Not nearly as many as you do.

He's heard about that little problem and responded by gutting Dodd-Frank with his hands held out to Wall Street.

TheSystemWorked, your comment is completely unrelated to this article, and completely unsupported by any tangible fact.

Elizabeth Warren's comparison of our infrastructure spending to China's spending is as valid as her claim of Indian ancestry. China is now forced to spend 9% of its GDP on infrastructure improvements due to years of neglect. For example, China has a public water delivery system that is near collapse due to significant shortages and widespread pollution due to untreated sewerage and industrial waste. Less than 70% of key Chinese cities meet national potable water standards. Where do similar conditions exist in our country? They don't. The Chinese must construct more than 250,000 miles of roads because throughout the rural countryside less than 20% of the villages are connected by paved roads. Those conditions don't exist in our country. The Chinese are proud to show off some of their limited more recent improvements but we'll never see the disaster that exists throughout the rest of the country. While they are in fact outspending the US, 9% to 2.4% of our respective GDP's, the expenditure per capita is $517 in China versus $1,192 in our country. We spend more than twice as much per capita as the Chinese do. And our GDP is $49,679 per capita compared to $5,745 in China. Bur what Warren doesn't tell you is that our national debt is 100.9% of our GDP while it's only 25.8% of China's GDP. The average American's share of our debt is $49,236 compared to only $1,482 for every one of the 1.3 billion Chinese. Nor does Warren tell you that while the Gross National Income in the US is $48,450 per person, its only $4,930 in China. It's time for Warren to stop her selective use of facts and start being truthful with the voters by providing all of the facts. We're all not as smart as Warren but we can figure it out if she provided all of the facts. Lastly her proposal to spend $850 million in Massachusetts highway, rail, and aviation projects which she says would create 11,000 jobs in the state works out to $173,469 per job created. Seriously? Does that makes sense to anyone other than Warren?

The debt is a red herring. Our bridges, roads, highways and yes our water systems are crumbling. Lack of internet access is also limiting our ability to expand. Through al the numbers up there that you want, the fact of the matter is that China is cleaning house on us and will continue to do so.

Elizabeth Warren wants another $100 billion for road, bridges and schools. This would be fine, except the original $800 billion stimulus ( that Warren was charged with overseeing ) was sold to us as creating jobs while building and fixing roads, bridges and schools. Then President Obama had a chuckle at our expense, saying that "we discovered there were no shovel ready jobs", instead giving the money to politically connected bankers and lawyers, foreign and domestic. Republicans are certainly not faultless in this mess either.

Thanks for the talking points, but HALF the stimulus covered tax reductions for business, not government expenditures. This has been pointed out correctly for three years, yet you droogs keep droning on as if your opinion changes fact. One question that repeatedly comes up is: WHERE are the jobs that $400billion in tax cuts were supposed to "create." Of course, it just reinforces the GOP myth that tax cuts help the economy. Tax cuts help billionaires' offshore accounts and corporations' offshore holdings, period.

Please read my comment above. Do we now have "shovel ready jobs", when we didn't when the taxpayers were given the previous $800 billion to create jobs through infrastructure work?

kennedylar - Yes, as I said, Republicans are not faultless. I don't believe what they seem to take on faith, that any tax cut will result in job creation. That doesn't excuse the other $400 billion thrown away, or the admission by Obama that they did poor planning, and there were not "shovel ready jobs". I think we could help job creation by having stable government tax and regulation policy. Another problem (fault of both Dems and Repubs) is NAFTA ... why are our factories saddled with costly regulations, but we can import products from factories that are not subject to the same pollution control, worker safety rules? I wouldn't lower our standards, I would require that other factories must meet our standards. That will level the playing field, make our products more competitive, and raise standards in other countries. And the number one rule: any dollar given to government will be spent, with them always looking for more ... limit government and pass a balanced budget amendment. Cut the credit card.

jim1751 - thank you for the information. With U.S. GDP at $49,679 per capita and China at $5,745 (US), our 2.4% is $1192, China's 9% is $517 per capita. We are spending double per citizen. Those are statistics you won't find on Elizabeth Warren's website.

We need to demand changes the our countries priorities. Oil companies are making huge profits every month, yet they get huge subsidies from the us government. This is money that could be used instead to invest in redeveloping our infrastructure and encouraging the use of public transportation. And, the middle class and the poor are subsidizing rich folks when they don't pay their fair share of taxes. Notice how fees keep creeping into everyday life? (umass amherst costs 25,000 per year. Most of that is fees!) Because of all the tax breaks for wealthy. Finally, the farm bill needs to be changed. We shouldn't be giving guarantees to big agri. That just encourages them to take risks because they know that the us taxpayer will pay. Just like the big banks. Warren gets it. She's not getting donations from the big banks. They don't want her in congress. Do you still need to ask why?

Let's look at the facts carafram. The 'Top 5%' of wage earners in this great country of ours pay 58.7% of all the income taxes and the "top 50%" pay 97.8% of all income taxes but the "poor are subsidizing the rich folks when they don't pay their fair share of taxes"? Seriously, the rich don't pay their fair share? They pay 58.7% and only represent 5% of the population and they don't pay their fair share. If you're a student at UMASS I suggest you ask one of your professors to educate you on real life.