The big debate about whether infrastructure spending is a good or bad thing continues to haunt us into the 21-century. Infrastructure spending brings on many positives while bringing on negatives at the same time. We like to say that it improves economic efficiency in the large scale, however it often ruins the area in which the new structures are being built. They say that often the cost is short term, but the benefits are long term, yet political leaders face all the upfront heat and none of the aftermath benefit backlash. While private investors often fund projects the private sector only gets involved in large scale trends such as the 1840’s railway mania. This leaves the state to fend for their own projects. Private investors often push too far with one foot into the political field completing projects that fail despite ruthless power. Such as Robert Moses’s idea for public transport to the JFK airport. So how do we solve the “bridge to nowhere problem”? Maybe we just have to accept the fact that there will be a certain degree of unhappiness and delay with no infrastructure delivery. If the political heat soon disappears we can get rid of the problem of plans that fail to respond to changing economics. The gLAWcal Team LIBEAC project Wednesday, 18 January 2017 (Source: Economist)