|
|
| Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal (1430806) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Tue Mar 21 19:24:24 2017, in response to Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal, posted by Joe V on Tue Mar 21 19:10:57 2017. The land grant was a de facto loan. They have been paid off.What do you mean a "de facto loan?" You have sited no evidence otherwise than to babble for 3 days. OK, 1. The word is "cited." If you're going to spew nonsense, at least use correct grammar. 2. You've actually cited evidence to support my position, so that saves me the bother. 3. Since you think Eisenhower was a socialist, you're far too disconnected from reality to be worth much effort; any evidence I present, you will simply dismiss. 4. The evidence is a quick google away. For example: Without the assistance of the U.S. government, railroad construction between 1860 and 1900 would have been greatly curtailed. Building a railroad was an expensive venture. Private banks, fearing the railroad companies would need a long time to pay off their debts, were reluctant to loan money to the companies. To remedy the situation, Congress provided assistance to the railroad companies in the form of land grants. The land grant railroads, receiving millions of acres of public land, sold the land to make money, built their railroads, and contributed to a more rapid settlement of the West. In the end, four out of the five transcontinental railroads were built with help from the federal government. Source Signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln on July 1, 1862, the 1862 Act authorized extensive land grants in the Western United States and the issuance of 30-year government bonds (at 6 percent) to the Union Pacific Railroad and Central Pacific Railroad (later the Southern Pacific Railroad) companies in order to construct a continuous transcontinental railroad between the eastern side of the Missouri River at Council Bluffs, Iowa (opposite from Omaha, Nebraska) and the navigable waters of the Sacramento River in Sacramento, California. Section 2 of the Act granted each Company contiguous rights of way for their rail lines as well as all public lands within 200 feet (61 m) on either side of the track. Source But then, you're not actually disputing the existence of land grants, are you? No, you're trying to defend the even more absurd idea that because Congress gave the railroads subsidies in 1945, it proves the railroads never received any subsidies. Airlines paying to use airports does not change the fact that AIRPORTS DO NOT PAY PROPERTY TAXES. No one claimed airports pay property taxes. You claimed airlines are subsidised by virtue of the fact that they don't pay property taxes. However, they pay airport fees in lieu of property taxes, meaning they don't actually receive subsidies. So I think we can agree that: 1. Airports do not pay property taxes. 2. Airlines do not receive subsidies. 3. Cars and airplanes pushed the private sector out of passenger rail. That's how free markets work. |
|
|
|