Fix Our Roads! Act (Law'd)

[Badger]

SOIA:

Can I take a moment to remind Senators that £30bn for road repair is a fairly modest sum.

SIR!! May I demand you remove that errant "pound" symbol at once! What next? Would you have us eating stake and kidney pies (or worse "haggis" )? Checking the "colour" of items before we take a "lift" partially composed of "Al-lew-MIN-ee-um"?

Zounds sir! There shall be no eating of bangers and mash, toad in the hole, let alone "spotted dick" in THIS Senate's cafeteria.
[/threadjack]

[Badger]

You know I don't know why I bother

Sorry, it's too common sense a suggestion to oppose, and thus move much passion in favor.

I'm ready to support it whenever Yank calls a vote.

[Badger]

Do we maybe want to allocate a certain amount of money to the regions to use on their roads? It would seem that they would know best which roads are in greatest need of repair.

That would make sense, but how do we figure out what amount goes to what region? Would the SE love me more if I sweetened the deal for them?

We could just allocate money to each governor and allow them to use the funds on the roads they think need it.

Well at least regions that have legislatures might enjoy being able to allocate the funds appropriately. Just a thought.

It's a good one, and I agree with you, but now we must decide what to give each region. Should it be a flat number or should it depend on the population?

Well, practically speaking, population is probably the only indicator we can go by. Ideally, it would be awarded based on the various regions' roads....but we have no real objective way of measuring how the roads are by region....right?

We could go by a rough ratio of regional geographic size (representing miles of roads) and population (representing the density of highway systems and traffic causing wear and tear to the roads). Frick all if I know how to calculate that, though it seems to me the various regional governors and L-G's really should have a strong interest in this legislation and may want to provide their "best estimates" for us if we go this route (hint, HINT).

Alternatively, we could reasonably just punt this to the Atlasian DOT to administer the monies as deemed fit.

[Badger]

Do we maybe want to allocate a certain amount of money to the regions to use on their roads? It would seem that they would know best which roads are in greatest need of repair.

That would make sense, but how do we figure out what amount goes to what region? Would the SE love me more if I sweetened the deal for them?

We could just allocate money to each governor and allow them to use the funds on the roads they think need it.

Well at least regions that have legislatures might enjoy being able to allocate the funds appropriately. Just a thought.

It's a good one, and I agree with you, but now we must decide what to give each region. Should it be a flat number or should it depend on the population?

Well, practically speaking, population is probably the only indicator we can go by. Ideally, it would be awarded based on the various regions' roads....but we have no real objective way of measuring how the roads are by region....right?

We could go by a rough ratio of regional geographic size (representing miles of roads) and population (representing the density of highway systems and traffic causing wear and tear to the roads). Frick all if I know how to calculate that, though it seems to me the various regional governors and L-G's really should have a strong interest in this legislation and may want to provide their "best estimates" for us if we go this route (hint, HINT).

Alternatively, we could reasonably just punt this to the Atlasian DOT to administer the monies as deemed fit.

To the Secretary of Internal Affairs, rather. Whatever equivalent we have to the DOT most likely an unnamed sub-department of the DOIA that doesn't technically exist in Atlasian statute.

Truye Dat.

[Badger]

AYE.

[Badger]

Ah, the Senate's hard at work redistributing wealth on behalf of auto companies and the wealthy.

Oh come on, Senator. Road and bridge construction & upkeep has been a major government function since the Revolutionary era you types idealize so well. And since Roman times before that.

The "auto companies" subsidy allegation is enough of a stretch (people by more cars when there're fewer potholes?), but "the wealthy"? Come on.

[Badger]

Ah, the Senate's hard at work redistributing wealth on behalf of auto companies and the wealthy.

Oh come on, Senator. Road and bridge construction & upkeep has been a major government function since the Revolutionary era you types idealize so well. And since Roman times before that.

The "auto companies" subsidy allegation is enough of a stretch (people by more cars when there're fewer potholes?), but "the wealthy"? Come on.

It's not at all of a 'stretch'. It's a fact.

There are plenty of people who do not own cars, many inner-city poor who cannot afford them, as well as the environmentally-conscious. They are being forced to pay for something that they will not use.

In fact they cannot use them, unless they fork over thousands of dollars more to a private automotive corporation to buy their product.


This amounts to a subsidy to the automobile over other forms of transportation. Why does the federal government invest in the infrastructure necessary for automakers to sell cars rather than in mass-transit which all Atlasians can use?

As a fellow member of the Green Lobby, I am sure you are also well aware of the environmental ramifications of the government's persistent investment in subsidizing not-so-green methods of transportation via road construction.


I am not against roads, but let them be paid for by those who will use them. Stop giving an unfair advantage to automakers, the wealthy, and the automobile as a form of transportation in general. There are better ways to invest in infrastructure for the benefit of all Atlasians.

You make some valid points here, and I agree with you wholeheartedly on the need for expanded mass transit. Though buses and the like still need a good road and bridge system to be useful, don't they?

IMHO, the strong expansion and upkeep of a good road and bridge network is among the most basic important roles of the state, and its effect of fostering increased commerce, trade and mobility so broadly impacts all society I just can't consider doing so to be merely a mere subsidy to the auto industry. Such expansion of road networks were a fundamental aspect of colonial, medieval, and Roman governments well before there were cars (though I'm sure then the lobbying efforts of the Wagon and Ox Cart guilds were also fierce).

Honestly, old chap, while most conservatives seem to want to bring back the 1920's, sometimes you appear determined to revive the 1320's.