I picture 10 construction workers standing around watching 1 guy work & wonder: is this the best use of $275B?
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-11-29/hillary-clinton-calls-for-275-billion-in-federal-infrastructure-spending …
-
-
Replying to @zackkanter
@zackkanter depends what kind of infrastructure we use it on. Infrastructure we need vs the kind someone wants. Devil is in the details1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RyanJanoch
@RyanJanoch I think infrastructure spending often comes down to what someone wants (or owes) as a pet project rather than something we need.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zackkanter
@zackkanter too often that is true. Also "shovel ready" likely was tabled when prioritizing spending before. Why does cash influx free it?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RyanJanoch
@RyanJanoch@zackkanter building automated ports would be worthwhile use of govt funds. Only need $5B to do the whole country.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @typesfast
@typesfast@zackkanter economic impact on whole country plus safety and efficiency improvements makes too much sense1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RyanJanoch
@typesfast@zackkanter Is the fight vs automated ports like the fight against containers originally in NY/NJ? Will private co have to fund?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RyanJanoch
@RyanJanoch@zackkanter same fight yes, private companies ready and willing to fund if a settlement can be reached with displaced unions2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@typesfast @RyanJanoch I'm good with $5B for automated ports + $270B towards lobbying against unions.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.