That's just what I was thinking of too when you mentioned infrastructure improvements. I think you're right on the money. It will save many more lives working on these improvements than messing around in the middle east. Abandoning the cities has also occurred to me. It's not just the roads and pipes that are deteriorating, it's the buildings too. It's going to cause huge repercussions in both the government and the private sector. But it's almost certainly the "average Joe" citizens that will bear the brunt of the death tolls from failing structures and the increasing costs to repair them.
-
Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
-
FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!
Minneapolis bridge collapse
- Thread starter icerfan
- Start date
That's just what I was thinking of too when you mentioned infrastructure improvements. I think you're right on the money. It will save many more lives working on these improvements than messing around in the middle east. Abandoning the cities has also occurred to me. It's not just the roads and pipes that are deteriorating, it's the buildings too. It's going to cause huge repercussions in both the government and the private sector. But it's almost certainly the "average Joe" citizens that will bear the brunt of the death tolls from failing structures and the increasing costs to repair them.
We could create a lot of good middle class jobs if we starting to rebuild as well.We are going to have to face the fact someday that what we have to re-prioritize our spending.We can't spend what we spend on defense and rebuild too.Eisenhower warned how powerful this defense lobby would get.We don't need much to be safe from attack by another country and the money spent on the military to go round the world imposing what we like seems wasted as it doesn't accomplish what we want no matter how much we spend it seems.But until there are bridges falling every day not much will probably happen.Its like Global warming nothing will happen till its a crisis,and probably too late.
"Governors order new bridge inspections"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070802...inspections;_ylt=Aq_npJHBQ7dxfdWuFLXnGWhI2ocA
Now everybody will run around for a couple weeks,inspecting bridges and tunnels and who knows what else.There will be talk of our crumbling aging infrastructure and then nothing will happen.Nobody wants to pay to fix the stuff and we can't just close them even if they are risky.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070802...inspections;_ylt=Aq_npJHBQ7dxfdWuFLXnGWhI2ocA
Now everybody will run around for a couple weeks,inspecting bridges and tunnels and who knows what else.There will be talk of our crumbling aging infrastructure and then nothing will happen.Nobody wants to pay to fix the stuff and we can't just close them even if they are risky.
Instead of wasting billions in Iraq.. that money can be used to create jobs and repair America's infrastruture.
Water mains, Sewer, Gas, eletrical, roads, bridges, tunnels, etc.........
Remember that big blackout black in 2003? The electrical grid in America sucks.
More sht like this is gonna hapen again, dont be surprised.
Peace.
Water mains, Sewer, Gas, eletrical, roads, bridges, tunnels, etc.........
Remember that big blackout black in 2003? The electrical grid in America sucks.
More sht like this is gonna hapen again, dont be surprised.
Peace.
It some ways this makes me think about it as a metaphor for America in general. Where supposed to be the most advanced, rich, and powerful country history has ever seen but looking underneath the outer shell makes you wonder. We seem to be dying a slow death with problems that we cannot or refuse to solve because of greed of the people that run this country and everybody’s apathy.
I was going to post some good info ...
I was going to post some good info from the ASCE.
But then I started to read the political dribble and agendas.
I'll reserve it for another board.
I just gotta start doing that from now on.
Especially when it touches on my area of expertise.
I'm an EE who grew up in the family business of a CE, so I have years of structural/road exposure as well.
I was going to post some good info from the ASCE.
But then I started to read the political dribble and agendas.
I'll reserve it for another board.
I just gotta start doing that from now on.
Especially when it touches on my area of expertise.
I'm an EE who grew up in the family business of a CE, so I have years of structural/road exposure as well.
Okay, gotta call BS ...
Sorry, but I gotta call BS.
In fact, the state and federal expenditures on road infrastructure make wars look like nothing.
In fact, a great portion of the cost of the military in many wars has been reconstruction too -- namely roads and bridges!
But anyone who isn't remotely involved with engineering seems to not know this.
They don't seem to look at their own state and federal budgets.
They don't care about the 1 trillion-plus of dollars the US Congress recently approved for infrastructure updates.
They don't seem to remember that not only did Eisenhower himself call for the interstate system and related funding of state roads,
but he used the "military" justification for them (for logistics should the US be invaded) -- which is laughable.
The US really has too many roads, too many inefficiently placed and designed, with the same that can be said about bridges.
The Pacific Coast Highway is one horrible example of this.
Heck, even the interstate system was a political nightmare, as the interstate roads were never supposed to go into cities, but politics changed that!
If you go to other nations, you don't even remotely have the road infrastructure of the US -- nothing like our superhighways.
And in reality, no one -- not even the US -- really needs them anyway.
We really need to focus on mass transit, not "bridges to nowhere" or should I say "bridges to everywhere."
We need to start building master plans on multi-city/county level, and some places are actually starting to do that.
Too many Americans have rediculous expectations, and we cannot afford to pay for it -- far worse than any "war."
Again, I don't think people actually look at the budgets these days of thir state and its federal supplements.
And lastly ...
Then next time someone says, "oh, we should refocus our efforts and money," consider the reality ...
The US graduates so few engineers nowdays!
So whose going to design them anyway?
But what do I know?
My father served 3 years in Vietnam, half of it with special force engineering detachments.
Which is what he decided to complete his degree in once he got out, so I grew up in the house of a consulting CE.
I ran groundstations and transits and did trigonometry before I hit a double digit age.
I moved on to truss and other "statics" (elementary engineering mechanics) with calculus before I was in high school.
But so few people go into it these days.
So few that more and more "underqualified" people are now licensed to "sign off" on many designs.
And we still don't have enough to do all of what most Americans expect.
You'd be surprised how little slashing the entire defense budget would dent this.
Especially since the largest, most significant portion of the DoD budget is engineering related.
It's not overlooked.
Sorry, but I gotta call BS.
In fact, the state and federal expenditures on road infrastructure make wars look like nothing.
In fact, a great portion of the cost of the military in many wars has been reconstruction too -- namely roads and bridges!
But anyone who isn't remotely involved with engineering seems to not know this.
They don't seem to look at their own state and federal budgets.
They don't care about the 1 trillion-plus of dollars the US Congress recently approved for infrastructure updates.
They don't seem to remember that not only did Eisenhower himself call for the interstate system and related funding of state roads,
but he used the "military" justification for them (for logistics should the US be invaded) -- which is laughable.
The US really has too many roads, too many inefficiently placed and designed, with the same that can be said about bridges.
The Pacific Coast Highway is one horrible example of this.
Heck, even the interstate system was a political nightmare, as the interstate roads were never supposed to go into cities, but politics changed that!
If you go to other nations, you don't even remotely have the road infrastructure of the US -- nothing like our superhighways.
And in reality, no one -- not even the US -- really needs them anyway.
We really need to focus on mass transit, not "bridges to nowhere" or should I say "bridges to everywhere."
We need to start building master plans on multi-city/county level, and some places are actually starting to do that.
Too many Americans have rediculous expectations, and we cannot afford to pay for it -- far worse than any "war."
Again, I don't think people actually look at the budgets these days of thir state and its federal supplements.
And lastly ...
Then next time someone says, "oh, we should refocus our efforts and money," consider the reality ...
The US graduates so few engineers nowdays!
So whose going to design them anyway?
But what do I know?
My father served 3 years in Vietnam, half of it with special force engineering detachments.
Which is what he decided to complete his degree in once he got out, so I grew up in the house of a consulting CE.
I ran groundstations and transits and did trigonometry before I hit a double digit age.
I moved on to truss and other "statics" (elementary engineering mechanics) with calculus before I was in high school.
But so few people go into it these days.
So few that more and more "underqualified" people are now licensed to "sign off" on many designs.
And we still don't have enough to do all of what most Americans expect.
You'd be surprised how little slashing the entire defense budget would dent this.
Especially since the largest, most significant portion of the DoD budget is engineering related.
Huh?
Likewise, the US is known for the same, and no other country has a comparable infrastructure.
And it's why we can't afford to upkeep it, much like the Romans as well.
Man, I really wish people would research some of this stuff before they speak.
Rome was known for its massive, extensive set of roads like no where else in the world.
Likewise, the US is known for the same, and no other country has a comparable infrastructure.
And it's why we can't afford to upkeep it, much like the Romans as well.
Man, I really wish people would research some of this stuff before they speak.
you do have a point but it is all relative. think of the UK: look at their feeble flood defences, just pathetic. look at their airport facilities in Heathrow. look at their olympic logo! you think we have problems? take a look at the UK.
er, i'm not denying there are plenty of problems in the uk - but i gotta pick up on this < and defend blighty's honour
>yes - the floods were a nightmare and the preparations to prevent them were, in many cases, a disgrace but in many areas that were flooded they had had the highest amount of rain on record, and the records go back like 150+ years
( and without wanting to upset any of my friends on the other side of the pond - new orleans, people in glass houses ...... etc etc )
as for heathrow - it's the busiest airport in europe and the airport with the highest international passenger traffic in the world - with, to my mind, pretty good facilities
now the olympic logo - well i guess that's a matter of personal taste ...
...that's why i said it's all relative. was not trying to pick an argument - both the USA and the UK have their pros and cons. but, by and large, the USA is very exact and careful when it comes to structural defences and transportation issues.
Re: Okay, gotta call BS ...
The biggest smog problem is in cities. One of the biggest polluters is cars. So let's run even more traffic through the cities with Interstates? Not smart.
And one day it will. Either by choice or necessity.
I think you make some excellent points above.
However...
To assume that 'lay people' have nothing to bring to the table in terms of new ideas and directions is both arrogant and foolish.
And since many of these people are American tax payers then they definitely have the right and I think should be strongly encouraged to voice any opinion they have about anything that relates to the expenditures of their (usually) hard earned funds.
According to this (on page 19):
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2006/d20060206slides.pdf
The biggest single expenditure of the US military is Operations and Maintenance. Followed by Military Personnel. With Procurement third.
How are these engineering related?
I agree 100%. Look at Boston's 'Big Dig'. An insane waste of money just so Interstates (more or less) can continue to go right through cities - where they have no business being in the first place.
The biggest smog problem is in cities. One of the biggest polluters is cars. So let's run even more traffic through the cities with Interstates? Not smart.
I agree. America's love affair with the automobile has got to change - radically.
And one day it will. Either by choice or necessity.
I think you make some excellent points above.
However...
I get the distinct impression that you feel the only people that should be allowed to utter opinions on things are those that are officially schooled and/or qualified to do so. Especially on matters of engineering; I assume because you claim to have some expertise in the field.
To assume that 'lay people' have nothing to bring to the table in terms of new ideas and directions is both arrogant and foolish.
And since many of these people are American tax payers then they definitely have the right and I think should be strongly encouraged to voice any opinion they have about anything that relates to the expenditures of their (usually) hard earned funds.
Especially since the largest, most significant portion of the DoD budget is engineering related.
According to this (on page 19):
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2006/d20060206slides.pdf
The biggest single expenditure of the US military is Operations and Maintenance. Followed by Military Personnel. With Procurement third.
How are these engineering related?
Apples to oranges comparison ...
I think people keep making apples-to-oranges comparisons.
Both the US and the UK have long traditions of exacting structural integrity.
But the US has far more recent construction, far more extensive than any other nation.
And many of these constructions were not designed for a full century of usage.
They are just too many massive creations in the US, many cases, of which, it would cost a priceless value to make them last forever.
As far as New Orleans and other "issues," let's stop proliferating in ignorance -- the city floods,
has been flooded by hurricanes before (in the '60s and '20s), and will be flooded again.
The same goes for Houston and other cities "across the pond" and other places.
The cost to errect massive barriers are impractical and it doesn't matter how many times the US Army Corps of Engineers points this out,
people want to assume we have the time, money, technology, etc... to build permanent, lasting, massive and huge constructions.
If anything, British folk seem to be willing to accept these facts about their own nation.
Unfortunately, Americans are wondering why their tens of trillions of dollars in road infrastructure (it's just shy of 100s) is crumbling around them.
Many engineers have long argued that we have made too many investments in too many temporary structures.
And we cannot sustain those investments and would be well advised to make them elsewhere, for efficiency and longer-lasting utility.
I think people keep making apples-to-oranges comparisons.
Both the US and the UK have long traditions of exacting structural integrity.
But the US has far more recent construction, far more extensive than any other nation.
And many of these constructions were not designed for a full century of usage.
They are just too many massive creations in the US, many cases, of which, it would cost a priceless value to make them last forever.
As far as New Orleans and other "issues," let's stop proliferating in ignorance -- the city floods,
has been flooded by hurricanes before (in the '60s and '20s), and will be flooded again.
The same goes for Houston and other cities "across the pond" and other places.
The cost to errect massive barriers are impractical and it doesn't matter how many times the US Army Corps of Engineers points this out,
people want to assume we have the time, money, technology, etc... to build permanent, lasting, massive and huge constructions.
If anything, British folk seem to be willing to accept these facts about their own nation.
Unfortunately, Americans are wondering why their tens of trillions of dollars in road infrastructure (it's just shy of 100s) is crumbling around them.
Many engineers have long argued that we have made too many investments in too many temporary structures.
And we cannot sustain those investments and would be well advised to make them elsewhere, for efficiency and longer-lasting utility.
Re: Okay, gotta call BS ...
So what you're saying there are no engineering personnel and operations?
And what to you think "maintainence" is?
You're not looking at a chart broken down by field, so it won't even be on there.
You do know when a chart is relevant to the context and not, right?
I mean, I could show you a chart that says no states spend $1 on education.
It only shows how many state employees, etc... not where they spent those.
That's basically the same chart you found!
You're impossible.
So what you're saying there are no engineering personnel and operations?
And what to you think "maintainence" is?
You're not looking at a chart broken down by field, so it won't even be on there.
You do know when a chart is relevant to the context and not, right?
I mean, I could show you a chart that says no states spend $1 on education.
It only shows how many state employees, etc... not where they spent those.
That's basically the same chart you found!
"If anything, British folk seem to be willing to accept these facts about their own nation".
...i think it's more the fact that they accept how just incompetently run the UK is.
...i think it's more the fact that they accept how just incompetently run the UK is.
I disagree -- I've worked with several British Chartered Engineers in my career.
Although the British has the same problem as we do in the US, there are just too few of them anymore.
Which is why the quality has gone down as they've started to license others to do the same.
Man builds too many structures where mother nature easily defeats them.
Heck, as I point out regularly about the space program, it's all about "mitigating risk," as its impossible to eliminate it.
Otherwise we'd never launch any rocket with humans atop -- there is always risk to anything.
So you have to ask yourself ... should we build something?
Too many Americans say "yes" then turn around a bitch when it fails, and no engineer can explain "risk" to their satisfaction.
Man builds too many structures where mother nature easily defeats them.
Heck, as I point out regularly about the space program, it's all about "mitigating risk," as its impossible to eliminate it.
Otherwise we'd never launch any rocket with humans atop -- there is always risk to anything.
So you have to ask yourself ... should we build something?
QUOTE]
good points
nothing can be totally safe - and there's a good chance that, at some point, structures and buildings which are built to last for decades will be pushed to their limits and beyond by a freak natural occurence, increased / different use etc
as for free4440273 - are you actually "trying to pick an argument" with members from the UK with your quasi-insults about our dodgy facilities, how incompetently run the country is and all the rest of our problems :crying: ?
... i would like to hope that you are speaking from a very knowledgable position regarding the UK's infrastructure & governance ... as san francisco seems a long way from the UK
or are you just making sweeping generalisations based on what you've seen in the media
(something which i myself would never be guilty of
Re: Okay, gotta call BS ...
You typed the following:
'You'd be surprised how little slashing the entire defense budget would dent this.
Especially since the largest, most significant portion of the DoD budget is engineering related.'
In my opinion, that statement suggests that engineering related activities make up the the most significant portion of the defense budget.
Operations and Maintenance is the largest part of the budget. Operations is self explanatory. Maintenance is simply the maintaining of various vehicles/ships/weapons systems/etc. (among other things). This is not engineering.
So it appears to me that your statement is clearly wrong and/or deliberately misleading.
And if not. Then what was the purpose of your above quoted statement?
You're impossible.
So what you're saying there are no engineering personnel and operations?
And what to you think "maintainence" is?You're not looking at a chart broken down by field, so it won't even be on there.
You do know when a chart is relevant to the context and not, right?
I mean, I could show you a chart that says no states spend $1 on education.
It only shows how many state employees, etc... not where they spent those.
That's basically the same chart you found!
You typed the following:
'You'd be surprised how little slashing the entire defense budget would dent this.
Especially since the largest, most significant portion of the DoD budget is engineering related.'
In my opinion, that statement suggests that engineering related activities make up the the most significant portion of the defense budget.
Operations and Maintenance is the largest part of the budget. Operations is self explanatory. Maintenance is simply the maintaining of various vehicles/ships/weapons systems/etc. (among other things). This is not engineering.
So it appears to me that your statement is clearly wrong and/or deliberately misleading.
And if not. Then what was the purpose of your above quoted statement?
Similar threads
