That was the first time it was rebuilt. It was then used for freight rail for about 50 years, fell into disrepair and was decommissioned in 1993, was on the verge of being torn down, but was refurbished in 2017. The analogy to the Statue of Liberty is not a very good one, at all.
So, this is really just a bunch of rabble rousing, and much ado about nothing, unless taxpayers have to pay for it. THAT would be the real issue to be up in arms about. Not the temporary removal and subsequent re-installation of this center span (they are not going to dismantle the whole thing.)
Don’t they realize that by holding their own elected officials to the public promises made to local citizens they could be creating mild inconvenience for a foreign billionaire’s vanity project??
Yes, and the reason this decommissioned piece of industrial architecture was refurbished in 2017 was precisely because of its symbolic nature. Although fine, the Statue of Liberty isn’t a perfect analogy. Given the city’s history a better analogy would be the Genbaku Dome.
A country that has a national healthcare plan, old age pension, unemployment insurance etc. is hardly a “welfare state”. It’s a functional modern country with a proper social safety net for its citizens.
Not really an apt comparison either, and frankly a bit disgusting to me comparing the site of a nuclear holocaust to a freight bridge. almost as offensive as, say, comparing mask mandates to the Shoa. But what do I know.
City Councils make stupid short sighted and untenable promises all the time. The smart non knee jerk populist thing, again, would be to use this as an opportunity to hit up Bezos for more money and more jobs for the municipality. A “leaving town tax” as Mayor Quimby would call it.
A bridge that represents resistance against the Nazis that firebombed the city to rubble is a bad comparison to Hiroshima? WTF are you on about? That’s almost a perfect comparison! How are you coming up with that being offensive?
Is it so difficult to understand that some locals would be offended by the idea that the integrity of their historic landmark would be for sale at ALL, regardless of how much Bezos pays to move his symbol of absolutely obscene wealth and self-indulgence through their waterway?
In my opinion, since Bezos and his builders were foolish enough to build his yacht too tall for the bridge, it’s his responsibility to modify his boat for the passage and not the other way around. It’s not like he’s lacking the funds to make whatever modifications he needs, and reverse them once he gets wherever he’s going.
Yeah, no two bombed cities are exactly the same but it’s hard to deny a certain resemblance. But whatever. Having any sensitivity about this is apparently akin to being an anti-masker.
