Certainly your beloved government seems to endorse the concept.
Over the decade we went
from a Roosevelt and pre-Roosevelt system where the government builds the roads and bridges itself,
to the Eisenhower-and-later model where the government hires private companies to do so (back when America really worked.)
In more recent decades the government added piles and piles of expensive time consuming regulations, which as Sam has pointed out often have to be set aside in times of emergency.
In your haste to have an imaginary argument with an imaginary foe have you taken any of that into consideration?
Or are you stuck on your strawman fallacy?
This is logical and fair. Except it doesn’t reflect which comes first in most projects - environmental studies and following of regs and then project bidding and acceptance.
Biden can use the rebuilding process to champion Black labor in the construction industry. If done right, he can incorporate the issue in his efforts to generate enthusiasm among Black working-class men broadly. He can use it to demonstrate awareness of how the civil construction industry needs to address a history of excluding Black labor. . . .
. . . the racial demographic in the construction industry is now 60 percent white, 30 percent Hispanic, and 5 percent Black American, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. . . .
. . . Black labor was the odd man out. Even during disasters like Hurricane Katrina, federal contractors opted to use the labor of immigrant work crews rather than hire and train Black men from the region. . . .
. . . The Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse is a moment for Biden to show concern for rebuilding a vital bridge — and for building a bridge of inclusion for Black American workers in the construction industry as well.
Roger House is professor emeritus of American Studies at Emerson College
It does seem as though libs will jump at the chance to slow down the reconstruction, and make it more expensive, by adding all sorts of big government mandates to it.
I guess some things are more important than getting the bridge and the harbor re-opened. (I also wonder what earmarks they will add to the bill.)
August 1, 2007: Shortly after 6 pm, the I-35W Bridge collapses with 111 motor vehicles on it at the time.
August 4, 2007: Mn/DOT issues a request for qualifications for a Design Build Contract for the I-35W Bridge replacement project. Congress authorizes about $250 million to rebuild the 35W bridge.
November 1, 2007: Actual construction of new bridge begins.
Gosh! 13-1/2 months! In spite of Federal oversight!
There is no reason to think this bridge replacement won’t go just as smoothly, although it is a much larger bridge so both debris removal and reconstruction will take longer. My original timeline estimate in the other thread is reasonable.
Not at all, what he is doing is simply asking about the myriad od govt requirements typically in force before any project of this size. Bridge construction, pier dredging/widening, major building construction.
Should these requirements be enforced, or are they only enforced when convenient.
Not even 10%