Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Way to go, bringing jobs to America.. giving the work to Chinese government-owned contracting firms...and the rebuilding jobs to Chinese workers, despite U.S. law to keep this kind of work in the U.S. I guess we don't have enough welders. What's behind this? How much worse can it get?
"When we subsidize jobs in China, we're not creating any wealth in the United States," said Scott Paul, executive director for the Alliance for American Manufacturing....
Well, is the point of the infrastructure spending jobs or is it to build infrastructure? If the Chinese bid is $7.2 billion and the lowest American bid is $10.2 billion, was it really worth it to spend $3 billion dollars on creating those 3,000 jobs? A million dollars for each temporary job, worth it? Or would the community be better served saving that $3 billion dollars and investing it somewhere else? Maybe you could employ 3,000 people at $50,000 a year to dig a whole and fill it up again. You'd get the same multiplier effect, the same number of employed people, and it'd cost a lot less money. Maybe you could give Twitter tax breaks (estimated cost $22 million, kept 350 and expected to bring in another 2,000 jobs in San Francisco, or $9,000 a job ). Lemme think about this one. $9,000 a job or $1,000,000 a job. I'm going to go ahead and say send the bridge contract to China. More bang for the buck to be had elsewhere.
Well, is the point of the infrastructure spending jobs or is it to build infrastructure? If the Chinese bid is $7.2 billion and the lowest American bid is $10.2 billion, was it really worth it to spend $3 billion dollars on creating those 3,000 jobs? A million dollars for each temporary job, worth it? Or would the community be better served saving that $3 billion dollars and investing it somewhere else? Maybe you could employ 3,000 people at $50,000 a year to dig a whole and fill it up again. You'd get the same multiplier effect, the same number of employed people, and it'd cost a lot less money. Maybe you could give Twitter tax breaks (estimated cost $22 million, kept 350 and expected to bring in another 2,000 jobs in San Francisco, or $9,000 a job ). Lemme think about this one. $9,000 a job or $1,000,000 a job. I'm going to go ahead and say send the bridge contract to China. More bang for the buck to be had elsewhere.
Exactly. We've rather painted ourselves into a corner, haven't we?
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,570 posts, read 81,167,557 times
Reputation: 57793
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
Except, um, we have a little problem with jobs...
True, but the high priced union workers with benefits, OSHA safety regulations and high price of materials here compared to China makes it a no-brainer when they are broke. It's a catch-22 situation. Can't afford to hire US workers, due to no tax money coming in because the US workers have no jobs.
"When we subsidize jobs in China, we're not creating any wealth in the United States," said Scott Paul, executive director for the Alliance for American Manufacturing....
We are bringing wealth to certain individuals who keep a legislator or 3 in their back pockets, though. Why we continue to let lobbyists and "party contributions" infect our government is beyond me
That 30% or so difference is returned in various taxes to the .gov if all done in the US.
So by the mandate that the .gov should choose the Best Value -- NOT the Lowest Price (that is Wal-mart's claim, not the .gov), $10B spent here would be of better overall value that $7B spent in China.
That 30% or so difference is returned in various taxes to the .gov if all done in the US.
So by the mandate that the .gov should choose the Best Value -- NOT the Lowest Price (that is Wal-mart's claim, not the .gov), $10B spent here would be of better overall value that $7B spent in China.
True of wages, not true of corporate spending. Not even close, especially on construction where most of the costs are materials. For example, Sterling construction had revenues of 460 million, IBT of 36 million. So 8.84% of less than 10%, or less than 1% would return to California. Plus you'd get some more in personal income taxes, sales taxes on personal income. But with each temporary job costing roughly a million, there's not much of that that's going to salaries which is typical of heavy construction jobs.
newenglandgirl, I don't see how its painted ourselves in a corner. Send the bridge contract to China and spend $40 million or so on Twitter tax breaks. You've just achieved the same job growth for a few peanuts. Plus you've still got another probably $2 billion (or whatever the savings from sending the contract to China was). I like that corner. Lots of good options.
That 30% or so difference is returned in various taxes to the .gov if all done in the US.
So by the mandate that the .gov should choose the Best Value -- NOT the Lowest Price (that is Wal-mart's claim, not the .gov), $10B spent here would be of better overall value that $7B spent in China.
Yes, esp when you consider the cost of the welfare and unemployment rolls, food stamps, rent assistance, etc etc for the un/underemployed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
giving the work to Chinese government-owned contracting firms...and the rebuilding jobs to Chinese workers, despite U.S. law to keep this kind of work in the U.S. I guess we don't have enough welders. What's behind this? How much worse can it get?
