Obama calls on Congress to approve $21B infrastructure bill

[jonny5]

The platform provided a view of a $2 billion tunnel project intended to improve congestion and allow for quicker trade. Obama said the project, funded by both public and private dollars, was a template for the rest of the nation.

Obama suggested creating an infrastructure bank that could help seed major projects, and White House officials say they want Congress to allocate $10 billion for the program.

The president also unveiled a $4 billion investment program in support of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA). The program, expanded in last year’s transportation bill, is intended to leverage private and nonfederal funding for projects of regional or national significance through loans, loan guarantees and lines of credit.

Obama additionally called for a set of $7 billion in tax incentives meant to support state and municipal bonds for projects. Among them is a measure that would do away with penalties, sometimes totaling up to 35 percent, on foreign investment in U.S. real estate and infrastructure projects.


Read more: Obama calls on Congress to approve $21B infrastructure bill - The Hill's Video
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

The spending just never ends. Pass a bill spending 900bn for the rest of the year, and the next week its 21bn more. Two billion for a tunnel there, 10bn for a infrastructure bank no doubt run by Obama donors, 4bn for projects of regional significance to Obama supporters, 7bn for tax incentives in blue states from foreign donors. This is why deficit reduction predictions will never come true. Everytime we save a dollar, Obama spends two.

 

[Fenton]

He's such a liar. I mean thats what "stimulus" was supposed to be for.

More borrowed money to perpetuate the lie that there's "growth".

He's doing it to the Stock Market qnd now wants more stimulus.

Its been 4 years BO. Your corrupt ideology creates misery, unemployment and debt.

Youv'e failed, now move on.

 

[penn1954]

The spending just never ends. Pass a bill spending 900bn for the rest of the year, and the next week its 21bn more. Two billion for a tunnel there, 10bn for a infrastructure bank no doubt run by Obama donors, 4bn for projects of regional significance to Obama supporters, 7bn for tax incentives in blue states from foreign donors. This is why deficit reduction predictions will never come true. Everytime we save a dollar, Obama spends two.

Pretty soon it adds up to real money!!:censored

 

[ocean515]

The spending just never ends. Pass a bill spending 900bn for the rest of the year, and the next week its 21bn more. Two billion for a tunnel there, 10bn for a infrastructure bank no doubt run by Obama donors, 4bn for projects of regional significance to Obama supporters, 7bn for tax incentives in blue states from foreign donors. This is why deficit reduction predictions will never come true. Everytime we save a dollar, Obama spends two.

If one were so inclined to dig into the details, one would find funding for California's High Speed (Not) Rail boondoggle, estimate to cost over $100 billion to build.

How about it taxpayers, care to fund a rail line through the Central Valley of California where nobody really lives? The unions will love you.

 

[jonny5]

If one were so inclined to dig into the details, one would find funding for California's High Speed (Not) Rail boondoggle, estimate to cost over $100 billion to build.

How about it taxpayers, care to fund a rail line through the Central Valley of California where nobody really lives? The unions will love you.

Im glad my governor turned it down. Too bad I still have to pay for it.

 

[ocean515]

Im glad my governor turned it down. Too bad I still have to pay for it.

Operating costs for the first 20 years have ranged to as much as $230 billion.

And then there is this:


The 520-mile project, which is getting its start in the San Joaquin Valley with a segment connecting Bakersfield to Merced, is “expected to be one of most expensive transportation projects undertaken in the United States,” GAO auditors noted in the report formally released Friday

Read more here: Calif. high-speed rail report fuels critics and supporters - Capitol and California - The Sacramento Bee

It would seem you'll be paying for it, and members of future generations of your family will be paying for it.

 

[jonny5]

Operating costs for the first 20 years have ranged to as much as $230 billion.

And then there is this:


The 520-mile project, which is getting its start in the San Joaquin Valley with a segment connecting Bakersfield to Merced, is “expected to be one of most expensive transportation projects undertaken in the United States,” GAO auditors noted in the report formally released Friday

Read more here: Calif. high-speed rail report fuels critics and supporters - Capitol and California - The Sacramento Bee

It would seem you'll be paying for it, and members of future generations of your family will be paying for it.

Yep, it makes me think of this scifi book Im reading where in the future everyone has a secondary bank account to avoid taxation.

 

[Snake Oil]

Well, we did just spend a few TRILLION in the middle east for nothing. At least (if they actually do it) that money would be spent here.

 

[Slyfox696]

Everytime we save a dollar, Obama spends two.

It never ceases to amaze me how little people understand government, even when they are the ones posting it. Obama cannot spend money. Obama is asking Congress to spend money.

 

[Fenton]

It never ceases to amaze me how little people understand government, even when they are the ones posting it. Obama cannot spend money. Obama is asking Congress to spend money.

What exactly is it that we do not understand ? Obama is of the same neo-Keynesian ilk that would approve of suicidal spending, massive structural deficits and a central bank pumping trillions of borrowed currency into the financial markets so he can continue to borrow money at low interest rates.

 

[head of joaquin]

Compared to the $3T we spent on Bush's vanity wars building nonoperable firestations in Iraq, I think Obama's proposal is modest. I'd double it.

Funny how market evangelists no longer believe in investment in productivity. It's like you have to walk them through how capitalism works over and over again.

 

[Libertas-Mors]

Compared to the $3T we spent on Bush's vanity wars building nonoperable firestations in Iraq, I think Obama's proposal is modest. I'd double it.

Funny how market evangelists no longer believe in investment in productivity. It's like you have to walk them through how capitalism works over and over again.

I bet you would. Double down on debt and failed Keynesian economic policies lol.

 

[head of joaquin]

I bet you would. Double down on debt and failed Keynesian economic policies lol.

Only in teapartybizarroworld is 3% growth a failure. I know, I know, you prefer the double dip recesson of austerity haunted Britain.

Don't you love it how conservatives try so hard to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear of austerity?

 

[JRSaindo]

It never ceases to amaze me how little people understand government, even when they are the ones posting it. Obama cannot spend money. Obama is asking Congress to spend money.

Hilarious.

 

[JRSaindo]

Only in teapartybizarroworld is 3% growth a failure. I know, I know, you prefer the double dip recesson of austerity haunted Britain.

Don't you love it how conservatives try so hard to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear of austerity?

What growth? Show and enlighten us rather than tote your bs talking points.

 

[head of joaquin]

What growth? Show and enlighten us rather than tote your bs talking points.

So you haven't bothered to look at US GDP growth last year and compare it with Europe?

That explains why your posts are so ill informed.

 

[Libertas-Mors]

Only in teapartybizarroworld is 3% growth a failure. I know, I know, you prefer the double dip recesson of austerity haunted Britain.

Don't you love it how conservatives try so hard to make a silk purse out of the sow's ear of austerity?

Right as the debt grows to 102% of GDP lmao!

 

[head of joaquin]

Right as the debt grows to 102% of GDP lmao!

"Quick change the subject!"

Now, which country has more GDP growth the US or the UK (or Germany for that matter)? I know you can say it if you just take a deep breath and say it.

By the way, did I mention how whimsical debt fetishism is?

 

[CanadaJohn]

To be fair, $21 billion in infrastructure spending for a country as rich and large as America is not unreasonable. Canada, in its most recent budget, created a $53 billion over 10 years infrastructure program. Considering your country is 10 times our population and your economy is even larger than that, $21 billion doesn't seem so bad, but then I don't know what the total infrastructure spending is that's buried in your entire budget, not including this new amount. Also of consideration is that Canada's budget calls for our deficit to end in two fiscal years with surpluses beginning in 2015 so we don't have the debt/deficit problems your country has.

 

[Libertas-Mors]

"Quick change the subject!"

Now, which country has more GDP growth the US or the UK (or Germany for that matter)? I know you can say it if you just take a deep breath and say it.

By the way, did I mention how whimsical debt fetishism is?

Actually you framed 'spending more money' and thus increasing GDP as a positive sign!! But you neglected that the debt raised to 102%. I am just keeping em honest like your boy Anderson Cooper.

 

[head of joaquin]

To be fair, $21 billion in infrastructure spending for a country as rich and large as America is not unreasonable. Canada, in its most recent budget, created a $53 billion over 10 years infrastructure program. Considering your country is 10 times our population and your economy is even larger than that, $21 billion doesn't seem so bad, but then I don't know what the total infrastructure spending is that's buried in your entire budget, not including this new amount. Also of consideration is that Canada's budget calls for our deficit to end in two fiscal years with surpluses beginning in 2015 so we don't have the debt/deficit problems your country has.

Stop making sense! You're going to alienate your American conservative brethren.

 

[head of joaquin]

Actually you framed 'spending more money' and thus increasing GDP as a positive sign!! But you neglected that the debt raised to 102%. I am just keeping em honest like your boy Anderson Cooper.

Let's cut the military budget to the bone. It's dead weight on the economy. Agreed?

Wait for it, wait for it . . .

 

[Slyfox696]

What exactly is it that we do not understand ? Obama is of the same neo-Keynesian ilk that would approve of suicidal spending, massive structural deficits and a central bank pumping trillions of borrowed currency into the financial markets so he can continue to borrow money at low interest rates.

"Obama cannot spend money. Obama is asking Congress to spend money."

For goodness sake, you even quoted it.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Stop making sense! You're going to alienate your American conservative brethren.

I don't think any of my "American conservative brethren" would object to your country balancing its budget and creating surpluses starting in 2015. Are you now supporting America moving in that direction? Keep in mind that the Canadian government put no new personal income taxes in place to move towards surplus going forward.

 

[Libertas-Mors]

Let's cut the military budget to the bone. It's dead weight on the economy. Agreed?

Wait for it, wait for it . . .

Yes, shred the fat off it. Major reductions, no more overseas expenditures, no more foreign aid to Israel or Egypt.