(Page 2 of 2)
There would be minimal overhead, and instead of gaming the funds through a multi-tiered political process and bureaucracy, money would be allocated to necessary upkeep and maintenance only. No more sending money to Washington, with Washington then deciding how much it will send back and to whom. No more siphoning funds for projects (make-work or otherwise) that don't have anything to do with building new roads and keeping the ones already built in good order.
But the current setup is not likely to be altered because there's next to no outrage. People focus on the supposed machinations of "Big Oil" -- and give Big Government a blank check.
It doesn't make much sense, but that's the way it is.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
louis vuitton| 4.27.10 @ 1:13AM
researchers have desperately tried to downplay these findings, to the extent that the New York Times, canada gooseAfter the immigration bill failed in the U.S. Senate, the postmortems deplored the new power of bloggers and the Internet.