This question considers whether maintaining and repairing current infrastructure should take precedence over constructing new roads and bridges. Proponents argue that it ensures safety, extends the life of existing infrastructure, and is more cost-effective. Opponents argue that new infrastructure is needed to support growth and improve transportation networks.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Political theme:
County:
City:
@B4CVGKL1mo1MO
If the road is almost unable to drive on then it should be prioritized but if its just a little bit bumpy then no.
Yes, once our current infrastructure meets current standards, then we can invest in new infrastructure
@9VV3MFB7mos7MO
Yes, but not if the new infrastructure can replace and upgrade maintenance and repair of existing roads at a lower overall cost.
@9VSZ5PT7mos7MO
i think it should be 50/50, new infrastructure is a good thing, however, maintaining current infrastructure is also important.
They should keep repairing and maintaining existing roads and bridges, until new infrastructure is required due to extensive damage or it being simply the better or cheaper option.
@9VLKHNH7mos7MO
It depends on the condition of that infrastructure. There are times when improving it may be adequate and other times it may need to be replaced.
@9VJW7P27mos7MO
No, the government should maintain existing roads and bridges, but create a more robust public transportation system as a long-term solution.
@9VGBMN87mos7MO
Yes because there are very many roads that need to be fixed but they aren't and that money is being taken out of our paychecks for taxes.
@92QXRND 8mos8MO
Yes, but they should revisit the idea of new infrastructure (that supports pedestrians and cyclists) later
@9S6LCCN9mos9MO
Yes, depending on where you live could depend on how you tackle this battle. Climate crisis works different ways in different areas for example that might favor one over the other.
@9RZRCN99mos9MO
No, Prioritize both the maintenance and repair of existing roads and bridges as well as building new infrastructure.
@slangford12Libertarian 9mos9MO
Should be based on current data usage combined with cost benefit analysis.
@9R3H9CK10mos10MO
If the roads and bridges are too old they should be fully replaced. If they just need repairs they should be repaired.
@9NQDDVSRepublican11mos11MO
Possibly but the states would do a better job at managing such affairs.
@LoneWanderer987mos7MO
The government should crack down on corruption in construction projects and use the money saved to maintain and repair existing infrastructure.
As long as there is no safety risk the development of better, new infrastructure should take priority.
@9QRM6YH10mos10MO
No, destroy all freeways and highways in urban and suburban areas, and replace it with rail and bike infrastructure.
@9Q3NX5410mos10MO
Government should prioritize both maintenance on current infrastructure and creating new infrastructure as well.
@9PWFHWT10mos10MO
Prioritize what is most needed for public safety, followed by what is most cost effective in the long term. In some cases a new bridge may be better than repairing an old one and vice versa.
@9P9YK9611mos11MO
The government should prioritize inspections of bridges and then remake bridges to replace them
@9NXN4FH11mos11MO
Not the government. Private companies should instead.
@9NBNRNN 11mos11MO
No, as long as new infrastructure is exclusively public transportation
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
