• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Politico: Conservatives vs. Trump’s infrastructure plan

Status
Not open for further replies.
EMT0 said:
And continue to fail the rust belt, providing ammo for turning the rust belt permanently red? Democrats suck at playing spite politics. Either they come to the table on this specific point of Trump's, or the demonization ads just roll themselves. I don't think I've met someone who's actually against infrastructure projects.
Click to expand...

No, we play spite politics.

Then rightly blame the Republicans, when our bipartisan effort fails in the House.

We don't have enough votes to get this done on our own.
 
Trump will get his infrastructure spending by agreeing to even bigger tax cuts than he proposed. The United States will be defaulting on its debt right around the time these guys are ready to get voted out or die off.
 
numble said:
His plan is to spend private money via tax cuts. The rough example is this: I will use Los Angeles as an example because they just passed a tax increase to raise around $1 billion/year for infrastructure spending. If an infrastructure project costs $1.5 billion, Los Angeles can go to a developer and say, we can pay $1 billion, you put in $500 million. Trump gives a developer a $450 million tax credit. So the developer spent $50 million but gets a $1.5 billion project.
Click to expand...

Is this Trump's plan or the party's? Where is it outlined? In instances of areas with low economic activity, would tax credits be enough of an incentive for developers to commit?
 
I actually believe Trump would go to war with GOP over this, rebuilding the nation's infrastructure is one of the few cause he's ideologically invested in.
 
Window said:
Is this Trump's plan or the party's? Where is it outlined? In instances of areas with low economic activity, would tax credits be enough of an incentive for developers to commit?
Click to expand...
Trump's plan.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-infrastructure-plan-faces-speed-bumps-1478884989

The president-elect’s infrastructure plan largely boils down to a tax break in the hopes of luring capital to projects. He wants investors to put money into projects in exchange for tax credits totaling 82% of the equity amount. His plan anticipates that lost tax revenue would be recouped through new income-tax revenue from construction workers and business-tax revenue from contractors, making the proposal essentially cost-free to the government.

The Trump team’s thinking is laid out in a 10-page description of the proposal posted on the website of Peter Navarro, a public-policy professor at the University of California, Irvine, and an adviser to Mr. Trump.
Click to expand...

The plan on Peter Navarro's website:
http://www.peternavarro.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/infrastructurereport.pdf
 
It's the only plank in his platform that I support so I sure as hell hope he fights for this one and get it done.

we need the infrastructure rebuilt desperately and yes it would be the one that could actually bring some jobs at least temporarily

Here's hoping the obstruction from the right does not continue with him in power
 
It'll be really funny if the only thing Trump wants that I agree with is the one thing that will likely be obstructed.
 
Robdraggoo said:
Trump: here's some free money want to build a bridge now?

Rich poeple: no I'm good

Trump: ok then

These plans that revolve around doing the right thing don't ever play out.
Click to expand...

I'm seeing it as the opposite.

Trump: Hey rich friend, want a free bridge you get to collect tolls from for 10 years?

Rich person: You mean you'll give me an asset I can monetize for next to nothing? Sign me up!

Don't necessarily like the idea of handing assets to the already wealthy, but it would get shit built and would create jobs.
 
And so it begins.

Will Trump put up a fight? Or will we get four years of a Republican-controlled puppet?

You know, for the first time I'm kinda routing for Trump here.
 
Phrozenflame500 said:
And so it begins.

Will Trump put up a fight? Or will we get four years of a Republican-controlled puppet?

You know, for the first time I'm kinda routing for Trump here.
Click to expand...

If he really is an egomaniac then I think he will put up a fight.

He already shat on the GOP during the election, what does he have to lose?
 
Robdraggoo said:
Trump: here's some free money want to build a bridge now?

Rich poeple: no I'm good

Trump: ok then

These plans that revolve around doing the right thing don't ever play out.
Click to expand...
I think the actual empirical truth is that businesses do take advantage of tax breaks and corporate welfare when offered, and they will fulfill the bare minimum required to do so. Look at the way stadiums get tax breaks, or WalMart and others get tax breaks for setting up stores.
 
me thinks the Republicans will play ball given the proper adjustments, like some parts of the infrastructure are built by rep's friends contractors and stuff

all in all, other than the corruption, it may not be a bad thing for america. investing in infrastructure is not bad per se
 
Snowybreak said:
I mean... Like... What? Man... I don't fucking get it anymore. Here in PA we have a ton of bridges in disrepair and a friend of mine sat down and cranked the numbers as to how much would be needed and how many jobs would be created. In PA alone, it's over 50,000 jobs to rebuild our crumbling bridges, not even counting the highways, back roads and the full interstate.
Click to expand...

The New Deal was a mistake after all!
 
This is like the only good thing that Trump wants to do, so of course the GOP hates it.


Edit: Ugh hadn't read the details. Of course the way he wants to do it ends up being terrible.
 
GurgleBot20 said:
I want to agree, but Congress feuding with Trump is the one of the few things that could delay destructive anti-civil rights legislation from passing.
Click to expand...

True, should say I hope they let him spend some money to create jobs unlike how they blocked Pres Obama form the same goal
 
Can't manufacturing come back through automation? I know it will never be like how it was back in the day, but certainly it can come back.

Automation and 3D printing will be a big part of it and jobs will be fewer per plant and people will be doing different things, but I truly believe it can make its way back to the US, just not how it was in its heyday.
 
AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:
Can't manufacturing come back through automation? I know it will never be like how it was back in the day, but certainly it can come back.

Automation and 3D printing will be a big part of it and jobs will be fewer per plant and people will be doing different things, but I truly believe it can make its way back to the US, just not how it was in its heyday.
Click to expand...

Robots can't go on strike, but they also can't vote.
 
Let me point something out: If it's Trump vs the GOP on anything, Trump wins. Trump has demonstrated that even if you're a GOP lawmaker, he will happily come to your home state and call you a dick. Just ask Paul Ryan. They won't cross him. He's now the de facto, indisputable leader of the Republican Party, and anyone who has his back will be rewarded (see Newt, Rudy and Christie), and anyone who gets in his way will get fucked. Fear of drawing his wrath in the next election cycle will keep them in line, book it.
 
The people have elected this man, based on promises he made, without considering whether his own party will prevent him from keeping them.
 
A public infistruture plan, if implemented correctly, would be really good actually.
I have no faith republicans or Trump will impliment it correctly. How the fuck they play to impliment it while decreasing taxes at the same time is beyond me.

If passed, it will go straight into the deficit. Watch conseevatives stop b itching sout it then...
 
kirblar said:
They cannot make a deal. They have to let him fail.
Click to expand...

If, somehow, we managed to turn the Republican president against congressional Republicans, that's a win. If he managed to pass his infrastructure project, that's a win.

Good outcomes are good outcomes, even if terrible people get credit for them.

I think he'll just quietly drop the plan and defer by saying "we have to deal with immigration first so the illegals don't get those jobs," and since we all know he's never going to actually fix those problems, that's the end of that.
 
Tripon said:
Ding ding.

Poor areas in cities are prime spot be gentrified.
Click to expand...

Gentrification is about speculating on getting people who are already well-off to move into an area where real estate is relatively cheap for them. And then the people who live there can't afford to live there anymore. They move out to the suburbs, the suburbs lose their tax base and undergo neglect by local and state governments, and the process repeats.

You have to solve the problem in place. You have to solve the systemic problems that lead to the people in poor neighborhood staying poor. You can't just shuttle people around and call the problem fixed.
 
Ogodei said:
If, somehow, we managed to turn the Republican president against congressional Republicans, that's a win. If he managed to pass his infrastructure project, that's a win.

Good outcomes are good outcomes, even if terrible people get credit for them.

I think he'll just quietly drop the plan and defer by saying "we have to deal with immigration first so the illegals don't get those jobs," and since we all know he's never going to actually fix those problems, that's the end of that.
Click to expand...
I heavily disagree with good outcomes brought by terrible people are always good outcomes.

If Trump really does make things better for the middle class white man with good policies like infrastructure while telling them minorities and foreigners are the ones responsible for their ills we are on an irreversible path to fascism. The dictators always make things better for enough people first while killing or silencing or deporting those who its making it worse for.

We are at serious risk of repeating history.
 
theignoramus said:
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/an-americas-infrastructure-first-plan

Im not sure how he "rebuilds the inner cities" with that plan though, those are poor areas developers have no interest in, unless its being gentrified.
Click to expand...

numble said:
Trump's plan.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-infrastructure-plan-faces-speed-bumps-1478884989

The plan on Peter Navarro's website:
http://www.peternavarro.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/infrastructurereport.pdf
Click to expand...
Thanks.

Seems well reasoned enough (I'm assuming there's a good reason for the specific 82% stake and that revenue streams are sustainable and sufficiently high even in less well off areas). So the point of contention with the party will be whether this is actually revenue neutral given their goal is still to produce a balanced/surplus budget or reduce budget deficits. I still don't understand how this is dissimilar to providing the initial equity share via direct govt. spending (which I assume the party would be against). Is it that the costs to the govt. are spread over time as credit claims are made steadily (and that govt spending is considered 'inefficient')?
 
AnotherDayAnotherDollar said:
Can't manufacturing come back through automation? I know it will never be like how it was back in the day, but certainly it can come back.

Automation and 3D printing will be a big part of it and jobs will be fewer per plant and people will be doing different things, but I truly believe it can make its way back to the US, just not how it was in its heyday.
Click to expand...

I think output has grown because of automation. The issue is that to. You don't need many humans to manufacture so less jobs over all. Many people want those jobs again, but they are less valuable now with automation.
 
DrROBschiz said:
What the fuck

Healthy people with access to clean water, shelter, and can get from point A to point B are MORE PRODUCTIVE

They dont give a shit cuz they dont really want to get AMERICA back to work
Click to expand...

It's because job creation in part is just the latest form of "trickle down economics" which is itself a dog whistle for "actually just give more money to white collar corporates who donate to our campaign funds." It's also because for some reason there's this idea among them that Chinese human slave labor pulled from the 1910's is the optimum industrial economy and automation is some far off boogeyman that won't actually do anything for like another million years. It's stuff like this that puts the current GOP's hypocrisy and ignorance in sharp relief.
 
Abinash117 said:
I think output has grown because of automation. The issue is that to. You don't need many humans to manufacture so less jobs over all. Many people want those jobs again, but they are less valuable now with automation.
Click to expand...

Article from another GAF thread: http://nypost.com/2016/11/02/robots-are-taking-more-factory-jobs-than-mexico-or-china/

So it's possible but the rate of attrition is likely to be higher than jobs generated.

I think output increasing per worker due to technology has been the case forever leading to goods to be cheaper and increased consumption quantities (and disposable income). It's effectively how economic growth is achieved. The problem is where do displaced workers end up and the rate at which this seems to be happening is difficult to cope with.
 
numble said:
I think the actual empirical truth is that businesses do take advantage of tax breaks and corporate welfare when offered, and they will fulfill the bare minimum required to do so. Look at the way stadiums get tax breaks, or WalMart and others get tax breaks for setting up stores.
Click to expand...

This may end up like when Oregon offered tax breaks for cable companies to install gigabit internet, and Comcast came in and made a really small area have access to gigabit internet and got the tax breaks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Peppermint vs. Spearmint
18
132
Chuck Berry replied
  • Poll
Superman (1978) vs Batman (1989) vs Spider-Man (2002)
2
81
791
MrCunningham replied
  • Locked
Trump X 6ix9ne
5
322
Coconutt replied
  • Locked
SCOTUS rules Trump tariffs illegal
15
311
Smiggs replied
KCD2 vs F1
6
494
Catphish replied
Top Bottom