Canada will never allow the Ambassador to be spanned into there because it makes the trucks run through the city.

According to Mr, Crain they do have an option and what is wrong with this option?

Maybe a possible compromise is for the Ambassador Bridge to pay for a short extension of the Windsor Essex Parkway [[WEP) from its presently planned end at the DRIC Canadian Plaza to the Canadian plaza of the Ambassador Br. That would take the trucks off the local streets of Windsor.

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/5121

Ambassador Bridge "monopoly"?Read the numbers here and you will have a more educated outlook.Just look at the numbers and ignore the overtones.

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/5895

Matty owns the tunnel also? Not according to this .

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/5791

RE: Port Mann bridge

As for the second, the government's own financial statements indicate the corporation will not turn a steady profit until the last year of the current decade.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/n...2-211438e34e54

Self-Supporting Debt
A bond, especially a municipal bond, where the coupons and principal are paid with funding from the project the debt seeks to finance. It may be used, for example, to build a hospital or a toll bridge, and bondholders are repaid with the revenue the hospital or toll bridge derives. Self-supporting debt is usually slightly higher risk than a general obligation bond because if the project fails to generate revenue, the bond will default. However, self-supporting debt is generally low risk and highly liquid.

http://financial-dictionary.thefreed...pporting+Debts

Private toll roads are built cost effectively and most have a life span of ten years before resurfacing so any future proceeds coming back to the community will never appear.

Do I believe that toll roads and bridges can be self supporting? Yes I do because all they have to do is raise the toll to increase revenue to make up for shortfalls .

But at what point does it end? If you have less traffic and need to raise tolls to make up for it do you not get into the same situation as if you lose taxpayers so you raise taxes on the remaining taxpayers to make up the difference.Detroit is a prime example of that.

When the tolls are raised just like fuel costs the difference is passed on to the consumer when it comes to moving goods.So who is really paying for the loss?

If you do a Yahoo string search of "self supporting toll bridges" you will see that all across the country just about every toll road is increasing tolls to make up for less demand.

Do you reject the obligation that Canada promises to be responsible for any shortfall?

Yes in a way I do because I have not heard from the Canadian taxpayers saying that they would feel comfortable covering the losses should they incur and they would be the ones that could sway that promise.If they say no way who then foots the bill?

FTR I do not appose the bridge theory on its own in the future ,I appose it now because of Areo being attached to it.

Because if the bridge gets built now and Areo comes into play it will be the largest disinvestment within the city of Detroit sense "white flight" it will be in direct conflict with everything good happening now in the city when it comes to diversification.

Look at the players.

GE: Has already spent millions on it and by putting GE Capital at the disposal of future potential business players in Tech,Bio,alternative energy,and research it will undermine all the recent start ups within the city and create a very un leval playing field by stacking the deck against future start ups.

But they need help politically.

Second player.

Ann Arbor Spark which is a VC firm backed by GE.

Mr Snyder is the founder of Ann Arbor Spark.VC funding firm
Mr. Dillion State treasurer served as vice president of GE Capital and as president of the Detroit Steel Co.
Michael Finney Ceo of Ann Arbor Spark became Ceo of MEDC.

Talk about stacking the deck.

So to me and my speculation it appears as if there is another reason to push for the bridge to be built and it appears like there is a big conflict of interest involved in it.

There is a write up in Crains today about the state wanting to help with Detroit airport , I have not read the write up but it does kinda fall into place,why all of the sudden the interest?

So I have personally two questions for the Canadians on this board and they all seem to be level headed so far.

#1 , Do you feel comfortable supporting the bridge knowing that you are paying for it with no return?

#2 Do you feel comfortable paying for a bridge with your tax dollars knowing that the bridge is being put into play to make US private enterprise billions while getting you to pay for the bridge?

So like I posted previously it is not just an issue of a bridge there is a lot more at stake in the larger picture and it is hard to base a decision on just the bridge as a stand alone theory.