict with the established agenda. I truly pity the next president. What a mess to clean up. With NO money or resources to be had. Good luck.


.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Infrastructure does not maintain itself. As marg pointed out on another thread, the effects of four years of domestic cutbacks are beginning to show.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Qute but not entirely accurate. Infrastructure does not decay overnight, and there is plenty of blame to go around leading back to 8 years of the Clinton administration.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Yeah great find and great analysis! I'm glad you agree with me that places to play and fish and wildlife are more important than avoiding getting blown up by terrorists. Great!



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I dread to think what the UK would get if such a report was produced over here.
Proberly a A+ for effort but a D- for work



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Qute but not entirely accurate. Infrastructure does not decay overnight, and there is plenty of blame to go around leading back to 8 years of the Clinton administration.




Might be true - haven't checked the budget records. ...Confession: I just wanted to bump the thread. It only needed one more vote but was on the back page already.



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 03:25 PM
link   
well, in California at least, we spend *billions* of dollars annualy to support individulas who have never contributed to the tax dollar base, and never intend to, for multiple generations. This includes cash and other benefits for "undocumented" foreign nationals, suspiciously disabled, chronically homeless and unemployed, etc.

And before anyone starts screaming about how that's not true, that it's all republican/racist propaganda, shut up and listen-I work *for* one of those government agencies. I assist in the forced redistribution of wealth, by taking your (from California taxes and Federal money from taxpayers across the country) money and giving it to people who can work under the table, but can't get a legitimate job. People come to this country and demand cash and food benefits, and get such a surplus of your money they send it to Mexico via Western Union, in big, fat stacks of cash. Those check cashing places are sure an eye opener.

Not to mention making sure we provide everything in a "culturally sensitive" means(your culture doesn't allow you to eat hamburger because it's processed wrong? Go get steak! We'll pay for it!). We don't want people embarassed either, so they get their cash via an ATM like card, and can work their cases (soon) at libraries, schools and just about anywhere without having to take so much of their time to go to the welfare office.

Like continuously driving by a certain block of Section 8-only apartments, with the brand new Hummer H2 in front.

Or listening to a dozens of new social workers, who have gone through all the effort to get their degree in social work, quitting in a month due to frustration of being constantly lied to, treated with nothing but disrespect, dealing with abuse and threats of violence, by "clients" who take home more in government-provided benefits than they (the social workers) do.

This is mostly why infrastructure is in the toilet. Infrastructure is mostly a State esponsibility, with schools and such being local community or County responsibility. People vote against the increased taxes to support such things because they're already being ridiculously taxed to support neighbors who give less than a # about who suffers for their way of life. And many of these clients, who legally vote, will not vote for increased taxes or spending on infrastructure, when they can vote on their own "paychecks" instead.

I know many of you don't like to hear this and are probably putting fingers in ears, closing eyes and shouting "blahblahblah!" to avoid a truth that doesn't fit how things are "supposed" to be. And finding a way to point more negativity at Bush like good little leftist political robots. But this is how it is, reported to you from the actual trenches.

Guess what, it's not the Federal government's responsibility to do all these things. And it shouldn't be government taking on these responsibilities, and taxing us to pay for them.

Oh, and another thing-who do you think gets hired more, and paid more, when there *is* a boom on infrastructure construction or upgrading? Could it be the Civil Engineers, hmm?



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrowUnfortunately, this administration routinely ignores reports that conflict with the established agenda. I truly pity the next president. What a mess to clean up. With NO money or resources to be had. Good luck.


.


uh its not any one administrations fault, you cant say you have never seen areas that have been the same and unrepaired since 1989 or longer can you? (im assuming youre over 20)



posted on Mar, 9 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by namehere

Originally posted by soficrowUnfortunately, this administration routinely ignores reports that conflict with the established agenda. I truly pity the next president. What a mess to clean up. With NO money or resources to be had. Good luck.


.


uh its not any one administrations fault, you cant say you have never seen areas that have been the same and unrepaired since 1989 or longer can you? (im assuming youre over 20)


I can name roads that were built, facilities that got repaired all through the 90's and also things that were scheduled to be repaired in the late 90's to early 2000 that funding for disappeared in early 2001, and are now in a state of disrepair and no funding will come available for them.

True it may not be a one administration issue but when there is money set aside from one administration and then that money is appropriated during another administration and sent to other places and no funding is scheduled to take up where these funds used to exsist. That is an issue that a future administration has to deal with the state of affairs this administration leaves them with.

Phae



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join