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?
Or foam semi-truck technology.For real? Do you mean, "Why aren't we spending more on anti-truck bridge technology"?
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.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 buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
Case in point.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.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.
Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
Rather than calling this shtick, if you don't agree with me, please explain why not.Case in point.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.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.
How about this?Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
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.Rather than calling this shtick, if you don't agree with me, please explain why not.Case in point.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.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.
Are you really asking why self titled "fiscally conservative" Senate Republicans aren't supporting a large deficit spending infrastructure program?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?
3D foam printers.Or foam semi-truck technology.For real? Do you mean, "Why aren't we spending more on anti-truck bridge technology"?
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.Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
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.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?
Then you must be hiding in a hole somewhereYes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
"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."How about this?Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
Calculate up the total costs for all those social services, and then get back to me.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.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?
That's because the situation is already horrendous."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."How about this?Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
Incremental improvement is relative. Still too many bridges are structurally deficient."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."How about this?Yes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
I haven't noticed everything collapsing everydayThis whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
Then you must be hiding in a hole somewhereYes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
I've posted them before. You're welcome to go back and find them.Calculate up the total costs for all those social services, and then get back to me.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.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?
Agreed. Any bridge will collapse if the supporting members are taken out. But that doesn't negate the need for substantial road/bridge improvement.proninja said:Facts:This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
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.
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.proninja said: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.This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
57.4 > 50The 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.
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.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.
57.4 > 50.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.proninja said: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.This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
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.I haven't noticed everything collapsing everydayThis whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
Then you must be hiding in a hole somewhereYes I am. I've never seen anything to suggest otherwise.I buy into whatever makes sense. Are you saying our infrastructure is in good shape?Tim is just buying into the liberal "crumbling infrastructure" schtick.
I, for one, am shocked.
Why?Did you know that the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed because of a design flaw and not because of lack of repair?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.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.
LikelyDrinking 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?
But if it can be used to direct attention to the agenda to spend more, then it should.Why?Did you know that the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed because of a design flaw and not because of lack of repair?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.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.
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.Why?Did you know that the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis collapsed because of a design flaw and not because of lack of repair?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.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.
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.
So it was only MOSTLY dead?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.
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.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.
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.Agreed. Any bridge will collapse if the supporting members are taken out. But that doesn't negate the need for substantial road/bridge improvement.proninja said:Facts:This whole idea that it was just because of a truck is really stupid. The bridge was rated
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.
Hey crabby pants. I already said we need to spend more on it.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.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.