[Retroit]

Originally Posted by detwahDJ

So a corporate military would obviously be much better. Such a corporation would selflessly operate in the best interests of the country and not its own bottom line. Right... I wonder how they would decide who and when to invade.
And your corporate roads would keep pesky poor people in their homes and out of your way. Mobility and access to roads dependent on income? Good thinking. Pity the unemployed poor person looking for a job.

The military uses a lot of private contracting. A lot of our military involvements have been to protect corporate interests (Middle East and oil for example).

Poor people would not be prevented from leaving their homes. Tolls are not very much for short trips. I'm sure most would be willing to sacrifice other things for employment transportation. Most "poor people" nowadays buy all kind of unnecessary junk. Giving people hand-outs is insulting and dehumanizing.

[detwahDJ]

Originally Posted by Retroit

The military uses a lot of private contracting. A lot of our military involvements have been to protect corporate interests (Middle East and oil for example).

Poor people would not be prevented from leaving their homes. Tolls are not very much for short trips. I'm sure most would be willing to sacrifice other things for employment transportation. Most "poor people" nowadays buy all kind of unnecessary junk. Giving people hand-outs is insulting and dehumanizing.

A) How do you know what tolls would be under monopolistic corporate control of roads? You surely don't favor government "meddling".
B) So you are opposed to corporate subsidies?

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by detwahDJ

A) How do you know what tolls would be under monopolistic corporate control of roads? You surely don't favor government "meddling".

Not sure I understand the question. Corporations are given control over collecting tolls and maintaining roads. There would still be government oversight. It's not about eliminating government altogether, but reducing the inefficiencies of government as much as possible.

B) So you are opposed to corporate subsidies?

Yes. The only exceptions I would foresee would be to subsidize industries that our country is lacking or is at a great disadvantage to those of other countries. But the subsidies would be phased out over time.

[Mavigo]

Originally Posted by michigan83

I would prefer to have an international border crossing that is publicly owned, not privately owned. International borders should not be controlled by private individuals. That is the government's job (unlike a lot of things the government DOES do, but should not do).

Amen to that. Nicely said. I'm still raging from last year from Maddy's propaganda to stop the bridge from being built. Up until then, I didn't even know it was possible for a bridge to be privately owned. You can't own streets and roads so why can you own a damn international bridge?

[Gorath]

Originally Posted by Retroit

I do doubt that Canada is going to pull this off financially. All Maroun has to do is lower his toll below what the Canadians charge. No one has said what will happen to the current bridge once the new one is built.

Canada has already got this figured out. After the new bridge is built they are going to turn all intersections on Huron Church Road to 4-way stops.

[BoomRShine]

Originally Posted by Retroit

The only "steel" I'm worried about is the state of Michigan "stealing" my tax money to build a bridge that should be built by Maroun using the toll revenue he has collected over the years for the express purpose of building a replacement for the Ambassador Bridge.

Where would Moroun even build the replacement bridge?

Furthermore, if you are worried about "stealing", perhaps you should focus on all the duty-free fuel that Moroun sells at his fuel pumps. If gas was $3.50 per gallon, there would be nearly $.52 in federal and state taxes (about $.14 federal and about $.38 state). However, Moroun doesn't collect these taxes at the duty-free pumps, depriving our federal and state coffers of revenue. Who makes up the difference? Hmmm...

(Note: even though Moroun does not collect taxes on fuel, he charges the same rate per gallon of fuel as other fuel stations in the area, thereby pocketing an additional $.52 per gallon in profits.)

[actinic]

Originally Posted by Gorath

Canada has already got this figured out. After the new bridge is built they are going to turn all intersections on Huron Church Road to 4-way stops.

It's no wonder for the first in history that the average Canadian is wealthier than a US citizen.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by Gorath

Canada has already got this figured out. After the new bridge is built they are going to turn all intersections on Huron Church Road to 4-way stops.

Oh that will be great for the residents. All that extra noise and pollution caused by truckers accelerating and decelerating. The distance is not that great to discourage them, is it? A couple miles maybe? They could probably just turn to go toward where the Canadian entry point.

[Retroit]

Originally Posted by BoomRShine

Where would Moroun even build the replacement bridge?

Furthermore, if you are worried about "stealing", perhaps you should focus on all the duty-free fuel that Moroun sells at his fuel pumps. If gas was $3.50 per gallon, there would be nearly $.52 in federal and state taxes (about $.14 federal and about $.38 state). However, Moroun doesn't collect these taxes at the duty-free pumps, depriving our federal and state coffers of revenue. Who makes up the difference? Hmmm...

(Note: even though Moroun does not collect taxes on fuel, he charges the same rate per gallon of fuel as other fuel stations in the area, thereby pocketing an additional $.52 per gallon in profits.)

The new bridge would be right next to the old one. Maroun actually built the ramp (it ends at Fort Street).

I suppose the liquor and other items that are sold duty free also bothers you?