Hopefully they learn really fast that when they see a certain type of problem with bridges of that design it isn't just tagged as "structurally deficient" and "watched more carefully", it's Closed For Repairs. NOW.
No matter how loudly the local politicos howl that it's a vital artery and any closure is bad for the local economy...
-->--
They already knew how long before this happened.
You don't need to know much to drop a bridge like this - I have absolutely no demolitions training at all, and even I could probably take a bridge like that down with minimal resources should I care to. (Which I don't.) You just need to identify the weak spots.
ANFO is easy to mix, and doesn't take too big a kick to light off - a half-stick of dynamite with some Detcord if all those Discovery Channel shows are accurate.
With access to even small amounts of high explosives and the proper detonators it would be trivial. Just kick a vital support out from underneath, and after that gravity does all the heavy work.
-->--
One argument in favour of tolls is that those who USE the bridge, PAY for it. Those who don't use it, don't pay. Works for me...at least for bridges and roads.
Do you continue to pay the bank after you've paid off your mortgage?
If the bridge was paid for by the tax payer, why should he also pay to use it?
And isn't a road-use tax the same thing as a toll? Trucks pay road-use taxes as well as fuel taxes. That means you want trucks to pay a toll to use the state's roads and bridges and pay a toll to use the state's roads and bridges and pay another toll to use the state's roads and bridges.
If you don't use your states roads and bridges then you don't buy fuel for your car. If you don't buy fuel then you don't pay fuel taxes. If you don't pay fuel taxes then you don't pay for the roads and bridges that you don't use.
You really need to think these things through before you advocate tolls on publicly owned roads and bridges.
Jack
?????????????????
You had cars lined up bumper to bumper on the bridge due to construction, plus the construction equipment. That is a LOT of extra weight. If I also understand this correctly, they were adding asphalt on top of the existing surface, which drastically reduces the vehicle carrying capacity of the bridge. Before putting asphalt on a bridge you need to REMOVE some of the existing surface. It is NOT acceptable to put asphalt on top of a concrete bridge! The proper method is to remove sections of concrete and replace with new concrete.
YOU need to do the thinking. Multiple layers of taxes is nothing new.
Just because multiple layers of taxes are common doesn't mean they are right. However if you want to pay more in taxes, your local, state and federal government will be happy to take your money. Just don't try to make me pay along with you.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.