Apparently the US used to be "the world leader in infrastructure"! But sadly now we suck in infrastructure. It seems that the Chinese are eating our lunch in infrastructure.
The authors claim that, because we haven't spend enough on infrastructure, "China is now home to six of the world's 10 busiest ports—while the U.S. isn't home to one."
This is where the first two words of my title come in. I hate to break it to you Ed and Scott, but the US could spend trillions on ports and China would still have 6 of the world's 10 busiest ports and we'd probably still have none.
But that's because China has at least 3 times as many people as we do, China is growing at 8 to 10 percent annually, and China is the export king of the world. They don't have busy ports because just because they spent a lot of money on infrastructure!
If the authors really wanted US ports to be busier (as opposed to just wanting the government to spend more money), they should lobby their colleagues to pass the trade deals with Colombia, South Korea, and Panama.
And of course this masterpiece would not be complete without Ed and Scott making the sacred call for a national infrastructure bank. What politician wouldn't want a $500 billion slush fund to dig into come election time?
What the last word of my post's title refers to is left as an exercise to the reader!
3 comments:
I assumed this was typical Angusian hyperbole.
But these dolts actually say that the US should be "the world leader in infrastructure."
Astonishing.
What if we are getting richer because we use our infrastructure more efficiently. The US does have substantial imports and they have to be trucked, railed or shipped here somehow.
China's High Speed Rail is in no expansion mode and is trillions in debt.
Awesome post!!!
Post a Comment