We’ve all heard the old adage that it takes money to make money, and we’ve all also heard it repeated over and over again, even in the most optimistic economic forecasts.
And if you think that’s just the kind of thing that people would think about, well, you’d be wrong.
This week, we’re bringing you a list of strange and exciting new vehicles from around the globe that are being built with no funding at all, with the help of the very folks who can’t afford it.
But the money for these projects comes from a new program called the Transportation Financing Program (TFP), which was established by Congress in 2018 to fund infrastructure projects that would help lower fuel and vehicle prices.
So the idea behind this program is to find the very best and most innovative ways to help make the most of our precious public money and put it to good use.
That includes not just funding a car modification, but also building or leasing a new vehicle that could potentially use it.
This list includes some of the most innovative vehicles we’ve seen from around China, the US, and the UK.
And here’s a few things to know about these vehicles.
First, the idea for this program has a long history, going back at least to the late 1990s.
And it wasn’t just a way to make a quick buck, it’s been widely considered a way for the US to put more money into infrastructure in the future.
“It was actually a way of making a profit,” said Dan Siegel, director of the transportation finance program at the Center for Automotive Research in Washington.
The idea for the program came from a long-term effort to boost vehicle efficiency. “
But these were projects that were not designed to be able to pay for themselves and not be subsidized.”
The idea for the program came from a long-term effort to boost vehicle efficiency.
When it was first implemented in the late 2000s, the TFP gave the US federal government $150 billion in stimulus funds to pay states and cities to do some work on transportation projects.
The program, Siegel said, “was intended to encourage people to use transportation less and less.
But it also has the potential to incentivize a lot of these projects to do more.”
One of the big benefits of the TFEP, Sigelden said, was that it provided a way “for the federal government to invest in the infrastructure of the United States without having to do that through the usual appropriations process.”
In addition to funding some of these programs, the program also provides a “reward” for the projects that go to work.
“If you build a new transmission, that’s a new investment, and that can have an impact on the cost of building a transmission,” Sigeilden said.
“So, you get this opportunity to get this much capital, which is not typically the case.”
This is a good example of why these types of projects are sometimes referred to as “sustainability projects,” but Siegel stressed that they are in fact all about saving the planet and making it easier to travel.
“The idea is that you are putting a bunch of capital into infrastructure to improve the life of our vehicles,” Siegel told The Verge.
“That’s a really good idea and a good way to put it, but we’re not doing that.
We’re not spending that capital to build a better, more efficient car or truck.”
One such project, the $1.5 million project of the Detroit Auto Show, is one of those that was built without any federal funding.
The city has spent tens of millions of taxpayer dollars building highways and roads and bridges and parking lots.
“A lot of the projects have been built without public money,” Sikelden explained.
“I think the majority of the project costs were done by private individuals, not by government.
And so the government had nothing to do with the whole thing.”
In other words, the federal grant program, known as “Federal Low Cost Roadway Development,” is being used as a way by the federal and state governments to pay private companies for the construction of new roads and roads to be built at a profit.
This is the same model that is being adopted in other countries, Sikeilden added.
And while the money being spent on these projects may be considered “sustainable,” Sinkeng said the overall economic impact of these vehicles is probably not.
“For the average American household, the cost per mile per year is going to be higher than what the cost would be if they just spent a couple of hundred dollars on a new car,” Suckling said.
And when you look at it from the perspective of a local government, this is not sustainable either.
“These vehicles are being bought and sold for a profit, and a lot people don’t know that,” Sargeld