The National Review’s Charles Krauthammer argues that the best way to make Texas “the state you want it to be” is to rebuild its infrastructure.
But, Krauthampers, isn’t that a pretty good strategy?
He believes that Texas could use a bit more “miller” in its highways and bridges.
Krauthammers opines: “The only way you could rebuild Texas would be by going to the private sector.”
And what’s a “private sector”?
“They’re people who are actually doing things in Texas.”
That’s right, Krauss, the very people that he claims to be supporting are now trying to help build infrastructure for a private corporation.
The article is a clear case that Krauth is a “conservative” and a “right-wing” author.
He doesn’t seem to have a clue that he’s writing for conservatives.
He just makes it sound like he’s advocating for the kind of economic policy that is a hallmark of right-wing ideologues.
The author makes the same mistake as many conservatives that Kraus is making: he thinks that government can solve all our problems.
The National Journal has a piece on the article and the author’s comments that it is a good idea for Texas to rebuild the roads.
Here’s the article: “What we need to do is not wait for private investment.
We need to be proactive in order to be ready for any sort of eventuality that might occur.
And it’s going to take a lot of private investment to do that.”
He says “private investment” to build roads will “probably require” $3.5 trillion over 10 years.
The writer does not seem to understand the value of private infrastructure investment in Texas.
If you can’t build roads, you cannot solve all of Texas’ problems.
It is the state’s infrastructure that is the real problem.
The Texas Tribune thanks its sponsors.
The piece goes on to describe how the state can build its infrastructure: “A lot of what we’re talking about in Texas is going to have to be a lot more like the interstate highway system that exists in the United States.”
“A state that has a massive infrastructure problem like we have right now is going not only to have an even more severe infrastructure problem than we currently have, but it’s also going to be in the middle of a very vulnerable political environment, and we need a leader that is not going to allow that.”
The author also makes the claim that we have “no chance” of “winning” the “state of Texas.”
But, this is a very simplistic approach.
We know how bad Texas’ infrastructure problem is, because the National Review article mentions it in passing.
And, we know that our state’s political situation is not good, because it has a history of being dominated by a small group of wealthy landowners.
If Krauthams argument is correct, he should have written that we “can’t” win the “Texas of the future.”
He should have added that the only way we can win Texas is if we “build it ourselves.”
It is not the National Journal’s responsibility to make the argument that it would be a good thing to build our own roads.
It’s a duty to be skeptical of ideas like this and to be willing to listen to the opinions of experts who are willing to disagree with us.
The only way to win in Texas, Kraus suggests, is by “building it ourselves” through private investment and public ownership.
It would be great to hear from him if he actually has the guts to tell us that private investment is the answer to our state of problems.
But the National Post and the American Enterprise Institute don’t think so.
In a piece that was posted in June, the National Council of La Raza, the nation’s largest Hispanic civil rights group, warned that it was not only dangerous for Texas, but that it could have serious consequences for the nation as a whole.
“Texas is not a state we can just get behind,” La Rza wrote.
“There are huge disparities in wealth and income in Texas and there is a serious lack of racial equity in our society.
We cannot let our nation be divided by these differences.
We must work together to build a better future for our country.”
And, La Razas chief of staff told The Daily Beast that he and the group “are not going anywhere.”
The National Council on La Raze’s president and executive director, Michael Casteel, wrote that they “are confident that we can build a viable state of Texas.
We have already seen that with the growth of the city of Houston.
We will continue to work toward building a state that is truly representative of all of us and the people who live in it.”
That doesn’t mean La Razias president will be going anywhere.
The American Enterprise institute, for example, has been critical of the National Park Service