Why is infrastructure in Japan better than the infrastructure

A fucking D+ in infrastructure.

JUST

http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/

because us spends money fighting useless wars instead of spending it on improving their own country.

1. Smaller country with more resources.
2. Asians do everything better, that's just a rule of life.

>>70066751
it's small

>>70066802
most asian countries are trash

>>70066751
Automobile and oil/gas companies want money.

>597 billion USD of military budget
>>70066794
this

>>70066794
spbp

>>70066835
not a lot

>>70066751
varies by state. Some have decent to pretty dman good while others it's dogshit and declining.

>>70066751
It's only better in the cities.
In the countryside it's worse.

Let's not ignore the fact that they also have an aging infrastructure in certain cities. Not that our rust belt cities are any better.

File: discretionary_spending_pie,_2015_enacted.png (145KB, 1003x915px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1003x915px

>>70066861
Of course not

>>70066751
In urban areas of Japan, greater population density. Population density goes hand in hand with good infrastructure. Sprawly areas means infrastructure becomes expensive

>>70066794
fucking this. this is why Japanese has been refused to participate wars fat Americans supported.

Won't mean in shit in the next 10+ years, their birth rate is declining at ridiculous levels LMAO

>>70066751
They got a really great opportunity to build modern cities from the ground up

File: 1394140316764.jpg (153KB, 580x330px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 580x330px

>>70066751
It's almost as if almost all major American cities have a certain ethnic group which few people in the '50s wanted to live around, and almost all infrastructural investment since the '50s has been devoted to avoiding this ethnic group at all possible costs

>>70068091
hmmm......made me think quite a bit

>>70068091
If you wonder why some American highways take meandering paths, it is because they were planned to go through black neighborhoods while preserving white ones.

Japanese government is dominated by unaccountable, faceless bureaucrats who have their decisions rubberstamped by pliant, clueless politicians who win re-election by bribing overrepresented rural areas with Tokyo's tax money. Usually this works poorly compared to a real democracy but sometimes, like with transportation infrastructure, it works well. In this case by making it impossible for local opposition to stop a needed project or unions to restrict the supply of construction labor

>>70068001
>let's build the infrastructure of 21st century america
*nukes all major cities*

ebin

File: Homie_the_Clown_Maltese_Falcon.png (155KB, 332x247px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 332x247px

>>70068731
>or unions to restrict the supply of construction labor
>"""""unions""""""""

>>70066751
samurai construction techniques

File: 1484358076200.jpg (27KB, 800x733px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 800x733px

>>70069565
SUPERIOR SAMURAI CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES, ROADS FOLDED OVER 1 MILLION TIMES.

>this whole thread
>implying

>>70069791
No but really Japanese railways are better because of better techniques

>>70066904
fake. this has to be fake.

>>70069839
notice the keyword "discretionary"
military expenditures as a percentage of the total US budget isn't very much. most of the budget goes to welfare (including healthcare).

>>70069839
It is
They spend 3.2% of there economy on military budget
Though if you want to have a laf have a look at Russian or the polish military expense

>>70069839
It is, however the majority of our spending does go to welfare and stuff along that line.

File: a big pie.png (146KB, 1003x915px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 1003x915px

>>70069839
It's only "discretionary spending".
here's the full chart

>>70066751
Earthquakes ensure the infrastructure is never more than a few years old.

>>70068147
Doesn't that pretty much ruin the housing value of any property there?

>>70069879
>It is
3.2% of the GDP maybe not of the government revenue (taxes).

>>70069911
>It is.
It isn't.

>>70070584
I wonder how much of that social security and medicare and the like is spent on nigs.

File: file.png (127KB, 1085x1056px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1085x1056px

>>70071176
social security is for retirees and medicare is mostly for old people

if you're talking about just general welfare programs, here are those stats

>>70067798
>muh birthrate

americans too dumb to understand that an island nation with limited living space can't support unlimited population growth.

Population is like a pendulum, birthrates can make a turn around in a year or two if the conditions are there.

Meanwhile america's "birthrate" is 80% niggers and spics. lets see who's more fucked in 10 years.

>>70071340
Are you being stupid? They aren't slowing down or flatlining they are actually decreasing in population.

Having a population decrease is super bad especially if you sustain it for too long since you tax base is going ot be lower and they'll have to pay much more money into the system per person to retain the standards they did.

>>70071443
Like 3 brothers rent a big apartment and they split the bill each to everything. Suddenly one has to move abroad so now to retain the same QoL they had with 3 men the two bros have to pay more to keep things the same or give up some things that they liked. No imagine that their uncle is now living with them because his house got burned and is retired. So now you have a dependent in the system that pays nothing into the system, consumes resources and increases costs. So they now have 3 men in house but the two bros are paying more and have deadweight and lets not bring up their aunt who also is retired and she has medical needs as well that makes her even a bigger burden on their brothers resources.