whembly wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
New question.

On the subject of America's aging infrastructure, your entire government, including both the President and President-Elect, agrees on how severe and immediate the problem is. The agreement on it is in fact so strong, that even Business and Labor agree on it, and in fact those two sides came together to plead to the government to find a way to provide funding to fix the problem before it becomes a literal disaster.

If literally everyone in charge of your government, plus both sides of the business/labor dispute, are in total agreement... why are you guys still refusing to let your government increase the gas tax to account for over 20 years of inflation, so they can fund simple things like routine maintenance and inspections of 50-year-old bridges and dams?

The government isn't like your personal finances. They can't just take money from the military to fund this the way you can shuffle money between your chequing and savings accounts. The money can't be shifted around at will. The gas tax was created specifically to fund this, but the fact it's been at the same 18c/gallon for over 20 years means that when you adjust for inflation, it's insufficient because it's actually gone down by almost 40% since then.

Are you really so opposed to the idea of something as universal as paying taxes that you're willing to let bridges collapse and dams burst because your government has spent years trying to find another way to fund this without success, and Americans would rather let it happen than support their entire government by letting them raise the tax to stop it from happening just to account for inflation?

Well... because we have both federal and state funding streams that are earmarked for roads and bridges.

The feds give "block grants" to states for some of this...

The states get their funds in their own way.

For instance, in Missouri it's called a "road tax" which a flat percentage of the blue book value of your car. You pay this every year during tax time.

However, in Illinois, they don't tax you based on what vehicle your drive... that tax you at the gas pump. Hence, why you'll almost always see a gas station right on the Missour side of the state line in just about every roadway.

The state of Missouri and Illinois run their state governance differently.

Doesn't your Canadian provinces work that way too?

EDIT: other funding streams could be used for infrastructure projects as well...

 whembly wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

You read all that. And that's your response. THAT is your response after hearing your entire government has spent years trying to find an alternative way to fund this so they don't have to raise the gas tax, and have come up with a total of zero solutions.

Raising gas taxes won't solve it Pouncey.

Besides, it's not raising taxes on gas the problem... it's literally spending priority is the problem.

We're not a tax-poor country.

 Pouncey wrote:
New question.

On the subject of America's aging infrastructure, your entire government, including both the President and President-Elect, agrees on how severe and immediate the problem is. The agreement on it is in fact so strong, that even Business and Labor agree on it, and in fact those two sides came together to plead to the government to find a way to provide funding to fix the problem before it becomes a literal disaster.

If literally everyone in charge of your government, plus both sides of the business/labor dispute, are in total agreement... why are you guys still refusing to let your government increase the gas tax to account for over 20 years of inflation, so they can fund simple things like routine maintenance and inspections of 50-year-old bridges and dams?

The government isn't like your personal finances. They can't just take money from the military to fund this the way you can shuffle money between your chequing and savings accounts. The money can't be shifted around at will. The gas tax was created specifically to fund this, but the fact it's been at the same 18c/gallon for over 20 years means that when you adjust for inflation, it's insufficient because it's actually gone down by almost 40% since then.

Are you really so opposed to the idea of something as universal as paying taxes that you're willing to let bridges collapse and dams burst because your government has spent years trying to find another way to fund this without success, and Americans would rather let it happen than support their entire government by letting them raise the tax that was created to stop it from happening just to account for inflation?

 Pouncey wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
New question.

On the subject of America's aging infrastructure, your entire government, including both the President and President-Elect, agrees on how severe and immediate the problem is. The agreement on it is in fact so strong, that even Business and Labor agree on it, and in fact those two sides came together to plead to the government to find a way to provide funding to fix the problem before it becomes a literal disaster.

If literally everyone in charge of your government, plus both sides of the business/labor dispute, are in total agreement... why are you guys still refusing to let your government increase the gas tax to account for over 20 years of inflation, so they can fund simple things like routine maintenance and inspections of 50-year-old bridges and dams?

The government isn't like your personal finances. They can't just take money from the military to fund this the way you can shuffle money between your chequing and savings accounts. The money can't be shifted around at will. The gas tax was created specifically to fund this, but the fact it's been at the same 18c/gallon for over 20 years means that when you adjust for inflation, it's insufficient because it's actually gone down by almost 40% since then.

Are you really so opposed to the idea of something as universal as paying taxes that you're willing to let bridges collapse and dams burst because your government has spent years trying to find another way to fund this without success, and Americans would rather let it happen than support their entire government by letting them raise the tax to stop it from happening just to account for inflation?

Well... because we have both federal and state funding streams that are earmarked for roads and bridges.

The feds give "block grants" to states for some of this...

The states get their funds in their own way.

For instance, in Missouri it's called a "road tax" which a flat percentage of the blue book value of your car. You pay this every year during tax time.

However, in Illinois, they don't tax you based on what vehicle your drive... that tax you at the gas pump. Hence, why you'll almost always see a gas station right on the Missour side of the state line in just about every roadway.

The state of Missouri and Illinois run their state governance differently.

Doesn't your Canadian provinces work that way too?

EDIT: other funding streams could be used for infrastructure projects as well...

The state of Alabama has thousands of dams, but cannot afford to pay even a single inspector to inspect them.

Also, the fact I'm Canadian is why I'm being so serious here. It's why I'm urging you to take this so seriously. Because I have seen what happens when a bridge collapses onto a busy highway because it was in a critical state of disrepair and eventually just gave way. That happened to a bridge near Montreal a few years ago.

I don't want that to happen to anyone in your country.

I'm not trying to start an argument. I'm trying to tell you the reality.

Your entire government has been desperate to find a way to fund this work. They know how important it is. They know what needs to be done. They can't afford it.

Anything you suggest as another way to fund it is something they have already looked at and found to be insufficient. They have known about this for over a decade, not a single solution has ever been found.

 Pouncey wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

You read all that. And that's your response. THAT is your response after hearing your entire government has spent years trying to find an alternative way to fund this so they don't have to raise the gas tax, and have come up with a total of zero solutions.

Raising gas taxes won't solve it Pouncey.

Besides, it's not raising taxes on gas the problem... it's literally spending priority is the problem.

We're not a tax-poor country.

That's my point here. YES. RAISING GAS TAXES WILL SOLVE IT.

That is how easy it is to solve this problem. The gas tax was CREATED to fund this work, but it hasn't been ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION for over 20 years!

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
New question.

On the subject of America's aging infrastructure, your entire government, including both the President and President-Elect, agrees on how severe and immediate the problem is. The agreement on it is in fact so strong, that even Business and Labor agree on it, and in fact those two sides came together to plead to the government to find a way to provide funding to fix the problem before it becomes a literal disaster.

If literally everyone in charge of your government, plus both sides of the business/labor dispute, are in total agreement... why are you guys still refusing to let your government increase the gas tax to account for over 20 years of inflation, so they can fund simple things like routine maintenance and inspections of 50-year-old bridges and dams?

The government isn't like your personal finances. They can't just take money from the military to fund this the way you can shuffle money between your chequing and savings accounts. The money can't be shifted around at will. The gas tax was created specifically to fund this, but the fact it's been at the same 18c/gallon for over 20 years means that when you adjust for inflation, it's insufficient because it's actually gone down by almost 40% since then.

Are you really so opposed to the idea of something as universal as paying taxes that you're willing to let bridges collapse and dams burst because your government has spent years trying to find another way to fund this without success, and Americans would rather let it happen than support their entire government by letting them raise the tax that was created to stop it from happening just to account for inflation?

It is a problem and needs to be paid for. However, a Gas Tax hurts the poor more, as Frazzled said.

Tax the rich!

 Pouncey wrote:


That's my point here. YES. RAISING GAS TAXES WILL SOLVE IT.

That is how easy it is to solve this problem. The gas tax was CREATED to fund this work, but it hasn't been ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION for over 20 years!

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
New question.

On the subject of America's aging infrastructure, your entire government, including both the President and President-Elect, agrees on how severe and immediate the problem is. The agreement on it is in fact so strong, that even Business and Labor agree on it, and in fact those two sides came together to plead to the government to find a way to provide funding to fix the problem before it becomes a literal disaster.

If literally everyone in charge of your government, plus both sides of the business/labor dispute, are in total agreement... why are you guys still refusing to let your government increase the gas tax to account for over 20 years of inflation, so they can fund simple things like routine maintenance and inspections of 50-year-old bridges and dams?

The government isn't like your personal finances. They can't just take money from the military to fund this the way you can shuffle money between your chequing and savings accounts. The money can't be shifted around at will. The gas tax was created specifically to fund this, but the fact it's been at the same 18c/gallon for over 20 years means that when you adjust for inflation, it's insufficient because it's actually gone down by almost 40% since then.

Are you really so opposed to the idea of something as universal as paying taxes that you're willing to let bridges collapse and dams burst because your government has spent years trying to find another way to fund this without success, and Americans would rather let it happen than support their entire government by letting them raise the tax that was created to stop it from happening just to account for inflation?

It is a problem and needs to be paid for. However, a Gas Tax hurts the poor more, as Frazzled said.

Tax the rich!

You read all that. And that's your response. THAT is your response after hearing your entire government has spent years trying to find an alternative way to fund this so they don't have to raise the gas tax, and have come up with a total of zero solutions.

 Pouncey wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4i9aWt3L8Y

This is what you are allowing to happen to the US with what you just said.

 ender502 wrote:
When complaining about trump conflicts of interest or double dealing, an appropriate response is not "but Clinton did it."

Whether or not she did has nothing to do with whether or not trump is doing I. And her guilt (assuming she is guilty) in no way lessens trump's guilt.

So if you are answering charges of conflicts with trump by citing Hillary I suggest you cowboy up and stop obfuscating.

Just deal with the fact that you voted in someone who is a serial scanner and welcher of deals.

Ender502

 Pouncey wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
New question.

On the subject of America's aging infrastructure, your entire government, including both the President and President-Elect, agrees on how severe and immediate the problem is. The agreement on it is in fact so strong, that even Business and Labor agree on it, and in fact those two sides came together to plead to the government to find a way to provide funding to fix the problem before it becomes a literal disaster.

If literally everyone in charge of your government, plus both sides of the business/labor dispute, are in total agreement... why are you guys still refusing to let your government increase the gas tax to account for over 20 years of inflation, so they can fund simple things like routine maintenance and inspections of 50-year-old bridges and dams?

The government isn't like your personal finances. They can't just take money from the military to fund this the way you can shuffle money between your chequing and savings accounts. The money can't be shifted around at will. The gas tax was created specifically to fund this, but the fact it's been at the same 18c/gallon for over 20 years means that when you adjust for inflation, it's insufficient because it's actually gone down by almost 40% since then.

Are you really so opposed to the idea of something as universal as paying taxes that you're willing to let bridges collapse and dams burst because your government has spent years trying to find another way to fund this without success, and Americans would rather let it happen than support their entire government by letting them raise the tax that was created to stop it from happening just to account for inflation?

It is a problem and needs to be paid for. However, a Gas Tax hurts the poor more, as Frazzled said.

Tax the rich!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4i9aWt3L8Y

This is what you are allowing to happen to the US with what you just said.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4i9aWt3L8Y

This is what you are allowing to happen to the US with what you just said.

BS. It's almost like you didn't read anything I wrote.

1. I am for increased spending on our roads, bridges, power grid, etc. fething read that sentence 10 fething times until you fething get that.
2. I am NOT for doing it through a gas tax. The poor are taxed ENOUGH! Sales taxes hurt them the MOST!
3. Tax the top 1-5%. Add even a 0.5% tax and you have the money you need.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4i9aWt3L8Y

This is what you are allowing to happen to the US with what you just said.

BS. It's almost like you didn't read anything I wrote.

1. I am for increased spending on our roads, bridges, power grid, etc. fething read that sentence 10 fething times until you fething get that.
2. I am NOT for doing it through a gas tax. The poor are taxed ENOUGH! Sales taxes hurt them the MOST!
3. Tax the top 1-5%. Add even a 0.5% tax and you have the money you need.

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

 Pouncey wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4i9aWt3L8Y

This is what you are allowing to happen to the US with what you just said.

BS. It's almost like you didn't read anything I wrote.

1. I am for increased spending on our roads, bridges, power grid, etc. fething read that sentence 10 fething times until you fething get that.
2. I am NOT for doing it through a gas tax. The poor are taxed ENOUGH! Sales taxes hurt them the MOST!
3. Tax the top 1-5%. Add even a 0.5% tax and you have the money you need.

I want you to do something.

Actually look into the reality of this. You are not. You are pretending to yourself that your government has not spent over a decade trying to fund this without having to raise the gas tax, without finding a way that would work. You are then pretending that in less than the 30 minute timespan this conversation has lasted, you can provide a solution that your government has overlooked for the past decade.

 Pouncey wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4i9aWt3L8Y

This is what you are allowing to happen to the US with what you just said.

BS. It's almost like you didn't read anything I wrote.

1. I am for increased spending on our roads, bridges, power grid, etc. fething read that sentence 10 fething times until you fething get that.
2. I am NOT for doing it through a gas tax. The poor are taxed ENOUGH! Sales taxes hurt them the MOST!
3. Tax the top 1-5%. Add even a 0.5% tax and you have the money you need.

I want you to do something.

Actually look into the reality of this. You are not. You are pretending to yourself that your government has not spent over a decade trying to fund this without having to raise the gas tax, without finding a way that would work. You are then pretending that in less than the 30 minute timespan this conversation has lasted, you can provide a solution that your government has overlooked for the past decade.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4i9aWt3L8Y

This is what you are allowing to happen to the US with what you just said.

BS. It's almost like you didn't read anything I wrote.

1. I am for increased spending on our roads, bridges, power grid, etc. fething read that sentence 10 fething times until you fething get that.
2. I am NOT for doing it through a gas tax. The poor are taxed ENOUGH! Sales taxes hurt them the MOST!
3. Tax the top 1-5%. Add even a 0.5% tax and you have the money you need.

I want you to do something.

Actually look into the reality of this. You are not. You are pretending to yourself that your government has not spent over a decade trying to fund this without having to raise the gas tax, without finding a way that would work. You are then pretending that in less than the 30 minute timespan this conversation has lasted, you can provide a solution that your government has overlooked for the past decade.

And what of that 1% because they make billions they are exempted from giving money back into the government?

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

I just named three. You need to think outside the box. I particularly like putting a toll on Yonge St.
You should really examine this psychological thing you have about taxing the poor as the only solution.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

There is a fething solution. Tax the rich.

Honest question: Do you have a learning disability? I need to know, because your behavior indicates yes.

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

There is a fething solution. Tax the rich.

Honest question: Do you have a learning disability? I need to know, because your behavior indicates yes.

 Frazzled wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

There is a fething solution. Tax the rich.

Honest question: Do you have a learning disability? I need to know, because your behavior indicates yes.

Now I know you're not Canadian. Thats way too impolite. Even when high sticking someone they will be sure to say sorry!

Now Pouncy what do you think about tolling Yonge?*


*Yonge Street is the longest road in North America, going right through Toronto. I got lost once and walked most of it on a February night trying to find my hotel, after a couple of British mates introduced me to something call "ale."

 kronk wrote:
And I'm done with Pouncy's trolling.

 kronk wrote:
And I'm done with Pouncy's trolling.

I am not, and have never been, a troll.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

There is a fething solution. Tax the rich.

Honest question: Do you have a learning disability? I need to know, because your behavior indicates yes.

Now I know you're not Canadian. Thats way too impolite. Even when high sticking someone they will be sure to say sorry!

Now Pouncy what do you think about tolling Yonge?*


*Yonge Street is the longest road in North America, going right through Toronto. I got lost once and walked most of it on a February night trying to find my hotel, after a couple of British mates introduced me to something call "ale."

I think it's less important than the fact random citizens think they can find a solution in less than an hour to a problem their government hasn't found a solution to in ten years.

 Frazzled wrote:

 kronk wrote:
And I'm done with Pouncy's trolling.

Just don't drive anywhere. The road could collapse.

Now about that Younge street tollway. What say $1.50 every three miles?

 whembly wrote:

It's the beauty of having 50 semi-autonomous states trying to make their world go 'round. The issues at Alabama is "concerning"... but, the residences in the other 49 states probably don't care nor can do anything about it.

 whembly wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 kronk wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Again, why do you hate poor people?

I don't.

I am saying that there is no other way.

You think there has to be, but there is not. There is no alternative. In over ten years of trying to find another way, your entire government has failed to do so.

There is a fething solution. Tax the rich.

Honest question: Do you have a learning disability? I need to know, because your behavior indicates yes.

Now I know you're not Canadian. Thats way too impolite. Even when high sticking someone they will be sure to say sorry!

Now Pouncy what do you think about tolling Yonge?*


*Yonge Street is the longest road in North America, going right through Toronto. I got lost once and walked most of it on a February night trying to find my hotel, after a couple of British mates introduced me to something call "ale."

I think it's less important than the fact random citizens think they can find a solution in less than an hour to a problem their government hasn't found a solution to in ten years.

Newsflash Pouncy...

Every state has issues.... and many are unique to that region.

It's the beauty of having 50 semi-autonomous states trying to make their world go 'round. The issues at Alabama is "concerning"... but, the residences in the other 49 states probably don't care nor can do anything about it.

 kronk wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 kronk wrote:
And I'm done with Pouncy's trolling.

Just don't drive anywhere. The road could collapse.

Now about that Younge street tollway. What say $1.50 every three miles?

I want to go throw myself off the Golden Gate Bridge, but it will probably just fall into the bay before I get there.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

It's the beauty of having 50 semi-autonomous states trying to make their world go 'round. The issues at Alabama is "concerning"... but, the residences in the other 49 states probably don't care nor can do anything about it.

I care enough to propose a solution that would actually work, but it did not include beating the gak out of poor people, so Pouncey didn't like it.

Enjoy watching your fellow citizens die live on the national news in the near future from a bridge having collapsed or a dam burst because you didn't care.

 Pouncey wrote:

I think it's less important than the fact random citizens think they can find a solution in less than an hour to a problem their government hasn't found a solution to in ten years.

 Pouncey wrote:
Enjoy watching your fellow citizens die live on the national news in the near future from a bridge having collapsed or a dam burst because you didn't care.