HopeAtHand:



Haha bros...which one be "living in denial".

You questioned the selection and I gave you the simple answer.
Some house of rep members wanted Lagos to be given special status, but it was thrown away, cos it looked as if the West were asking for too much. They went home and devised a strategy that would work in Nigeria, ie give the special status to the three major tribes.
Since Rivers is not part of SE and Nigerian government has insisted that Igbos are not in Rivers, Anambra takes the status.
So, it doesn't matter if Rivers GDP or population is three times the population of Anambra combined.
Using the three major tribes is the only way to get the bill signed into law.

Ovamboland:


UK, an island has extensive underground railway and there's another subway under the sea linking UK and France. Water table can't stop us if we really want it

True, but you're comparing a nation that can't control its ocean encroachment with the UK.

The issue isn't an isolated constraint of the water table, it is the effective management and long-term maintenance that determines feasibility.

omonnakoda:

The Channel tunnel passes through the Ocean so a high water bed,table or chair is a relatively minor constraint though I do not believe an underground subway is necessary

The technology isn't being called to question, the feasibility of it in Nigeria is. (based on the Nigerian government's infrastructure management history).

In the context of Nigeria, approaching it as a "minor constraint" would be disastrous.

An overhead "monorail" style system would work better in Nigeria.

NaLaugh:


The technology isn't being called to question. The feasibility of it in Nigeria is (based on the Nigerian government's infrastructure management history).

In the context of Nigeria, approaching it as a "minor constraint" would be disastrous.

An overhead "monorail" style system would work better in Nigeria.

You are being clever by half . You mentioned a technical point as the reason for not doing it and on that basis your argument fails.If you want to change tack and cite cultural reasons that is absurd. Construction on a raised water bed is a technical challenge.Once completed it is done,finished. The LNG project is a very high technology project built by foreigners in Nigeria. In Niger Nuclear fuel extraction is going on as we speak.
The water bed or table issue is TOTALLY irrelevant in practice or to the argument you are making. Context of Nigeria is irrelevant. It is an engineering project that would be conducted by skilled firms/contractors so I do not see what the water table has to do with it We are talking of putting concrete tunnel under the ground and laying a track on it. It does not have to cover the entire city and parts of it could be over ground. The London Underground is not entirely underground.

Anyhow I am not advocating this for Lagos but water table is a non issue

omonnakoda:

You are being clever by half . You mentioned a technical point as the reason for not doing it and on that basis your argument fails.If you want to change tack and cite cultural reasons that is absurd. Construction on a raised water bed is a technical challenge.Once completed it is done,finished. The LNG project is a very high technology project built by foreigners in Nigeria. In Niger Nuclear fuel extraction is going on as we speak.
The water bed or table issue is TOTALLY irrelevant in practice or to the argument you are making. Context of Nigeria is irrelevant. It is an engineering project that would be conducted by skilled firms/contractors so I do not see what the water table has to do with it We are talking of putting concrete tunnel under the ground and laying a track on it. It does not have to cover the entire city and parts of it could be over ground. The London Underground is not entirely underground.

Anyhow I am not advocating this for Lagos but water table is a non issue

I haven't changed the technicality, I only added additional context.
Saying the water table is a non-issue is like saying constructing a house on dry flat land vs a swampy hill is the same.
No, it is not.

I'm not sure where you live, but to state that all it takes is the initial construction is incorrect.
There is no "one and done" option in public infrastructure.
My state has a yearly operating cost of its subway and commuter rail system at over $2 billion. A healthy chunk of it being for maintenance alone. This maintenance is what makes it feasible. Not the initial investment made when it was constructed in 1897.

So, in this case, if the high water table is overcome, the platform MUST be reinforced periodically, or it fails.

The conditions that accommodate underground transport of crude and gas aren't remotely comparable to a human conducive alternative.
So, that point is only mildly relevant, at best.

Your argument about "foreign companies" adds only very little to your narrative.
Aren't most Nigerian roads etc constructed by Julius Berger and such non-Nigerian companies?
Answer = yes.

Then the big question is, what is the present cumulative state of those same roads in Nigeria?
My point is, both the initial hurdle and more importantly, the maintenance are crucial to overall feasibility.

I appreciate your points, as you've made some reasonable arguments. However, that's really all the time I'm willing to dedicate to this.

NaLaugh:


I haven't changed the technicality, I only added additional context.
Saying the water table is a non-issue is like saying constructing a house on dry flat land vs a swampy hill is the same.
No, it is not.

I'm not sure where you live, but to state that all it takes is the initial construction is incorrect.
There is no "one and done" option in public infrastructure.
My state has a yearly operating cost of its subway and commuter rail system at over $2 billion. A healthy chunk of it being for maintenance alone. This maintenance is what makes it feasible. Not the initial investment made when it was constructed in 1897.

So, in this case, if the high water table is overcome, the platform MUST be reinforced periodically, or it fails.

The conditions that accommodate underground transport of crude and gas aren't remotely comparable to a human conducive alternative.
So, that point is only mildly relevant, at best.

Your argument about "foreign companies" adds only very little to your narrative.
Aren't most Nigerian roads etc constructed by Julius Berger and such non-Nigerian companies?
Answer = yes.

Then the big question is, what is the present cumulative state of those same roads in Nigeria?
My point is, both the initial hurdle and more importantly, the maintenance are crucial to overall feasibility.

I appreciate your points, as you've made some reasonable arguments. However, that's really all the time I'm willing to dedicate to this.

All this verbiage changes nothing .
You have shown no evidence that proves an underground system is more difficult to maintain than an overground one. I think it is actually the opposite
Water table is irrelevant. The technical task is to lay a concrete tunnel down with rail track running on the inside whether it is under ground or underwater as in side by side the third mainland bridge underwater it changes NOTHING. I just play along with your claim of a so called high water table even though you have show no evidence that this is the case or what it is high IN COMPARISON TO. The Underground in London crosses the Thames River.
I do not believe the water table in Lagos is higher than that in London or Newyork or elsewhere
Your knowledge of engineering is zero if you believe platform would need periodic reinforcement because of groundwater. With respect you are talking jazz
Groundwater is a very important part of the cooling system design for underground transport.
Troublesome groundwater collections can be dewatered and sealed off. This is technically simple
Water does not collect by magic it follows the laws of physics and knowledge of those laws is what is required

Julius Berger is unlikely to be given a contract to build something it has never done before. If an underground rail contract is to be awarded it will be to a company with a track record and likely will have a maintenance contract as well.

SIRmanjar:

How many are u guyz in kaduna if I may ask?are u guyz upto oyo state?u guyz ain't upto 1m

Chaiiiii,Lol, guy, ur mumu and ignorant is raise to power infinity

SIRmanjar:

U forgot do add djibouti or dubai sef.Unfrendly Blood thirsty backward state.Apart from d flat headz no Nigerian can invest in dat forsaken violent state, talkless of foreign investors.

Ignorat peep. The number of local and foreign investors in Kano are much more than d number of foreign investors u can ever dream of in ur state.

omonnakoda:

All this verbiage changes nothing .
You have shown no evidence that proves an underground system is more difficult to maintain than an overground one. I think it is actually the opposite
Water table is irrelevant. The technical task is to lay a concrete tunnel down with rail track running on the inside whether it is under ground or underwater as in side by side the third mainland bridge underwater it changes NOTHING. I just play along with your claim of a so called high water table even though you have show no evidence that this is the case or what it is high IN COMPARISON TO. The Underground in London crosses the Thames River.
I do not believe the water table in Lagos is higher than that in London or Newyork or elsewhere
Your knowledge of engineering is zero if you believe platform would need periodic reinforcement because of groundwater. With respect you are talking jazz
Groundwater is a very important part of the cooling system design for underground transport.
Troublesome groundwater collections can be dewatered and sealed off. This is technically simple
Water does not collect by magic it follows the laws of physics and knowledge of those laws is what is required

Julius Berger is unlikely to be given a contract to build something it has never done before. If an underground rail contract is to be awarded it will be to a company with a track record and likely will have a maintenance contract as well.

You idiots are detailing the thread.

NaLaugh:


I haven't changed the technicality, I only added additional context.
Saying the water table is a non-issue is like saying constructing a house on dry flat land vs a swampy hill is the same.
No, it is not.

I'm not sure where you live, but to state that all it takes is the initial construction is incorrect.
There is no "one and done" option in public infrastructure.
My state has a yearly operating cost of its subway and commuter rail system at over $2 billion. A healthy chunk of it being for maintenance alone. This maintenance is what makes it feasible. Not the initial investment made when it was constructed in 1897.

So, in this case, if the high water table is overcome, the platform MUST be reinforced periodically, or it fails.

The conditions that accommodate underground transport of crude and gas aren't remotely comparable to a human conducive alternative.
So, that point is only mildly relevant, at best.

Your argument about "foreign companies" adds only very little to your narrative.
Aren't most Nigerian roads etc constructed by Julius Berger and such non-Nigerian companies?
Answer = yes.

Then the big question is, what is the present cumulative state of those same roads in Nigeria?
My point is, both the initial hurdle and more importantly, the maintenance are crucial to overall feasibility.

I appreciate your points, as you've made some reasonable arguments. However, that's really all the time I'm willing to dedicate to this.

Please go and discuss your water table nonsense elsewhere jare, you are derailing this beautiful thread.

chibuzorAbia:


You idiots are detailing the thread.

Your father is an idiott

chibuzorAbia:


You idiots are detailing the thread.

Your mother is an idiott

abdulkayus:


Ignorat peep. The number of local and foreign investors in Kano are much more than d number of foreign investors u can ever dream of in ur state.

Guy listen to ur self.leave argument.U know witin u dat ur local state kano can't b compared wit lagoz.
Hw many krate of beers did ur islamic police destroy diz week?Local pipul in an ancient local state.

abdulkayus:


Chaiiiii,Lol, guy, ur mumu and ignorant is raise to power infinity

At list wit my mumurity I Sabi pass ur mama ad papa both u ad ur entire family joind togeder.

steppins:

You questioned the selection and I gave you the simple answer.
Some house of rep members wanted Lagos to be given special status, but it was thrown away, cos it looked as if the West were asking for too much. They went home and devised a strategy that would work in Nigeria, ie give the special status to the three major tribes.
Since Rivers is not part of SE and Nigerian government has insisted that Igbos are not in Rivers, Anambra takes the status.
So, it doesn't matter if Rivers GDP or population is three times the population of Anambra combined.
Using the three major tribes is the only way to get the bill signed into law.

ok.. So Nigeria consists of Igbo Yoruba and Hausa..

Has it occured to Kano and Anambra that a large part of the money that will be used to service their special status is generated from Oil mined in Rivers territory?

Lets see how this Bill will be passed into law without fracas.

HopeAtHand:


ok.. So Nigeria consists of Igbo Yoruba and Hausa..

Has it occured to Kano and Anambra that a large part of the money that will be used to service their special status is generated from Oil mined in Rivers territory?

Lets see how this Bill will be passed into law without fracas.

Is Rivers state more oil producing than Akwa Ibom?

If anyone should complain about this bill, it's akwaibomites, considering the enormous amount of petrodollars they bring to Nigeria.
Rivers shouldn't be seen crying more than the bereaved on this.

If SE,SW and North supports this bill, it will be passed into law comfortably with no fracas whatsoever.

Your threat is an empty One.

However, in the spirit of equity, it's my personal suggestion that provision be made for addition of Akwa Ibom to the list, to represent SS, and give every region a sense of belonging.

Akwa Ibom had done marvelously well with her oil wealth, she will do even more when such special privilege is bestowed on her.

pazienza:


Is Rivers state more oil producing than Akwa Ibom?

If anyone should complain about this bill, it's akwaibomites, considering the enormous amount of petrodollars they bring to Nigeria.
Rivers shouldn't be seen crying more than the bereaved on this.

pazieza, ina mu amu.. U dey learn work.. U want a situatio where i would explain why AKS shouldnt be considered and then deflect the attention from Anambra and Kano and start a Rivers V AKS debate. No way Jose!

Rivers, after Lagos and Abuja is the most cosmopolitan area in Nigeria, we boast atleast twice the population of Anambra, Thrice their IGR, Double their GDP. We have 2 of Nigerias 4 refineries, two seaports, two airports, a petrochemical plant, an NLNG complex and over 450,000 daily output of oil. Kano and Anambra combined has nothing on us.

So tell me whats special abt Kano and Anambra... Are we talking fake spare parts, substandard goods or what?

chibuzorAbia:


Please go and discuss your water table nonsense elsewhere jare, you are derailing this beautiful thread.

Not to worry, that conversation already ended.

HopeAtHand:


pazieza, ina mu amu.. U dey learn work.. U want a situatio where i would explain why AKS shouldnt be considered and then deflect the attention from Anambra and Kano and start a Rivers V AKS debate. No way Jose!

Rivers, after Lagos and Abuja is the most cosmopolitan area in Nigeria, we boast atleast twice the population of Anambra, Thrice their IGR, Double their GDP. We have 2 of Nigerias 4 refineries, two seaports, two airports, a petrochemical plant, an NLNG complex and over 450,000 daily output of oil. Kano and Anambra combined has nothing on us.

So tell me whats special abt Kano and Anambra... Are we talking fake spare parts, substandard goods or what?

Don't Rivers enjoy 13% derivation from their oil...
Why 20% again...? For what exactly?

Besides this 20% is for revenues coming out of the state thus no oil money from other state to service it... so chillax ...

Cause you just making a dumb noise...

HopeAtHand:


ok.. So Nigeria consists of Igbo Yoruba and Hausa..

Has it occured to Kano and Anambra that a large part of the money that will be used to service their special status is generated from Oil mined in Rivers territory?

Lets see how this Bill will be passed into law without fracas.

I do not believe you are literate. How will a single penny come from oil? You see a queue you join without any idea why people joined or what they are queuing for till you reach the front. You see a thread you start commenting.

This is a DERIVATION BILL. As things are derivation only applies to oil and minerals what this bill is hoping to achieve is to extend the scope of derivation and give 20% of money generated by Federal agencies e.g the Ports ,Airports ,VAT and so on to those states where the money is generated. As things are Lagos gets nothing from the Ports or Airports and does not get a special share of VAT even though most of it is generated in Lagos
So what does that have to do with oil?

I oppose the bill because it says 20% this does not seem fair when oil is 13% the other thing is why only Lagos .It should be every state. It is a kind of Resource Control Light BUT to my mind it should aply to every state though in some states it will mean, in practice, 20% of NOTHING But that is the pricinple

HopeAtHand:


pazieza, ina mu amu.. U dey learn work.. U want a situatio where i would explain why AKS shouldnt be considered and then deflect the attention from Anambra and Kano and start a Rivers V AKS debate. No way Jose!

Rivers, after Lagos and Abuja is the most cosmopolitan area in Nigeria, we boast atleast twice the population of Anambra, Thrice their IGR, Double their GDP. We have 2 of Nigerias 4 refineries, two seaports, two airports, a petrochemical plant, an NLNG complex and over 450,000 daily output of oil. Kano and Anambra combined has nothing on us.

So tell me whats special abt Kano and Anambra... Are we talking fake spare parts, substandard goods or what?

Lol!
What's your issue with Kano and Anambra?

The argument is that SS needs a representative in the list, and I totally agree to that.
But I believe as the highest oil producing state in SS, Akwa Ibom and not Rivers, should be the representative of SS in that list.
In the context of the above, I find your noise about Rivers state nauseating.
You are the one who is trying to claim what rightly should belong to Akwa Ibom for your Rivers state.


If you are a neutral mind, you should be arguing that SS deserves a representative on that list, and you should be projecting Akwa Ibom to take the slot, but that's not what you are doing here, yet I'm supposed to be the one trying to clash you with Akwa Ibomites?

He Who comes to equity must come with clean hands.

omonnakoda:
I do not believe you are literate. How will a single penny come from oil? You see a queue you join without any idea why people joined or what they are queuing for till you reach the front. You see a thread you start commenting.

This is a DERIVATION BILL. As things are derivation only applies to oil and minerals what this bill is hoping to achieve is to extend the scope of derivation and give 20% of money generated by Federal agencies e.g the Ports ,Airports ,VAT and so on to those states where the money is generated. As things are Lagos gets nothing from the Ports or Airports and does not get a special share of VAT even though most of it is generated in Lagos
So what does that have to do with oil?

I oppose the bill because it says 20% this does not seem fair when oil is 13% the other thing is why only Lagos .It should be every state. It is a kind of Resource Control Light BUT to my mind it should aply to every state though in some states it will mean, in practice, 20% of NOTHING But that is the pricinple

are you saying 20% of minerals resources + VAT mined in Lagos, Kano and Anambra would be used to further develop those areas. Is dat what this is about?

HopeAtHand:


are you saying 20% of minerals resources + VAT mined in Lagos, Kano and Anambra would be used to further develop those areas. Is dat what this is about?

It is not about what I am saying. Surely you can read and comprehend English
Why start commenting when you have not grasped the issues? That is a very bad habit

HopeAtHand:


ok.. So Nigeria consists of Igbo Yoruba and Hausa..

Has it occured to Kano and Anambra that a large part of the money that will be used to service their special status is generated from Oil mined in Rivers territory?

Lets see how this Bill will be passed into law without fracas.

All it needs is two-thirds of the house. The three tribes are more than that already.
You can cry me an ocean. Lol

pazienza:


Lol!
What's your issue with Kano and Anambra?

The argument is that SS needs a representative in the list, and I totally agree to that.
But I believe as the highest oil producing state in SS, Akwa Ibom and not Rivers, should be the representative of SS in that list.
In the context of the above, I find your noise about Rivers state nauseating.
You are the one who is trying to claim what rightly should belong to Akwa Ibom for your Rivers state.


If you are a neutral mind, you should be arguing that SS deserves a representative on that list, and you should be projecting Akwa Ibom to take the slot, but that's not what you are doing here, yet I'm supposed to be the one trying to clash you with Akwa Ibomites?

He Who comes to equity must come with clean hands.

seeing that we didnt get the clear picture, my argument with you ends here...ciao.

steppins:

All it needs is two-thirds of the house. The three tribes are more than that already.
You can cry me an ocean. Lol

No that is not all it needs. What is proposed is a constitutional change, it also requires state houses of assembly too 2/3 of them

omonnakoda:
It is not about what I am saying. Surely you can read and comprehend English
Why start commenting when you have not grasped the issues? That is a very bad habit

Well, knowing that Anambra has no airport, no seaport and almost no mineral resource except the exporting of Ugwu, from what are they expected to generate revenue. Atleast Kano has that hajj airport.

i now support the Bill..

HopeAtHand:



seeing that we didnt get the clear picture, my argument with you ends here...ciao.

HopeAtHand:



Well, knowing that Anambra has no airport, no seaport and almost no mineral resource except the exporting of Ugwu, from what are they expected to generate revenue. Atleast Kano has that hajj airport.

i now support the Bill..

Guy you funny die..........................

HopeAtHand:



Well, knowing that Anambra has no airport, no seaport and almost no mineral resource except the exporting of Ugwu, from what are they expected to generate revenue. Atleast Kano has that hajj airport.

i now support the Bill..

Lol!

Okwu nkasiobi ndi obi na afu ufu.

pazienza:

goodluck to you with 20% of sales from Ugwu. I hope the FG stops allication to those states.

I really Wish this works so dat Rivers state can get xtra serious with her ports.

HopeAtHand:



Well, knowing that Anambra has no airport, no seaport and almost no mineral resource except the exporting of Ugwu, from what are they expected to generate revenue. Atleast Kano has that hajj airport.

i now support the Bill..

This is a way of bringing in resource control through the backdoor and calling it another name