[[Part of this) should please people here [Gordie Howe Bridge]

[Wesley Mouch]

The way technology is going it is going to be obsolete as soon as it is built,retinal scan,self driving trucks going through image scan,drone service,a cargo drone can pick up parts and go rooftop to rooftop.

The U.K. Is working on phaseing out/banning diesel altogether,have this discussion 20 years from now and the bridge would probably be a footpath 50 years from now it probably will not even be needed.

It will be like the old covered bridges that technology made obsolete.

But it is free and we live in today and worry about tomorrow at that time.

Richard, a fine point to make. And one I hadn't given any thought to.

Certainly, as you note, this isn't quite today yet -- but when you're projecting a 50 year life for this beast, suddenly it almost is today.

No doubt we'll see some major changes in transport in the next decade or two -- but we may see a lot of the past for a long time too.

Thanks for the enlightenment.

[canuck]

The way technology is going it is going to be obsolete as soon as it is built,retinal scan,self driving trucks going through image scan,drone service,a cargo drone can pick up parts and go rooftop to rooftop.

The U.K. Is working on phaseing out/banning diesel altogether,have this discussion 20 years from now and the bridge would probably be a footpath 50 years from now it probably will not even be needed.

It will be like the old covered bridges that technology made obsolete.

But it is free and we live in today and worry about tomorrow at that time.

Why am I not surprised you didn't come up with technological progress to nix Chump's Mexican border wall?

[Richard]

Why am I not surprised you didn't come up with technological progress to nix Chump's Mexican border wall?

Because when I look at the map it shows Canada and the bridges in question in the north,the Mexican wall would be far down in the south and has nothing to do with anything related to said bridges.

Maybe that is why you are not surprised.

[canuck]

Because when I look at the map it shows Canada and the bridges in question in the north,the Mexican wall would be far down in the south and has nothing to do with anything related to said bridges.

Maybe that is why you are not surprised.

If you can do without trucking between Canada and the US, then surely you can find a way of zapping those criminal Latin-American and other trespassers South of the US border. No bridge, no wall. Lawl.

[Richard]

If you can do without trucking between Canada and the US, then surely you can find a way of zapping those criminal Latin-American and other trespassers South of the US border. No bridge, no wall. Lawl.

But of course,outfit drones with stun gun zappers,problem solved,if the thread was actually about looking at border jumping deterrents.

Is Canada doing without trucking at the moment?

Besides with the boycott you do not want any of our goods anyways,so why spend billions building a bridge to move products that you do not want in the first place?

Kinda kills the future demand calculation,when there is none.

Your hero President Trump offered free trade, But Canada rejected it,why?

Not interested in free trade,but cry about tariffs when the option is no tariffs.

Or maybe Canada rejects free trade because they feel that it is not in thier best interest,I am beginning to think Canadians are like a bunch of little Trump clones running around,because they think the exact same way he does.

[Canadian Visitor]

Ground Breaking Ceremony today:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windso...idge-1.4749688

[Richard]

I heard they dug a 6' deep hole.

[3WC]

I heard it is 600 feet deep and they're filling it with $100 bills. Things to do before they start construction of the bridge, for practice.

[mikefmich]

I heard they dug a 6' deep hole.

Dude, time to just put it to rest, 'eh? Or you still trying to garner brownie points? Which is really rather pathetic.

[Richard]

Dude, time to just put it to rest, 'eh? Or you still trying to garner brownie points? Which is really rather pathetic.

But what is unknown is when the bridge will be completed or how much it will cost Canadian taxpayers.

Or any other taxpayer for that matter,how exactly do you present a project to the taxpayer and tell them that it will cost them nothing and present the feasibility of it as positive,when you do not even know how much it will cost?

The only solid number that is advailable right now,today,is the tax base loss to the city of Detroit, that the current residents have to cover until the thing gets built and covers its costs. 5 years from now.

You can provide that number to us,correct?

5 billion dollars,at best guess,and I am pathetic?

I want to build something,give me 5 billion and I will let you know the details after you cut the check,is Tesla running the Canadian government?

Because Canada is our friend are they going to also reimburse the city for that loss and tack it on the end?

If your friend twisted his ankle would you kick him in the other one to make it feel better.

I am an independent person,I can make my own brownies.

The only difference between the two bridges is one is Taxpayer funded and the other is not,the metrics behind achieving that goal on both sides is one in the same.

[Honky Tonk]

The only solid number that is advailable right now,today,is the tax base loss to the city of Detroit, that the current residents have to cover until the thing gets built and covers its costs. 5 years from now.

I don't get this. What tax base loss are the residents covering for 5 years?

[Zacha341]

I wonder how the original bridge would have ever been built [[completed 1930) if there were the politics of today about! See photos of Ambassador construction:

https://tinyurl.com/ycfncu4j

http://photos.metrotimes.com/20-stun...sw-sh-ro-final

[Richard]

I don't get this. What tax base loss are the residents covering for 5 years?

Candian government buys the properties in Del Rey and leases the ones that are being used as fixed structures back to the perspective agencies.

Ie they pay to build the customs plaza,but still own it and leases it back to the agency triple net.

Is that building tax exempt,as a government agency,I believe it is tax exempt,but is Canada also tax exempt as a landlord role.

To build the supporting highways and ramps,houses and businesses are demolished,each one of those properties were on the tax roll subject to increased tax value in the future.

The properties are now demolished and even as a vacant lot thier tax value is decreased,if it takes 5 years to build the bridge that lot has a loss of tax revenues to the city for 5 years and beyond because it will never be replaced at the maximum tax value with a structure.

Lets say it is $2000 a year,that is $2000 more the rest of the residents have to replace in the budget and cannot count on in the future.

Now multiply that X hundreds of properties,that adds up.

I do not have a problem with others disagreeing with me,all they have to do is provide those numbers and how they directly impact the city and if they actually do.

Those numbers should have been provided to the U.S. Taxpayer and even more importantly the city residents if they are going to be required to make up the loss.

They can provide those numbers by adding up the taxable value before the buyouts began and what the taxable value is now,the city cannot because they no longer have taxable jurisdiction over the properties because they are now owned by the government of Canada.

Is the Government of Canada tax exempt when it comes to owning property on US soil?

[Honky Tonk]

Candian government buys the properties in Del Rey and leases the ones that are being used as fixed structures back to the perspective agencies.

Ie they pay to build the customs plaza,but still own it and leases it back to the agency triple net.

Is that building tax exempt,as a government agency,I believe it is tax exempt,but is Canada also tax exempt as a landlord role.

To build the supporting highways and ramps,houses and businesses are demolished,each one of those properties were on the tax roll subject to increased tax value in the future.

The properties are now demolished and even as a vacant lot thier tax value is decreased,if it takes 5 years to build the bridge that lot has a loss of tax revenues to the city for 5 years and beyond because it will never be replaced at the maximum tax value with a structure.

Lets say it is $2000 a year,that is $2000 more the rest of the residents have to replace in the budget and cannot count on in the future.

Now multiply that X hundreds of properties,that adds up.

I do not have a problem with others disagreeing with me,all they have to do is provide those numbers and how they directly impact the city and if they actually do.

Those numbers should have been provided to the U.S. Taxpayer and even more importantly the city residents if they are going to be required to make up the loss.

They can provide those numbers by adding up the taxable value before the buyouts began and what the taxable value is now,the city cannot because they no longer have taxable jurisdiction over the properties because they are now owned by the government of Canada.

Is the Government of Canada tax exempt when it comes to owning property on US soil?

A couple of things, first of all, Google and look up stories about Del Ray on the internet. I highly doubt the few residents that were living there were paying anywhere near $2K a year, especially the Church. That's why that area was picked. North of I-75, the area is very stable, South, not so much. [[one of the dangers of back seat driving from another state) I have no knowledge of the contract for the Welcoming Plaza, but if what you say is true, then shame on our Federal Government for not stepping up to the plate and avoiding this needless expenditure. This is an INTERNATIONAL crossing, not a MI or Detroit crossing. Neither Obama nor Trump have intervened, and this is our entrance point, our security involved, on our soil. [[Hillary would have been all for paying for the Plaza, unless there was public outcry, of course, then she would have been totally against it) Moroun is still going to be crossing vehicles, collecting tolls, and paying taxes, so we should be Ok there. Driving past the Ambassador Bridge several times a week, it's always packed. Sometimes commerce trucks are backed up all the way down 96. So I don't see a lack of business as an issue. If Moroun is allowed to build HIS bridge, though, the loan might take longer to pay back.

[Richard]

My view is no matter what we are told and how free it is,it is going to cost us so it should be a joint venture and not a one sided venture.Providing the numbers make it feasible.

If it is not then maybe there are more pressing venues that need immediate attention.

I know you meen no disrespect with the eyes not there part but I have lived in cities and seen parts of town that everybody said were dumps today and would never go anywhere, but times change.

Think of the worst part in Detroit that you can think of,my cousin bought a 6 story apartment building in a similar situation in Minneapolis for $1,10 years later sold it for 1.6 million. When you have a city that shows people care then you cannot stop progress.

If it was the Detroit of ten years ago I would probably say yea,they were lucky to get out,not so much anymore.