> On Jun 17, 2015, at 5:30 PM, Kelly St. Clair <xxxxxx@efn.org> wrote: > > (snip) > > The irony, of course, is that the interstate highway system was championed by Eisenhower (whose credentials were, last I checked, still immaculate), for a reason intuitively obvious to any Civilization player - to be able to move his stacks of Armor and other units rapidly around the country to respond to an invasion and/or atomic attack. Ehhh…A system proposed by his SecDef…whose ‘day job’ had been CEO of GM :-) Conflict of interest? I see no conflict of interest! Our interests mesh perfectly! :-P Strictly speaking the Interstate system’s *excuse* for federal funding was defense purposes, as highways had been state and private endeavors earlier, the *purpose* was that the US needed a modern highway system for all the usual infrastructural needs of a rapidly growing world-dominating economy, and that it advantaged automobiles over rail was just fine with the then-dominant US auto industry. Rather like the Internet, a few years later... -- Bruce Johnson "Wherever you go, there you are." B. Banzai, PhD
