LittleKitty235 t1_jacfggr wrote on February 28, 2023 at 1:01 PM

Reply to comment by _Maxolotl in Feds not coming to MTA’s rescue under GOP House, Schumer says by newzee1

Federal tax dollars going toward infrastructure improvements in the MTA seems like something the federal government should be doing. The idea it shouldn't is just Republican conditioning and that rejecting federal money is some noble principle.

I'm going to guess the argument is that only interstate bridges and tunnels should we paid for by federal tax dollars, or some other Republican nonsense

ripstep1 t1_jacs9p7 wrote on February 28, 2023 at 2:43 PM

Absolutely. Why is the federal taxpayer paying for roads in Brooklyn.

LittleKitty235 t1_jactynb wrote on February 28, 2023 at 2:55 PM

https://usafacts.org/state-of-the-union/transportation-infrastructure/

Because the Federal government provides funding for that and it has bi-partisan support. Probably not the hill Republicans want to die on as that aid disproportionately goes to rural areas when you account for where the tax money comes from. Your question should really be why are your federal taxes paying for bridges and roads in rural Arkansas.

Neither political party wants the type of policy you seem to want.

ripstep1 t1_jacudtb wrote on February 28, 2023 at 2:58 PM

Would be fine with less aid going to rural areas too.

LittleKitty235 t1_jacviuw wrote on February 28, 2023 at 3:06 PM

Well neither political party does and I question the economic benefit and short sightedness of reducing spending on infrastructure as it has tremendous long term returns. Building roads and bridges has been a core part of successful governments that predates the Romans.

dekalbavenue t1_jaddaiz wrote on February 28, 2023 at 5:03 PM

As I already explained, and which you ignored, the government gets way more money out of NYC in taxes than the money it invests into it. So it's in the government's interest to pay for roads in Brooklyn so that we can get around and be productive.