Too many politicians seem to reach for 'infrastructure' as the default answer to investment, as if roads and bridges were the answer to everything. Even the IMF and the World Bank seem to mainly offer infrastructure spending as an alternative to austerity, although they are right to focus on the need for investment.
Yes, we need a substantial investment in our hard infrastructure like roads and bridges. But roads and bridges can't serve people if they don't have the child care they need in order to go to work or the health care they need to stay healthy and participate in the workforce.
Infrastructure is one of the core responsibilities of government and one that cannot be shortchanged by other controversial spending. I believe investment in infrastructure pays dividends for decades and is a wise investment of taxpayer dollars.
Just as our roads and bridges are overdue for investment, so is the infrastructure for scientific research; that is, the body of scientific thought and the tools for searching through it.
We need to stop thinking about infrastructure as an economic stimulant and start thinking about it as a strategy. Economic stimulants produce Bridges to Nowhere. Strategic investment in infrastructure produces a foundation for long-term growth.
Despite my deep misgivings about austerity and the harm it would do, I agreed to chair the national infrastructure commission under a Tory government, because I believed that delivering infrastructure investment could help build a brighter future for businesses and families. I am a pragmatist. I do what works.
What mothers need, as well as fathers, spouses, and the children of aging parents, is an entire national infrastructure of care, every bit as important as the physical infrastructure of roads, bridges, tunnels, broadband, parks and public works.
Investment in infrastructure enables children to go to school. Investment in vital public services like health and education gives young people the opportunity to shape their own futures and reach their potential.
Secretary Clinton, right from day one, wants to do real investment in public works and infrastructure, building highways and bridges, building airports, to doing what we need to do that way which lifts the economy up, undoubtedly.
I do believe that India needs a lot more foreign direct investment than we've got, and we should have the ambition to move in the same league many other countries in our neighborhood are moving. We may not be able to reach where the Chinese are today, but there is no reason why we should not think big about the role of foreign direct investment, particularly in the areas relating to infrastructure, where our needs for investment are very large. We need new initiatives, management skills, and I do believe that direct foreign investment can play a very important role.
International lending banks need to focus on areas where private investment doesn't go, such as infrastructure projects, education and poverty relief.
Our infrastructure of bridges, roads and ports has been given a D-level rating by many civil engineer societies. The government should shift some money from the Defense budget and hire companies to fix our infrastructure. As for non-construction workers, we need to do job retraining in those growing areas where more skilled workers will be needed.
Infrastructure investment in science is an investment in jobs, in health, in economic growth and environmental solutions.
[ Big infrastructure investment mentioned by Donald Trump] that would be a welcome development. We'll see if he wants to deliver on that. The truth is that if he does, we want to see infrastructure development too.
I`d say is stimulus infrastructure spending is not instant jobs. I think the real reason the president [Donald Trump] wants to do this is because we have a crumbling infrastructure problem and you need a good modern infrastructure for economic growth to occur.
Many of the problems of poverty and need are really problems of physical infrastructure: not enough hospitals, too few schools, insufficient roads, bridges, and a lack of tools. This is what makes traditional philanthropy so daunting. You could build a thousand new hospitals in some parts of the world and barely make a difference.
You know, if you look back in the 1930s, the money went to infrastructure. The bridges, the municipal buildings, the roads, those were all built with stimulus money spent on infrastructure. This stimulus bill has fundamentally gone, started out with a $500 rebate check, remember. That went to buy flat-screen TVs made in China.