Posted on 03/07/2007 4:19:33 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
You are using national defense as an excuse . . . unless you are willing to demonstrate how the private operation of a road negatively impacts our national security.
The 65-mile system he's referring to, IIRC, is the portion that I mistakenly identified as public funding only. There is some private funding involved. The PPP I was referring to, on the other hand, was the separate southern section of SH 130, which will be financed and built by Cintra and Zachry.
You have the key phrases, PPP & CDA, why don't you google them?
See post #28 and #32
If we were going to be precise, we would identify a project as a PPP, then a CDA, and then which particular CDA, and since there are still going to be differences, we would have to turn to the book-length contract. Of course that is not practical.
Instead, we look at a particular project to determine whether it rises above a degree of objection or level of controversy. If so we use the jargon PPP to describe it.
While all of 130 is a CDA, only 2 segments are concessions. At the same time, TTC 35 is a CDA but not a concession. But they both rise above the level, so we call them by the PPP jargon.
Thus, TSR, I, and others can use the term and know what we are talking about, with out going thru a 60 word of 600 page description.
This doesn't mean that you have to do it. You are entitled to your semantical argument to muddy the water.
"You are entitled to your semantical argument to muddy the water."
Thanks Ben! All I did was clearup a few facts for people that don't live in my area. Call it what you want.
Heard a little new info on the TTC. (were rumors) Seems the contract has non-compete clauses and if We should decide to buy it back before the terms of the lease are up, Cintra would expect current free market value.
Should the state build and operate the TTC toll road, there would be a non-compete clause.
Parts of 130 may end up being sections of the TTC, so that much is sure. Do you believe the non-compete clause is a good thing?
Would you borrow the money to build a road across your property with the intention of charging to use it, then build a free one next to it?
Of course you won't. Cintra won't. The State won't.
Cintra can blow me! If they think they can charge the tolls necessary to pay for this road and actually get anyone to drive on it, I'll be surprised. Perry has already wasted millions of $$$ in taxpayer money to lure Cintra and others to the table after saying NO TAXPAYER MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT. He's got former staffers and other cronies involved in every facet of state financing, insurance, and foreign investment. IMO, he's out of political clout.
The way things work, I imagine it will be you blowing Cintra. And if not Cintra, a state agency.
I just finished reading the new P.J. O'Rourke book, On The Wealth Of Nations. Talking about pork barrel politics, on page 137, "Public services are never better performed than when their reward comes only in consequence of their being performed, and is proportioned to the diligence employed in performing them".
That Adam Smith knew what he was talking about!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.