Interesting and alarming NYT article this morning on the growing cost and need to replace the aging water sewage system in this country. As someone who grew up in Portsmouth, near New Boston, I know the pain of constant water pipe breaks.

Infrastructure, an area that is not a popular or sexy term is desperately needed in much of the country.

I'd argue that infrastructure needs to gain more attention than healthcare and even financial reform.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/us/15water.html?ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=all.

I'm a head of the game with my in-house infrastructure ...... replace my complete old galvanized pipe even inside the walls with …………PEX

Easy, quick and less costly that copper or plastic…

My Dad is a public utilities director for a city here in Ohio.

He complains about the same thing quite often.

However, he was lucky in that they just completed major upgrades, renovations, etc., of the wastewater and water treatment plants. They look absolutely beautiful, and will be more than adequate for quite awhile.

However, he dreads winter because of the constant water line breaks. He can essentially only replace when they break, not the money for preventative measures.

ptown_trojans_1 wrote: Interesting and alarming NYT article this morning on the growing cost and need to replace the aging water sewage system in this country. As someone who grew up in Portsmouth, near New Boston, I know the pain of constant water pipe breaks.

Infrastructure, an area that is not a popular or sexy term is desperately needed in much of the country.

I'd argue that infrastructure needs to gain more attention than healthcare and even financial reform.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/us/15water.html?ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=all.

Socialism will not fly we need more money for our military budget we are not secure in this nation.

Almost all of our infrastructure needs replacing since it's been ignored for so long. Our highways are still serviceable but are getting harder to maintain, the electric grid could use some attention, our internet/cable/fiber networks are pathetic, and obviously our water systems are old.

Wonderful. But yeah, let's keep cutting taxes.

Belly35 wrote: I'm a head of the game with my in-house infrastructure ...... replace my complete old galvanized pipe even inside the walls with …………PEX

Easy, quick and less costly that copper or plastic…

Great. Want to do that for the whole street?

BCS, We spend more money on defense than almost all the countries of the world put together. We do not need to be spending more on defense. Actually, we need to become more efficient and spend about 15-20 percent less. I love how both sides want to consistently spend more money on their holy cows, republicans on defense and democrats on social programs, and then argue about how the other guys cow needs to be cut. We need to get our financial books in order or we won't have much of either pretty soon.

As for national infrastructure, we need to start investing in it. What will help our investment is getting this economy going again by producing things. We can have people start saving again and that drives capital improvements.

bman618 wrote: BCS, We spend more money on defense than almost all the countries of the world put together. We do not need to be spending more on defense. Actually, we need to become more efficient and spend about 15-20 percent less. I love how both sides want to consistently spend more money on their holy cows, republicans on defense and democrats on social programs, and then argue about how the other guys cow needs to be cut. We need to get our financial books in order or we won't have much of either pretty soon.

As for national infrastructure, we need to start investing in it. What will help our investment is getting this economy going again by producing things. We can have people start saving again and that drives capital improvements.

I'm fairly positive that BCS was being sarcastic.

I Wear Pants wrote:

bman618 wrote: BCS, We spend more money on defense than almost all the countries of the world put together. We do not need to be spending more on defense. Actually, we need to become more efficient and spend about 15-20 percent less. I love how both sides want to consistently spend more money on their holy cows, republicans on defense and democrats on social programs, and then argue about how the other guys cow needs to be cut. We need to get our financial books in order or we won't have much of either pretty soon.

As for national infrastructure, we need to start investing in it. What will help our investment is getting this economy going again by producing things. We can have people start saving again and that drives capital improvements.

I'm fairly positive that BCS was being sarcastic.

Yes, I think I might have violated Poe's law though.

More likely, sarcasm should be reserved for those with more advanced writing skill levels.

I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

queencitybuckeye wrote: More likely, sarcasm should be reserved for those with more advanced writing skill levels.

This post coming from you....oh the irony...with a capital I.

^^^Footie...Do you need to get laid?

Quint wrote: I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

That's because the sheeple don't care about infrastructure. It won't buy anyone votes to say we are going to spend how every many billion on infrastructure, it's much easier to spend that money on a social program.

tk421 wrote:

Quint wrote: I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

That's because the sheeple don't care about infrastructure. It won't buy anyone votes to say we are going to spend how every many billion on infrastructure, it's much easier to spend that money on a social program.

Well I mean infrastructure investments are social programs.

I Wear Pants wrote:

tk421 wrote:

Quint wrote: I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

That's because the sheeple don't care about infrastructure. It won't buy anyone votes to say we are going to spend how every many billion on infrastructure, it's much easier to spend that money on a social program.

Well I mean infrastructure investments are social programs.

I mean health care, SS, etc. When's the last time you saw a politician run on a platform of infrastructure repairs? It's not a sexy vote getting thing.

tk421 wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:

tk421 wrote:

Quint wrote: I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

That's because the sheeple don't care about infrastructure. It won't buy anyone votes to say we are going to spend how every many billion on infrastructure, it's much easier to spend that money on a social program.

Well I mean infrastructure investments are social programs.

I mean health care, SS, etc. When's the last time you saw a politician run on a platform of infrastructure repairs? It's not a sexy vote getting thing.

Who did the highways? That's probably the last dude.

The rural electrification thing way, way back when was probably a big voting issue too.

If any of those things tried to get passed today they'd be met with screams of "socialism" from the right. Because, electricity and roads didn't help this country at all.

tk421 wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:

tk421 wrote:

Quint wrote: I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

That's because the sheeple don't care about infrastructure. It won't buy anyone votes to say we are going to spend how every many billion on infrastructure, it's much easier to spend that money on a social program.

Well I mean infrastructure investments are social programs.

I mean health care, SS, etc. When's the last time you saw a politician run on a platform of infrastructure repairs? It's not a sexy vote getting thing.

That was my point. No D or R really pushes it. Ed Randell of Penn. is the only one that comes to mind.

tk421 wrote:

Quint wrote: I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

That's because the sheeple don't care about infrastructure. It won't buy anyone votes to say we are going to spend how every many billion on infrastructure, it's much easier to spend that money on a social program.

Well, if a few more bridges tumble into the Mississippi River, some people might think it sexy.

What's really sad...all the pissed away hundreds of billions of dollars on the clusterfuck in Iraq. Talk about pissin away money we didn't have.

Footwedge wrote:

tk421 wrote:

Quint wrote: I've been to numerous American Society of Civil Engineers Conferences, and it is always alarming to see the international grades the United States receives year in and year out for our infrastructure. It is sad to see our water treatment programs and facilities in this country continually get grades in the D- range.

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2009/grades.cfm

That's because the sheeple don't care about infrastructure. It won't buy anyone votes to say we are going to spend how every many billion on infrastructure, it's much easier to spend that money on a social program.

Well, if a few more bridges tumble into the Mississippi River, some people might think it sexy.

What's really sad...all the pissed away hundreds of billions of dollars on the clusterfuck in Iraq. Talk about pissin away money we didn't have.

Yeah, I know. Instead of spending all that money to rebuild Iraqi infrastructure that we blew up, we could be fixing ours.

I think this is really one of the issues where both sides can agree that it needs more attention, and money on the federal, state and local levels.

I Wear Pants wrote:
Who did the highways? That's probably the last dude.

Eisenhower back in the 50's.

States and municipalities are welcome to raise bonds or taxes to fix the infrastructure. The federal government doesn't have to have a hand in everything we need. I can just see some of you looking at a photo of Obama saying, 'Daddy, the pipes are getting old, better break out the credit card again.'

dwccrew wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:
Who did the highways? That's probably the last dude.

Eisenhower back in the 50's.

For economic, as well as security reasons. He wanted citizens to have a way out of the cities in case of a Soviet nuclear attack.

Cleveland Buck wrote: States and municipalities are welcome to raise bonds or taxes to fix the infrastructure. The federal government doesn't have to have a hand in everything we need. I can just see some of you looking at a photo of Obama saying, 'Daddy, the pipes are getting old, better break out the credit card again.'

The problem is cities and states are stretched so thin, and the infrastructure problems are so deep that the federal government is the only player that can come in a pay for massive, massive fixes.

The feds should be the last resort of course, but it should still be an option.