NYT: Where Else Does the U.S. Have an Infrastructure Problem? Antarctica

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/climate/where-else-does-the-us-have-an-infrastructure-problem-antarctica.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Interesting and sad article about the failing US infrastructure, this time in Antarctica. Here's the part that really caught my attention:

-- snip --

In addition, the ships that deliver supplies every year must be led by a boat capable of breaking heavy sea ice. The only one in the United States’ fleet big enough to do the job, the Coast Guard’s Polar Star, is a decrepit 40-year-old vessel that members of the crew sometimes call “a rust bucket.”

Russia, by comparison, will soon have more than 50 icebreakers. Several will be powered by nuclear reactors. In Congress, members of both parties have called the situation a national embarrassment and provided funds to begin designing a new American icebreaker fleet.

But the ships may cost $1 billion apiece, and the bulk of the money has yet to be allocated. In the best case, the first new icebreaker will float out of dry dock six years from now.

In the meantime, unplanned ship repairs could force McMurdo and its sister station, at the South Pole, to operate with skeleton crews for a year or more, shutting down most of the scientific research.

-- snip --

And then there was the report earlier today about how the US is dead last among developed countries on health care delivery.

Embarrassments on all fronts. I know it's moot, but consider what those $2 trillion lost in Afghanistan and Iraq could have meant for infrastructure, research, job creation, and so much more.