Streetcar Named Desire

Morning headlines of the Arizona Daily Star champion a $64M grant from the federal government to build a 4 mile streetcar route from UMC medical center to somewhere on the west side of the Santa Cruz river. The total costs are approximately $150M and are being funded by a previous federal grant and voter approved funding in 2006. Strange as it may seem the previous federal grant and the voter approved bond issue both came at a "time of plenty" when we were in the midst of the greatest housing boom in history. That same period fostered the greatest financial crisis in the history of the world and we are still trying to figure out ways to dig ourselves out. So, you may ask, what does that have to do with our good fortune in getting a streetcar. One only has to purview the rest of section A to start getting a little uncomfortable with the grant. Towards the end of the article it states that there are not enough funds to complete the project nor are there any funds available for post construction operations. Like everything else they plan on crossing that bridge when they get to it. Sort of Tucson's own little "Streetcar Named Desire". Don't get me wrong, I have ridden the trolley in San Diego and the El in Chicago and find it to be the optimal way of getting around. Both started out as privately constructed and operated and both were bought out by the municipalities they served, with monies approved by the voters. They weren't subsidized by the rest of America and that is what sticks in my craw.

As we continue reading through the pages, one after other, we see that the newly appointed debt-reduction commission probably doesn't stand any more of a chance to be effective than a snowball in hell. This commission was formed by President Obama as a last resort effort to appear as if he was interested in reining in the government debt. This was done only after the Senate, in a rare bi-partisan vote, voted down the same commission as being counter-productive to the good of the country. They further explained that taking steps to curtail spending and balance the budget was within their responsibility and that a third party entity was not needed. Give me a break!!!!

The projected national debt for this fiscal year is projected to reach $9.3T (that's "T" for trillion) and is projected to total almost $14 trillion by 2015 which will equal 72.9 percent of the gross domestic product, the measure of all the nation's goods and services produced annually.

Reading on we find that the current post-collapse housing industry strategy is looking bleak, to say the least. Both the government and the banks were ill prepared to implement the program and as a consequence hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes will hit the market this year, further depressing prices even more. Depressed prices effect tax base values that almost every state relies on for revenue. Simple formula here: lower values equal less revenue equals higher taxes to provide the glut of services we have become accustomed to.

So just where am I going with this you might ask. Good point so I will wrap up by offering for your consideration the following. While Tucson was able to ply $64M from the federal coffers, Phoenix was rejected in their quest for $122M which was what they were seeking to speed up construction of its Sky Harbor people mover that would connect the airport terminals. Think about it for a moment, which of the two projects would actually benefit their respective communities the most? The one that transports millions of airline passengers each year or the one that transports the mostly poverty level constituents from Tucson's west side barrio to tax payer subsidized healthcare at UMC? No, I am not advocating them getting the monies as opposed to Tucson, just pointing out the dichotomy that exists between government spending our money as opposed to us spending it. And let's not forget the on-going operation expense that needs to be funded.

The old adage that "if it's not worth paying for, it's not worth having" seems to fit the bill here. Why should we ask the rest of America to foot the bill for what some of us might want or maybe not want. Why do we continue to spend monies that we don't have, monies that we borrow from the Chinese?

We have to recognize that this is an election year and the political mentality seems to be that as we get closer to that date we need to let the constituents know that we can at least bring home the bacon, otherwise referred to as "pork barrel" politics. The City of Tucson has a population of approximately 550,000 and we see that the $64M equates to about $116 per head. Just as a point of interest we note that Arizona's illegal alien population has grown to 550,000. Think about that for a few moments.

Just food for thought. The current debt of $9,300,000,000,000 equates to $31,000 per citizen, man, woman and child. Employed or not. How do you like those apples?