Belanger Park River Rouge
ON THIS DATE IN DETROIT HISTORY - BELANGER PARK »



Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37
  1. #1

    Default Canada may pay for US Customs Plaza for NITC Bridge. Expedite process

    Very interesting development.. really hope this helps speed up this process


    "Looks like Canada may agree to pay upfront for US Customs plaza to move delayed NITC bridge project ahead. See upcoming #freep story"

    https://twitter.com/JGallagherFreep/...83845561511937

  2. #2

    Default

    ​One step forward, one mile back:

    Lansing — Senate Republicans launched another attack on Gov. Rick Snyder’s new bridge to Canada Tuesday by prohibiting the state from purchasing any land for it as part of a $3.8-billion transportation budget for 2015.

    From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz30yLeF0pL

  3. #3

    Default

    Matty must be paying his goons a pretty penny.

  4. #4

    Default

    As you may know I'm Canadian, but if the US Feds won`t pony up a lousy 250 million to get a 2nd span built then all this Homeland Security stuff is a joke.

  5. #5

    Default

    They won't and it is.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 401don View Post
    As you may know I'm Canadian, but if the US Feds won`t pony up a lousy 250 million to get a 2nd span built then all this Homeland Security stuff is a joke.

    It's embarrassing is what it is. The proposed new bridge is an international crossing, not a State or Detroit crossing. A foreign government [[and I love Canada) has to pony up to make it happen? Shameful.
    Last edited by Honky Tonk; May-06-14 at 06:15 PM.

  7. #7

    Default

    It is absurd. It is one of the more basic functions of government. The bridge may be controversial, but having proper border screening should not be. And it is a comparative bargain for the feds anyway. Get half of a multi-billion dollar bridge project for the cost of screening people and cargo on one side.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeyinBrooklyn View Post
    It is absurd. It is one of the more basic functions of government. The bridge may be controversial, but having proper border screening should not be. And it is a comparative bargain for the feds anyway. Get half of a multi-billion dollar bridge project for the cost of screening people and cargo on one side.
    Mikey, you know better than that. Governments are not rational entities. They are creatures of politics. That's why we need a constitution and a judiciary -- to keep the politicians from making each and every decision with politics in mind.

    And 'bargain'. Irrelevant word to most government.

  9. #9

    Default

    We Canadians shouldn't be paying for the US customs plaza. I say let the bridge get built without a US customs plaza and then LET'S GO SHOPPING!

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Király View Post
    We Canadians shouldn't be paying for the US customs plaza. I say let the bridge get built without a US customs plaza and then LET'S GO SHOPPING!
    As a American I'm ashamed to admit it, but Canadians should have never offered to pay for the whole bridge.
    Instead they should have bought 50 mill in TV adds here, it would have saved them a lot of money and headache.

  11. #11
    GUSHI Guest

    Default

    don't build it, we have enough bridges and tunnels

  12. #12

    Default

    ... So has Duggan taken a public position on the development of a second bridge?

    I doubt that this will get addressed one way or another even in a few years. Horrible.

  13. #13

    Default

    Let them build our new hockey arena too...after all, its their sport.

  14. #14

    Default

    Sounds good to me. I actually thought that this could be a good test pilot project to have US Customs on the Candian side and the Canadian Customs on the US side. That way people are screened BEFORE crossing the bridge. What's the point of screening for "terrorists" if they are on one of the potential targets before they are screened....Duh....

    Quote Originally Posted by Király View Post
    We Canadians shouldn't be paying for the US customs plaza. I say let the bridge get built without a US customs plaza and then LET'S GO SHOPPING!

  15. #15

    Default

    It should be remembered that the Canadians are issuing and guaranteeing the bonds. If all goes as planned, the revenue from the bridge is to pay off the bonds. Canadian taxpayers hopefully will not lose a loonie on the venture.

    As for state Senate Republicans blocking necessary land acquisition: they are being stupid. Snyder lacks much pull with them because they are activist, ideological conservatives [[many of them anyway). Snyder isn't. He arrives at his policies through what he views as practical, not due to a sense of right or wrong. Hope they get it worked out.

  16. #16

    Default

    Well shit, while they're at it, lets have Canada bulldoze every abandoned building in Detroit, widen 94 and 75, and renovate MCS to incorporate a new high speed rail hub to Chicago.


    I find it incredibly embarrassing that the USA, the richest most powerful country in the world, can't pay for a customs plaza for an international crossing, especially when Canada is fronting the rest of it. What a joke...

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by animatedmartian View Post
    Matty must be paying his goons a pretty penny.
    Especially Pappageorge...

    But Sen. John Pappageorge, the Troy Republican who supports the restrictions on land acquisition, said the privately owned Ambassador Bridge is operating at 35 percent of capacity while carrying the bulk of trade goods between the United States and Canada across the Detroit River.

    From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz313Ne6pzY
    If it is indeed at 35% of capacity, then why did Matty want to build a second span?

  18. #18

    Default

    Let me start by saying I am no fan of Moroun or his tactics.

    But I do believe that this whole thing about Canada paying for the new bridge is because over the years the Canadians screwed up and allowed the approach roads to the Ambassador Bridge from the 401 to be developed as residential. Remember, the bridge was built in 1929. There was very little on the Canadian side that time. And truck traffic was nothing compared to today. IMO - the Canadians are trying to CYA years of mistakes on their side of the border.

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by downtownguy View Post
    Especially Pappageorge...



    If it is indeed at 35% of capacity, then why did Matty want to build a second span?
    Better question: Why would he spend $30 mil in advertising to try to stop the State from building theirs? EVEN BETTER QUESTION: Why is he STILL pursuing his second span erection? And there's no revenue to be had from a newer, bigger, bridge. What bull-poop.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,067

    Default

    It's still a pretty bad deal for Michigan.

    If Canada agrees to pay for Michigan's debt on the Blue Water twin-spanning, and Michigan's debt on the Ambassador gateway reconstruction, then I support this. Otherwise this will hurt Michigan's ability to repay those bonds.

    Both the Blue Water and Ambassador are seeing traffic well below capacity, and Michigan taxpayers are on the hook if traffic drops more on those two bridges. Currently the Blue Water debt is so bad that current traffic will never allow for repayment.
    Last edited by Bham1982; May-07-14 at 02:55 PM.

  21. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bham1982 View Post
    It's still a pretty bad deal for Michigan.

    If Canada agrees to pay for Michigan's debt on the Blue Water twin-spanning, and Michigan's debt on the Ambassador gateway reconstruction, then I support this. Otherwise this will hurt Michigan's ability to repay those bonds.

    Both the Blue Water and Ambassador are seeing traffic well below capacity, and Michigan taxpayers are on the hook if traffic drops more on those two bridges. Currently the Blue Water debt is so bad that current traffic will never allow for repayment.
    The Ambassador is a four lane bridge constructed in 1929. It is also the busiest trade crossing between the US and Canada. How is it possibly operating below capacity?

    I don't doubt your points about the Blue Water, though.

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Khorasaurus View Post
    The Ambassador is a four lane bridge constructed in 1929. It is also the busiest trade crossing between the US and Canada. How is it possibly operating below capacity?

    I don't doubt your points about the Blue Water, though.


    Ambassador bridge is not very busy. It has 14,000 vehicle crossings a day; 10,000 trucks and 4,000 cars. By comparison to the Champlain bridge in Montreal with 159,000 daily crossings, it is less than 1/10th the traffic usage of our busiest regional bridge. But again, it is an international bridge and folks dont need the hassle of border crossings and toll.


    I dont even know what the ultimate need for another bridge is btwn Detroit and Windsor really since there are four other spans crossing Montreal's south shore suburbs and they together hold maybe 300,000 cars a day...

    I think it has more to do with an Ontario make work project IMO.

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bham1982 View Post
    It's still a pretty bad deal for Michigan.

    If Canada agrees to pay for Michigan's debt on the Blue Water twin-spanning, and Michigan's debt on the Ambassador gateway reconstruction, then I support this. Otherwise this will hurt Michigan's ability to repay those bonds.

    Both the Blue Water and Ambassador are seeing traffic well below capacity, and Michigan taxpayers are on the hook if traffic drops more on those two bridges. Currently the Blue Water debt is so bad that current traffic will never allow for repayment.
    You're probably right. The Ambassador Bridge is operating way below capacity and a new bridge would be a losing proposition for Michigan. That's way Matty Maroun is pursuing his second span tooth and nail. He's in too high a tax bracket and is looking for some way to shed some of his billions.

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ferndalien View Post
    ​One step forward, one mile back:

    Lansing — Senate Republicans launched another attack on Gov. Rick Snyder’s new bridge to Canada Tuesday by prohibiting the state from purchasing any land for it as part of a $3.8-billion transportation budget for 2015.

    From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz30yLeF0pL
    I refuse to vote republican for anything in Washington, and I'm very damn close to doing the same for the state.

    That's very frustrating that folks that preach competition are trying to protect an evil man's monopoly at the expense of public interest.

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 48307 View Post
    I refuse to vote republican for anything in Washington, and I'm very damn close to doing the same for the state.

    That's very frustrating that folks that preach competition are trying to protect an evil man's monopoly at the expense of public interest.
    It's not that they're Republicans. Snyder is a Republican and he's the number one proponent of the bridge. It's that they're corrupt and Maroun shrewdly paid off Republicans because it's easy for them to pretend their opposition has something to do with government spending [[even though the bridge will cost Michigan taxpayers basically nothing...)

    Also note that the Democratic White House/USDOT are dragging their feet on this project, which makes no sense whatsoever.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Instagram
BEST ONLINE FORUM FOR
DETROIT-BASED DISCUSSION
DetroitYES Awarded BEST OF DETROIT 2015 - Detroit MetroTimes - Best Online Forum for Detroit-based Discussion 2015

ENJOY DETROITYES?


AND HAVE ADS REMOVED DETAILS »





Welcome to DetroitYES! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
DetroitYES! is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to DetroitYES! [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.