What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Why aren't we spending more billons on infrastructure? (1 Viewer)

timschochet

Footballguy
There is no excuse for what happened with that bridge in Washington. Our roads and bridges in this country are ####. Why don't we fix them? Whatever it costs, isn't this a worthy expenditure?

 
For real?

Do you mean, "Why aren't we spending more on anti-truck bridge technology"?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
proninja said:
That bridge had much of its support taken out by an oversize 18 wheeler at freeway speed. I'm pretty sure if you take the support out for a lot of bridges they will fall down. I don't disagree with you though - I'd much rather we be spending money on infrastructure for this country than infrastructures for other countries after we blow them up.
I don't want to get into an either-or argument- as in "we need to spend more money on infrastructure instead of the military", etc., because then you get bogged down in attacking other spending. I say we need to spend major money on infrastructure no matter what we spend on other stuff, because it's vital and needs to be done right now. If the debt has to increase as a result, then so be it.

 
Because we take the money raised for infrastructure and instead hand it out to those who don't feel like working.

 
Infrastructure spending makes sense when there is business growth and a business benefit to it. Throwing money at random projects is just stupid.

 
proninja said:
That bridge had much of its support taken out by an oversize 18 wheeler at freeway speed. I'm pretty sure if you take the support out for a lot of bridges they will fall down. I don't disagree with you though - I'd much rather we be spending money on infrastructure for this country than infrastructures for other countries after we blow them up.
I don't want to get into an either-or argument- as in "we need to spend more money on infrastructure instead of the military", etc., because then you get bogged down in attacking other spending. I say we need to spend major money on infrastructure no matter what we spend on other stuff, because it's vital and needs to be done right now. If the debt has to increase as a result, then so be it.
Case in point.

 
proninja said:
That bridge had much of its support taken out by an oversize 18 wheeler at freeway speed. I'm pretty sure if you take the support out for a lot of bridges they will fall down. I don't disagree with you though - I'd much rather we be spending money on infrastructure for this country than infrastructures for other countries after we blow them up.
I don't want to get into an either-or argument- as in "we need to spend more money on infrastructure instead of the military", etc., because then you get bogged down in attacking other spending. I say we need to spend major money on infrastructure no matter what we spend on other stuff, because it's vital and needs to be done right now. If the debt has to increase as a result, then so be it.
Case in point.
Rather than calling this shtick, if you don't agree with me, please explain why not.

 
Every American must live in fear... until the day the tax payer is willing to pay to make every bridge in this country strong enough to withstand the impact of an oversized 18 wheeler slamming into it at 50-60 MPH!!!!

[/timschochet]

 
proninja said:
That bridge had much of its support taken out by an oversize 18 wheeler at freeway speed. I'm pretty sure if you take the support out for a lot of bridges they will fall down. I don't disagree with you though - I'd much rather we be spending money on infrastructure for this country than infrastructures for other countries after we blow them up.
I don't want to get into an either-or argument- as in "we need to spend more money on infrastructure instead of the military", etc., because then you get bogged down in attacking other spending. I say we need to spend major money on infrastructure no matter what we spend on other stuff, because it's vital and needs to be done right now. If the debt has to increase as a result, then so be it.
Case in point.
Rather than calling this shtick, if you don't agree with me, please explain why not.
I already did. I've never seen anything to suggest something is wrong with our infrastructure. I can't prove that something doesn't exist.

 
There is no excuse for what happened with that bridge in Washington. Our roads and bridges in this country are ####. Why don't we fix them? Whatever it costs, isn't this a worthy expenditure?
Are you really asking why self titled "fiscally conservative" Senate Republicans aren't supporting a large deficit spending infrastructure program?

For quick reference, here are the Senate Republicans who filibustered Obama's infrastructure bill:

Sen. Sessions (R-Ala.)

Sen. Shelby (R-Ala.)

Sen. Murkowski (R-Alaska)

Sen. Lieberman (I-Conn.)

Sen. Chambliss (R-Ga.)

Sen. Isakson (R-Ga.)

Sen. Crapo (R-Idaho)

Sen. Lugar (R-Ind.)

Sen. Grassley (R-Iowa)

Sen. McConnell (R-Ky.)

Sen. Vitter (R-La.)

Sen. Collins (R-Me.)

Sen. Snowe (R-Me.)

Sen. Cochran (R-Miss.)

Sen. Nelson (D-Neb.)

Sen. Burr (R-N.C.)

Sen. Coburn (R-Okla.)

Sen. Inhofe (R-Okla.)

Sen. DeMint (R-S.C.)

Sen. Graham (R-S.C)

Sen. Thune (R-S.D.)

Sen. Alexander (R-Tenn.)

Sen. Hutchison (R-Tex.)

Sen. Hatch (R-Utah)

Sen. Enzi (R-Wyo.)

 
Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.

I, for one, am shocked.
I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?
Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.
Working in the civil engineering field, I can tell you with absolute certainty our roads and bridges are in horrendous shape. I work with bridge inspectors. There are major bridges in NJ I won't drive on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
From the report card:

Water and EnvironmentDams: Dams again earned a grade of D. The average age of the 84,000 dams in the country is 52 years old. The nation’s dams are aging and the number of high-hazard dams is on the rise. Many of these dams were built as low-hazard dams protecting undeveloped agricultural land. However, with an increasing population and greater development below dams, the overall number of high-hazard dams continues to increase, to nearly 14,000 in 2012. The number of deficient dams is currently more than 4,000. The Association of State Dam Safety Officials estimates that it will require an investment of $21 billion to repair these aging, yet critical, high-hazard dams.

Drinking Water: The grade for drinking water improved slightly to a D. At the dawn of the 21st century, much of our drinking water infrastructure is nearing the end of its useful life. There are an estimated 240,000 water main breaks per year in the United States. Assuming every pipe would need to be replaced, the cost over the coming decades could reach more than $1 trillion, according to the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The quality of drinking water in the United States remains universally high, however. Even though pipes and mains are frequently more than 100 years old and in need of replacement, outbreaks of disease attributable to drinking water are rare.

Hazardous Waste: There has been undeniable success in the cleanup of the nation’s hazardous waste and brownfields sites. However, annual funding for Superfund site cleanup is estimated to be as much as $500 million short of what is needed, and 1,280 sites remain on the National Priorities List with an unknown number of potential sites yet to be identified. More than 400,000 brownfields sites await cleanup and redevelopment. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that one in four Americans lives within three miles of a hazardous waste site. The grade for hazardous waste remained unchanged at a D.

Levees: Levees again earned a near failing grade of D- in 2013. The nation’s estimated 100,000 miles of levees can be found in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Many of these levees were originally used to protect farmland, and now are increasingly protecting developed communities. The reliability of these levees is unknown in many cases, and the country has yet to establish a National Levee Safety Program. Public safety remains at risk from these aging structures, and the cost to repair or rehabilitate these levees is roughly estimated to be $100 billion by the National Committee on Levee Safety. However, the return on investment is clear – as levees helped in the prevention of more than $141 billion in flood damages in 2011.

Solid Waste: In 2010, Americans generated 250 million tons of trash. Of that, 85 million tons were recycled or composted. This represents a 34% recycling rate, more than double the 14.5% in 1980. Per capita generation rates of waste have been steady over the past 20 years and have even begun to show signs of decline in the past several years. The grade for solid waste improved in 2013, and it earned the highest grade of B-.

Wastewater: The grade for wastewater improved slightly to a D. Capital investment needs for the nation’s wastewater and stormwater systems are estimated to total $298 billion over the next 20 years. Pipes represent the largest capital need, comprising three quarters of total needs. Fixing and expanding the pipes will address sanitary sewer overflows, combined sewer overflows, and other pipe-related issues. In recent years, capital needs for the treatment plants comprise about 15%-20% of total needs, but will likely increase due to new regulatory requirements. Stormwater needs, while growing, are still small compared with sanitary pipes and treatment plants. Since 2007, the federal government has required cities to invest more than $15 billion in new pipes, plants, and equipment to eliminate combined sewer overflows.

TransportationAviation: Despite the effects of the recent recession, commercial flights were about 33 million higher in number in 2011 than in 2000, stretching the system’s ability to meet the needs of the nation’s economy. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates that the national cost of airport congestion and delays was almost $22 billion in 2012. If current federal funding levels are maintained, the FAA anticipates that the cost of congestion and delays to the economy will rise from $34 billion in 2020 to $63 billion by 2040. Aviation again earned a D.

Bridges: Over two hundred million trips are taken daily across deficient bridges in the nation’s 102 largest metropolitan regions. In total, one in nine of the nation’s bridges are rated as structurally deficient, while the average age of the nation’s 607,380 bridges is currently 42 years. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that to eliminate the nation’s bridge backlog by 2028, we would need to invest $20.5 billion annually, while only $12.8 billion is being spent currently. The challenge for federal, state, and local governments is to increase bridge investments by $8 billion annually to address the identified $76 billion in needs for deficient bridges across the United States. However, with the overall number of structurally deficient bridges continuing to trend downward, the grade improved to C+.

Inland Waterways: Our nation’s inland waterways and rivers are the hidden backbone of our freight network – they carry the equivalent of about 51 million truck trips each year. In many cases, the inland waterways system has not been updated since the 1950s, and more than half of the locks are over 50 years old. Barges are stopped for hours each day with unscheduled delays, preventing goods from getting to market and driving up costs. There is an average of 52 service interruptions a day throughout the system. Projects to repair and replace aging locks and dredge channels take decades to approve and complete, exacerbating the problem further. Inland waterways received a D- grade once again as conditions remain poor and investment levels remain stagnant.

Ports: This new category for 2013 debuted with a grade of C. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimates that more than 95% (by volume) of overseas trade produced or consumed by the United States moves through our ports. To sustain and serve a growing economy and compete internationally, our nation’s ports need to be maintained, modernized, and expanded. While port authorities and their private sector partners have planned over $46 billion in capital improvements from now until 2016, federal funding has declined for navigable waterways and landside freight connections needed to move goods to and from the ports.

Rail: Railroads are experiencing a competitive resurgence as both an energy-efficient freight transportation option and a viable city-to-city passenger service. In 2012, Amtrak recorded its highest year of ridership with 31.2 million passengers, almost doubling ridership since 2000, with growth anticipated to continue. Both freight and passenger rail have been investing heavily in their tracks, bridges, and tunnels as well as adding new capacity for freight and passengers. In 2010 alone, freight railroads renewed the rails on more than 3,100 miles of railroad track, equivalent to going coast to coast. Since 2009, capital investment from both freight and passenger railroads has exceeded $75 billion, actually increasing investment during the recession when materials prices were lower and trains ran less frequently. With high ridership and greater investment in the system, the grade for rail saw the largest improvement, moving up to a C+ in 2013.

Roads: Targeted efforts to improve conditions and significant reductions in highway fatalities resulted in a slight improvement in the roads grade to a D this year. However, forty-two percent of America’s major urban highways remain congested, costing the economy an estimated $101 billion in wasted time and fuel annually. While the conditions have improved in the near term, and federal, state, and local capital investments increased to $91 billion annually, that level of investment is insufficient and still projected to result in a decline in conditions and performance in the long term. Currently, the Federal Highway Administration estimates that $170 billion in capital investment would be needed on an annual basis to significantly improve conditions and performance.

Transit: The grade for transit remained at a D as transit agencies struggled to balance increasing ridership with declining funding. America’s public transit infrastructure plays a vital role in our economy, connecting millions of people with jobs, medical facilities, schools, shopping, and recreation, and it is critical to the one-third of Americans who do not drive cars. Unlike many U.S. infrastructure systems, the transit system is not comprehensive, as 45% of American households lack any access to transit, and millions more have inadequate service levels. Americans who do have access have increased their ridership 9.1% in the past decade, and that trend is expected to continue. Although investment in transit has also increased, deficient and deteriorating transit systems cost the U.S. economy $90 billion in 2010, as many transit agencies are struggling to maintain aging and obsolete fleets and facilities amid an economic downturn that has reduced their funding, forcing service cuts and fare increases.

Public FacilitiesPublic Parks and Recreation: The popularity of parks and outdoor recreation areas in the United States continues to grow, with over 140 million Americans making use of these facilities a part of their daily lives. These activities contribute $646 billion to the nation’s economy, supporting 6.1 million jobs. Yet states and localities struggle to provide these benefits for parks amid flat and declining budgets, reporting an estimated $18.5 billion in unmet needs in 2011. The federal government is also facing a serious challenge as well since the National Park Service estimates its maintenance backlog at approximately $11 billion. The grade for parks remained unchanged at a C-.

Schools: Almost half of America’s public school buildings were built to educate the baby boomers – a generation that is now retiring from the workforce. Public school enrollment is projected to gradually increase through 2019, yet state and local school construction funding continues to decline. National spending on school construction has diminished to approximately $10 billion in 2012, about half the level spent prior to the recession, while the condition of school facilities continues to be a significant concern for communities. Experts now estimate the investment needed to modernize and maintain our nation’s school facilities is at least $270 billion or more. However, due to the absence of national data on school facilities for more than a decade, a complete picture of the condition of our nation’s schools remains mostly unknown. Schools received a D again this year.

EnergyEnergy: America relies on an aging electrical grid and pipeline distribution systems, some of which originated in the 1880s. Investment in power transmission has increased since 2005, but ongoing permitting issues, weather events, and limited maintenance have contributed to an increasing number of failures and power interruptions. While demand for electricity has remained level, the availability of energy in the form of electricity, natural gas, and oil will become a greater challenge after 2020 as the population increases. Although about 17,000 miles of additional high-voltage transmission lines and significant oil and gas pipelines are planned over the next five years, permitting and siting issues threaten their completion. Thus, the grade for energy remained a D+.

ConclusionInfrastructure is the foundation that connects the nation’s businesses, communities, and people, driving our economy and improving our quality of life. For the U.S. economy to be the most competitive in the world, we need a first class infrastructure system – transport systems that move people and goods efficiently and at reasonable cost by land, water, and air; transmission systems that deliver reliable, low-cost power from a wide range of energy sources; and water systems that drive industrial processes as well as the daily functions in our homes. Yet today, our infrastructure systems are failing to keep pace with the current and expanding needs, and investment in infrastructure is faltering.

We must commit today to make our vision of the future a reality – an American infrastructure system that is the source of our prosperity.

 
There is no excuse for what happened with that bridge in Washington. Our roads and bridges in this country are ####. Why don't we fix them? Whatever it costs, isn't this a worthy expenditure?
It costs a lot to give free medical care, schooling, and all sorts of other social services to Illegals. Something has to give. You made your choice.

 
Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.

I, for one, am shocked.
I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?
Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.
How about this?

http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
"Solid waste, drinking water, wastewater, roads, and bridges all saw incremental improvements, and rail jumped from a C- to a C+. No categories saw a decline in grade this year."

 
There is no excuse for what happened with that bridge in Washington. Our roads and bridges in this country are ####. Why don't we fix them? Whatever it costs, isn't this a worthy expenditure?
It costs a lot to give free medical care, schooling, and all sorts of other social services to Illegals. Something has to give. You made your choice.
Calculate up the total costs for all those social services, and then get back to me.

 
Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.

I, for one, am shocked.
I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?
Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.
How about this?

http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
"Solid waste, drinking water, wastewater, roads, and bridges all saw incremental improvements, and rail jumped from a C- to a C+. No categories saw a decline in grade this year."
That's because the situation is already horrendous.

 
Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.

I, for one, am shocked.
I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?
Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.
How about this?

http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
"Solid waste, drinking water, wastewater, roads, and bridges all saw incremental improvements, and rail jumped from a C- to a C+. No categories saw a decline in grade this year."
Incremental improvement is relative. Still too many bridges are structurally deficient.

 
Why aren't we fixing the thousands of bridges that are rated sub par? Because if we do that would mean jobs. Jobs for folks without college degrees as this work is largely blue collar. Those jobs would spur demand. The economy would grow faster. Can't have that. Obama may get a boost out of it. Politics over all.

 
This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated

Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.

I, for one, am shocked.
I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?
Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.
Then you must be hiding in a hole somewhere
I haven't noticed everything collapsing everyday :shrug:

 
There is no excuse for what happened with that bridge in Washington. Our roads and bridges in this country are ####. Why don't we fix them? Whatever it costs, isn't this a worthy expenditure?
It costs a lot to give free medical care, schooling, and all sorts of other social services to Illegals. Something has to give. You made your choice.
Calculate up the total costs for all those social services, and then get back to me.
I've posted them before. You're welcome to go back and find them.

 
proninja said:
This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
Facts:

The bridge was standing and functioning fine

Critical support beams were taken out by a big truck

The bridge fell

I'm no structural engineer, but to claim that the bridge fell without the aid of the huge multi ton truck traveling at freeway speed that ran full blast into the support structure of the bridge seems a little silly.
Agreed. Any bridge will collapse if the supporting members are taken out. But that doesn't negate the need for substantial road/bridge improvement.

 
Drinking Water: The grade for drinking water improved slightly to a D. At the dawn of the 21st century, much of our drinking water infrastructure is nearing the end of its useful life. There are an estimated 240,000 water main breaks per year in the United States. Assuming every pipe would need to be replaced, the cost over the coming decades could reach more than $1 trillion, according to the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The quality of drinking water in the United States remains universally high, however. Even though pipes and mains are frequently more than 100 years old and in need of replacement, outbreaks of disease attributable to drinking water are rare.

This alone should scare the hell out of everybody. How long are we going to wait on this? Until there are outbreaks of disease?

 
The answer probably is "We should be" but when you lead with citing the Washington bridge as a reason why, it isn't the best starting point, IMO.

 
proninja said:
This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
Facts: The bridge was standing and functioning fineCritical support beams were taken out by a big truckThe bridge fell I'm no structural engineer, but to claim that the bridge fell without the aid of the huge multi ton truck traveling at freeway speed that ran full blast into the support structure of the bridge seems a little silly.
The National Bridge Inventory Database gave the bridge a 57.4 rating. The scale goes from zero to 100, with zero being the worst. A bridge with a rating of 50 or less qualifies for replacement, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers.So basically it needed to be replaced. It wasn't just the truck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The National Bridge Inventory Database gave the bridge a 57.4 rating. The scale goes from zero to 100, with zero being the worst. A bridge with a rating of 50 or less qualifies for replacement, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers.So basically it needed to be replaced. It wasn't just the truck.
:confused:57.4 > 50

Not great. But not qualified for replacement.

 
The answer probably is "We should be" but when you lead with citing the Washington bridge as a reason why, it isn't the best starting point, IMO.
Perhaps the bridge is a poor example. I don't know. I'll take your word that it IS a poor example. But the bridge should direct our attention to the larger issue.

 
proninja said:
This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
Facts: The bridge was standing and functioning fineCritical support beams were taken out by a big truckThe bridge fell I'm no structural engineer, but to claim that the bridge fell without the aid of the huge multi ton truck traveling at freeway speed that ran full blast into the support structure of the bridge seems a little silly.
The National Bridge Inventory Database gave the bridge a 57.4 rating. The scale goes from zero to 100, with zero being the worst. A bridge with a rating of 50 or less qualifies for replacement, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers.So basically it needed to be replaced. It wasn't just the truck.
57.4 > 50.

 
This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated

Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.

I, for one, am shocked.
I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?
Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.
Then you must be hiding in a hole somewhere
I haven't noticed everything collapsing everyday
Well then never mind all those reports done by experts in the field. You let us know when your personal experience tells you there's a problem.

 
The answer probably is "We should be" but when you lead with citing the Washington bridge as a reason why, it isn't the best starting point, IMO.
Perhaps the bridge is a poor example. I don't know. I'll take your word that it IS a poor example. But the bridge should direct our attention to the larger issue.
Why?Did you know that the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed because of a design flaw and not because of lack of repair?

 
Drinking Water: The grade for drinking water improved slightly to a D. At the dawn of the 21st century, much of our drinking water infrastructure is nearing the end of its useful life. There are an estimated 240,000 water main breaks per year in the United States. Assuming every pipe would need to be replaced, the cost over the coming decades could reach more than $1 trillion, according to the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The quality of drinking water in the United States remains universally high, however. Even though pipes and mains are frequently more than 100 years old and in need of replacement, outbreaks of disease attributable to drinking water are rare.

This alone should scare the hell out of everybody. How long are we going to wait on this? Until there are outbreaks of disease?
Likely

 
The answer probably is "We should be" but when you lead with citing the Washington bridge as a reason why, it isn't the best starting point, IMO.
Perhaps the bridge is a poor example. I don't know. I'll take your word that it IS a poor example. But the bridge should direct our attention to the larger issue.
Why?Did you know that the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed because of a design flaw and not because of lack of repair?
But if it can be used to direct attention to the agenda to spend more, then it should.

 
The answer probably is "We should be" but when you lead with citing the Washington bridge as a reason why, it isn't the best starting point, IMO.
Perhaps the bridge is a poor example. I don't know. I'll take your word that it IS a poor example. But the bridge should direct our attention to the larger issue.
Why?Did you know that the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed because of a design flaw and not because of lack of repair?
I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me. Most of America's civil engineers are great, and they're going to, in most cases, declare major roads or bridges to be bad long before a terrible accident can occur. But this still doesn't mean we should ignore the overall problem. When you spend money only as a result of emergencies, you end up spending far more than you would if you had chosen to address the problem long before.

 
Love all the math majors. Unlike some folks I read what I post. I understand the numbers were different. I also understand there is a lot more distance between a hundred versus 57 than there is between 57 versus 50. It was on it's last legand was on it's way to needing to be replaced.

The bridge that collapsed into the Skagit River north of Seattle will get a short-term patch within weeks, officials say, keeping this busy portion of the I-5 interstate open while the crunched original is replaced.

"We will install a temporary span on the bridge that will restore traffic while we build a safe and durable permanent span adjacent to it," Gov. Jay Inslee said in a statement Sunday. That permanent replacement should be ready by early autumn.

That’s good news for commuters and travelers along this busy highway through the Pacific Northwest into Canada now poking their way along other river crossings. But it’s also a reminder that many older bridges around the country are at risk, in serious need of repair or replacement.

“Thousands of bridges around the US may be one freak accident or mistake away from collapse, even if the spans are deemed structurally sound,” reports the Associated Press.

“The crossings are kept standing by engineering design, not supported with brute strength or redundant protections like their more modern counterparts,” the AP reports. “Bridge regulators call the more risky spans ‘fracture critical,’ meaning that if a single, vital component of the bridge is compromised, it can crumple.”

Which is exactly what happened when a tractor-trailer carrying a legal oversized load clipped a girder on the I-5 bridge, sending one span and two vehicles plunging into the river below. No one was killed or seriously injured, and the truck driver (who made it across the bridge and immediately stopped) has not been charged.

Vulnerable bridges carry millions of passengers a day. Some examples: In Boston, a six-lane highway near Logan airport includes a "fracture critical" bridge over Bennington Street. In northern Chicago, an I-90 pass that goes over Ashland Avenue is in the same category. An I-880 bridge over 5th Avenue in Oakland,Calif., is also on the list.

There are 66,749 “structurally deficient” bridges and 84,748 “functionally obsolete” bridges in the United States, according to the Federal Highway Administration – about one-fourth of the 607,000 total bridges nationally.

"Since 1989, we've had nearly 600 bridge failures in this country,” Barry LePatner, author of "Too Big to Fall: America's Failing Infrastructure and the Way Forward," told CBS News last August. “While they're not widely publicized … a large number of bridges in every state are really a danger to the traveling public."

The Huffington Post notes that in his State of the Union address this year, President Obama urged repairs of "the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country." He proposed a plan called "Fix it First.”

“Investing in infrastructure not only makes our roads, bridges, and ports safer and allows our businesses and workers to be as competitive as they need to be in the global economy, it also creates thousands of good American jobs that cannot be outsourced,” states a White House fact sheet announcing Obama’s infrastructure program. “The President’s plan will immediately invest $50 billion in our nation’s transportation infrastructure, with $40 billion targeted to the most urgent upgrades and focused on fixing our highways, bridges, transit systems, and airports most in need of repair.”

Instead, Congress failed to avoid the sequester and transportation repair spending faces a $1.9 billion cut.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay, to answer your question sans hysterics - It's because we don't have the money.

Actually, it's because we don't have the will to spend the money we're already spending in the best ways.

But we're Americans so we should be able to have whatever we want whenever we want it because we're Americans.

 
Love all the math majors. Unlike some folks I read what I post. I understand the numbers were different. I also understand there is a lot more distance between a hundred versus 57 than there is between 57 versus 50. It was on it's last legand was on it's way to needing to be replaced.
So it was only MOSTLY dead?

 
Okay, to answer your question sans hysterics - It's because we don't have the money.

Actually, it's because we don't have the will to spend the money we're already spending in the best ways.

But we're Americans so we should be able to have whatever we want whenever we want it because we're Americans.
We have enough money to bomb the #### out of anyone we want though. we have enough money to give billions to farm subsidies. We have enough money to give billions in corporate welfare. We have plenty of money and it will only cost more to fix it later.

 
proninja said:
This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
Facts:

The bridge was standing and functioning fine

Critical support beams were taken out by a big truck

The bridge fell

I'm no structural engineer, but to claim that the bridge fell without the aid of the huge multi ton truck traveling at freeway speed that ran full blast into the support structure of the bridge seems a little silly.
Agreed. Any bridge will collapse if the supporting members are taken out. But that doesn't negate the need for substantial road/bridge improvement.
Having not paid any attention to this whole bridge collapse, I'm guessing that the whole truss system didn't give much clearance, probably less than the FHWA would allow for clearance today on the interstate.

 
Okay, to answer your question sans hysterics - It's because we don't have the money.

Actually, it's because we don't have the will to spend the money we're already spending in the best ways.

But we're Americans so we should be able to have whatever we want whenever we want it because we're Americans.
We have enough money to bomb the #### out of anyone we want though. we have enough money to give billions to farm subsidies. We have enough money to give billions in corporate welfare. We have plenty of money and it will only cost more to fix it later.
Hey crabby pants. I already said we need to spend more on it.

Where would you like to take it from first?

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top