Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (351252)	9/20/2007 3:00:52 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578228

re: I understand your explanation, but the needs of the nation really ought to weigh more heavily than the needs of the locals when it comes to federal tax money. It is what it is. The Fed is where the money (read power) is. You could overhaul the tax system to give the tax dollars to the states instead of the feds, but that could also be problematic. The people in Detroit might care more about widening a minor road that goes to the mall than about widening an interstate artery. Suddenly you have a bottleneck in the national transportation system. There are always winners and losers; the nature of taxes. Locally they just put in this new ultra high tech "intelligent" traffic light system on a major road that I have to cross twice a day during rush hour. Damn thing is so smart it realizes that the people on the main road are 100X more numerous than us little people trying to cross the road. So it only gives us a green for about 8 seconds, enough for 2 or 3 cars, then red for about five minutes. It's a lot of fun when you are the 10th car.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (351252)	9/20/2007 8:36:50 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 1578228

I think a data point missing in this state transportation discussion is the idea that the fed "prints" money in the view of liberals. The state can't print any.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (351252)	9/22/2007 6:53:03 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578228

But Jack Murtha Airport goes a little too far, IMO. And of course, Ted Stevens' "Bridge to Nowhere" is the worst. Yet both of those could legally fit under the definition of interstate commerce. After all, how else are out-of-state trucks going to supply that remote island in Alaska without the bridge? While Murtha has pork issues, building an airport is not one of them.....of course, if its not being used, then that is bad. As for the "bridge to nowhere", that was intended to help an airport as well. So they are both similar issues although the AK bridge was a total joke. Most airports in this country have been built by the feds. Now in the larger [read busier] airports like LAX, the feds can get the airlines to ante part or all of the bill for their terminals. However the feds still build the main terminals, runways, roads etc. Now with the smaller airports like Johnston or Binghamton or Harrisburg, the airlines would not bother to fly to these cities if they didn't have existing airports. So to insure that most cities in this country have airline service, the feds build most of the existing airports and then the airlines pay rent to use the facilities. The money to improve the airports comes from the airlines rent plus the tax you pay on every airline ticket you buy. PS. The Johnston airport is a boondoggle.......here's an example of the service from that airport....that might explain why Murtha is still on the corrupt list: US Airways has 4 daily flights from Johnstown to Pittsburgh, for a total of 136 seats daily and 8743 seats on all flights monthly. Flights on this route have an average occupancy of 25%. The on-time percentage for these flights is 90%. The cheapest roundtrip airfares from Johnstown to Pittsburgh is $ 222.