Promoting infrastructure plan, Buttigieg says U.S. 'coasting' on choices made in the 1950s

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: NBC News

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg rallied support for the Biden administration’s massive infrastructure plan in an interview on Sunday’s “Meet the Press,” arguing the bill represents “a generational investment” that can position the country for the future.

“Infrastructure is the foundation that makes it possible for Americans to thrive. And what we know is that foundation has been crumbling.” Buttigieg said.

“We’re still coasting on infrastructure choices that were made in the 1950," he said. "Now’s our chance to make infrastructure choices for the future that are going to serve us well in the 2030s and onto the middle of the century when we will be judged for whether we meet this moment here in the 2020s.”

President Joe Biden unveiled his $2 trillion infrastructure plan last week, a sweeping plan that includes $155 billion earmarked toward repairing roads and bridges; $80 million dedicated to Amtrak repairs; $40 billion for public housing improvements; $111 billion for repairing lead pipes; $42 billion for ports and airports; $100 billion for public school improvements; and $180 billion for research and development.


Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/promoting-infrastructure-plan-buttigieg-says-us-coasting-on-choices-made-in-the-1950s/ar-BB1fijco?li=BBnb7Kz

[SWBTATTReg]

1. Don't make it sound so negative, that decisions made in the 50s decided infrastructure choices

back then. Actually, the long established interstate highway routes used old wagon train paths in quite a few locations, and other existing routes already long established, probably because the route used was the most logical choice to make. Infrastructure is
massive by its nature, and will literally last decades and decades, if not longer.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

2. I don't think he's bashing the 50s per se.

He's pointing out we haven't done so much as far as infrastructure goes since then.

[SWBTATTReg]

4. I suspected as much, but I did want to make the clarification that choices made back then probably

fit in w/ geographical and/or other political concerns, e.g., build the railroads, highways near major population centers (makes sense, eh?), etc.

I would have to point out that the highways encircling every major metro area were in fact added afterwards, kind of catching up w/ the expanding development of the suburbs which I don't think was anticipated so much (the growth). Like in STLMO, we have interstate 70. and also now, interstate 170, 270, 370, all feeding eventually interstate 70. Urban sprawl, It's everywhere...

Take care!

[CTyankee]

3. Many years ago, my beloved Uncle Tim was in the Texas Legislature and was bent on getting

more paved roads. This was in the late 40s, early 50s. I remember the times we would take a car trip up to Colorado and the difference in the roads of Texas and those of Oklahoma was startling. I never heard the word "infrastructure" then but we called it "paving the roads" (which I realize is not the same thing).

[SWBTATTReg]

5. It certainly gives you an unique perspective on things, doesn't it? It is amazing sometimes the

differences between state to state, the conditions of the roads, the traffic patterns from state to state and how they drive, etc. I remember driving to Alabama recently, and we were amazing at the differences in traffic patterns from state to state, I guess we hadn't really noticed it very much until we were recently on the roads in other states.

[marble falls]

6. Accurate discription. The interstate hiways were built to move troops and equipment. We need to ...

... build that heavily again.

[Bayard]

7. 2T sounds like a ton of money

But as AOC said on Rachel last week, NY alone needs 40 billion. She said it should be more like 10T.

Wouldn't rethuglicans lose their minds over that?