They say in spirit that it is for bridges and then in reality appropriate it for high-speed rail under the guise of public transit spending. They then call for people to drive less despite the fact that it is the road-going public who subsidize every public transportation system in America save for NYC. If we could only all be as rich as NYC.
They also want to tax people based on how many miles they drive, so that only those who drive, and therefore pollute, are the ones who pay for the roads they damage and the environment they ruin not realizing that the ones who drive or are driven are the most productive in the country, and the ones who pay for the roads they drive on, while subsidizing public transportation.
Everyone paying regaurdless of use into the collective pool helps "Subsidize" our affordable way of life. Note that virtually all goods transported use the highway system, and even a majority of services use the highway system. Whether it be a hotel offering a shuttle to the airport, someone transporting beer from a local brewery, fedex ground delivering goods from SFO airport, or a truck carrying a shipment of TV's from the Port of Oakland to a Bestbuy distributor. By having a pool of people WHO ALL DEPEND on these goods and services either for a livelihood. Just because you can bike to work at your local whole foods grocer doesn't mean that you don't benefit from paying taxes into supporting and maintaining our roads.
If you liberals really cared about public infrastructure, it would have constituted a larger portion of the stimulus. It, however, doesn't even rival the amount that universities got. Your priorities are obvious, and crumbling roads or our aging electrical grid is not one of them, whereas ensuring future professor salaries are.
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
21 Jul 2011, 4:59 pm
