by Gilbert B Norman
MikeBPRR wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 3:48 pm ConnectUS is still infrastructure because the rails on which the new routes would travel may be possible by funding infrastructure upgrades along those corridors. I think that the bill will be funding the infrastructure expansion, not the service expansion. One example that comes to mind is what I call the "Peachtree Corridor" route of Nashville/Chattanooga/Atlanta/Macon/Savannah. A good chunk of this route would travel over what is now single trackage.Mr. Mike B, here is a completely rail unrelated column appearing in The Times today suggesting, as you have in your captioned point, that "infrastructure" extends far beyond "bricks and mortar" and includes all facets of society:
Fair Use:
This is not a matter of semantics. Infrastructure “of a country, society, or organization,” according to the Collins Dictionary, “consists of the basic facilities … which enable it to function.” I’ve inserted an ellipsis in place of the clause “such as transportation, communications, power supplies, and buildings.” That is the hard physical infrastructure that seemingly everyone agrees is what infrastructure “really” means.I would guess, if put to this columnist, she would likely agree that adding new rail routes as proposed by Connects US, would be within the scope of infrastructure. But even after giving this column a careful read, and due respect to the passion with which she sets forth her points, I still find it "a bit of a stretch".
But let’s take at face value that infrastructure are those facilities that are essential for everyone to do their jobs. It makes sense that men with wives at home to take on the 16-hour-a-day care responsibilities involved in raising children, supporting aged parents or otherwise tending to the sick, those with disabilities and the vulnerable would need roads and bridges to grease the wheels of commerce and allow them access to their desks and deals. But let’s imagine — it’s not that hard — a scenario in which those same men didn’t have wives at home and yet still wanted to have children, or to ensure that their own parents received love and support in their final years. In that case, they, too, might just find that care facilities were themselves just as “essential” to their ability to do paid work.