If Ford plant in St. Paul closes in 2011, what could take the place of it. (Rice: insurance, how much)

[Oildog]

Originally Posted by Globe199

I hate to be a buzzkill, but none of this will ever happen. Townhomes were vastly overbuilt and the Saints have no money for a stadium.

I think the Ford area will sit dormant for years. I can't imagine any other carmaker moving in. First off, one of the reasons most car factories are in rural areas is because the prevailing wages are lower there. Second, it would probably be cheaper and easier for someone like Toyota to build a new plant in BuFu-Kansas or wherever than to try and retrofit the Ford plant.

If anything, Ford themselves should retool the plant to make hybrid vehicles. But again, they'd probably rather just shut it down.

I think you are correct, given its location proximate to the river and the Moose and Goose environmental rules in the state (along with unfriendly to business tax rates), heavy industry is unlikely to return.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Oildog

I think you are correct, given its location proximate to the river and the Moose and Goose environmental rules in the state (along with unfriendly to business tax rates), heavy industry is unlikely to return.

I know about Tim Pawlenty's Clean Water Legacy Act. I did a term paper on it in my political science class last year. Why should that be a reason not to set up another automobile factory in the Twin Cities, or even an airplane factory and act within environmental regulations? I sound like an idealist, but I guess it has to do with watching my own father getting laid off more than once(in another state). I am wondering what the workers will do next.

[Camden Northsider]

Well, it's a crapshoot as to whether there will be enough funding to provide employment services to these dislocated workers. I've heard so much complaining from various constituencies about an imagining that our state govt is over-funding social/ human service programs, but guess what everyone, social/ human service programs are dropping like flies in the current economy and it basically feels like a survival of the fittest. So, not only are people finding themselves in the ranks of the unemployed (and unable to get out of it) and/or families now "in need", but simultaneously the long-established and impressive network of "safety nets" in our great state (many of them lauded throughout the nation for their efficiencies/ extraordinary success) are being butchered by the likes of Pawlenty, various other legislators, the Dept of Human Services(which, to their credit, were butchered by Pawlenty), and various foundations that have had to reduce funding because of the current economy and market losses; all the while service agencies are experiencing a huge increase in demand for services while having to lay off multiple staff positions and/or shut down programs and/or close their doors altogether.

Those complaining about human/ social service agencies don't often realize that (1) it is these very types of nonprofit agencies that provide needed employment and training (and re-training) services to the unemployed and dislocated workers in the state, and at a much greater rate than the state workforce centers (at least here in the metro area this is the case); and (2) said persons might just be put in the position where they are greatly in need of the services provided by said agencies in the not-too-distant future.

Stimulus monies are on the way, but a large percentage of them are allocated to Vocational Rehab and other programs that serve a very specific constituency (as opposed to the greater public), and many of them are stopping at state govts which in my experience aren't the most effective (or efficient) in delivering the actual services when compared to nonprofits.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

Well, it's a crapshoot as to whether there will be enough funding to provide employment services to these dislocated workers. I've heard so much complaining from various constituencies about an imagining that our state govt is over-funding social/ human service programs, but guess what everyone, social/ human service programs are dropping like flies in the current economy and it basically feels like a survival of the fittest. So, not only are people finding themselves in the ranks of the unemployed (and unable to get out of it) and/or families now "in need", but simultaneously the long-established and impressive network of "safety nets" in our great state (many of them lauded throughout the nation for their efficiencies/ extraordinary success) are being butchered by the likes of Pawlenty, various other legislators, the Dept of Human Services(which, to their credit, were butchered by Pawlenty), and various foundations that have had to reduce funding because of the current economy and market losses; all the while service agencies are experiencing a huge increase in demand for services while having to lay off multiple staff positions and/or shut down programs and/or close their doors altogether.

Sounds like Minnesota is slowly being turned into Georgia.

Speaking as someone who has been through multiple unemployment stints, those aren't words of praise.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

Sounds like Minnesota is slowly being turned into Georgia.

Speaking as someone who has been through multiple unemployment stints, those aren't words of praise.

I hope not. From what my father tells me about the Upper Midwest, MN and WI specifically, those places are usually more humane towards the unemployed than Georgia.

[Clifford63]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

Well, it's a crapshoot as to whether there will be enough funding to provide employment services to these dislocated workers. I've heard so much complaining from various constituencies about an imagining that our state govt is over-funding social/ human service programs, but guess what everyone, social/ human service programs are dropping like flies in the current economy and it basically feels like a survival of the fittest. So, not only are people finding themselves in the ranks of the unemployed (and unable to get out of it) and/or families now "in need", but simultaneously the long-established and impressive network of "safety nets" in our great state (many of them lauded throughout the nation for their efficiencies/ extraordinary success) are being butchered by the likes of Pawlenty, various other legislators, the Dept of Human Services(which, to their credit, were butchered by Pawlenty), and various foundations that have had to reduce funding because of the current economy and market losses; all the while service agencies are experiencing a huge increase in demand for services while having to lay off multiple staff positions and/or shut down programs and/or close their doors altogether.

Those complaining about human/ social service agencies don't often realize that (1) it is these very types of nonprofit agencies that provide needed employment and training (and re-training) services to the unemployed and dislocated workers in the state, and at a much greater rate than the state workforce centers (at least here in the metro area this is the case); and (2) said persons might just be put in the position where they are greatly in need of the services provided by said agencies in the not-too-distant future.

Stimulus monies are on the way, but a large percentage of them are allocated to Vocational Rehab and other programs that serve a very specific constituency (as opposed to the greater public), and many of them are stopping at state govts which in my experience aren't the most effective (or efficient) in delivering the actual services when compared to nonprofits.

Well butcher is probably overstating things. 50% cut - yep you can call it a butcher. 5% not so much. The thing that is difficult is when people need help the most is when the cuts are comming. State revenue is down, so it is a balancing act between floating the debt or cutting things back. Neither solution is ideal.

I guess the way I see it is that almost every family is finding some need to tighten up the purse strings, and I don't see why Government can't do some of the same. Reality is we still have a well above average social services in MN.

Also, don't buy into the hype that we may run out of unemployment funds. The system does have mechanisms in place should the coffers go empty. It is built into the fed reserve system.

As a whole I do believe that the social program in MN serve everyone. I don't like seeing cuts, but I think these are some challenging times and understand that Mr. Pawlenty has some pretty touch tasks on his plate.

I believe we will make it through these tough times, but it will take some paitence and cooperation from our people and our government.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by Clifford63

Well butcher is probably overstating things. 50% cut - yep you can call it a butcher. 5% not so much.

Also, don't buy into the hype that we may run out of unemployment funds. The system does have mechanisms in place should the coffers go empty. It is built into the fed reserve system.

As a whole I do believe that the social program in MN serve everyone. I don't like seeing cuts, but I think these are some challenging times and understand that Mr. Pawlenty has some pretty touch tasks on his plate.

As to hype of running out of unemployment funds, I wasn't speaking of the unemployment funds themselves, but rather specifically speaking to funding for employment & training agencies (e&t) or employment services for the unemployed. This hits close to home for me as I've actually had to lay off several senior employment counselor staff at my (largely government funded) agency over the past couple of months. There are some coffers related to employment services and other funds, but Pawlenty has already gotten his hands on many of these to fill budget shortfalls in totally unrelated budget areas (unethical in my view) - specifically the state's TANF (temporary assistance to needy families) reserves which fund employment services for families on welfare.

Also, if you look at Pawlenty's proposed cuts to Health and Human Services in Minnesota, the largest funder of the services I am speaking to in this and last post, the figures are much closer to 50% than 5% (i believe the correct number is 35%)- see below (several of these sources are pretty slanted, but you get the drift):

Fiscal fight: DFLers say Pawlenty agencies are gumming up the budget process | Politics in Minnesota
MN Progressive Project:: Pawlenty's budget: the amputation diet plan
MPR: Pawlenty uses stimulus money to reverse budget cuts
Pawlenty's Budget Would Shed State Jobs In Minn. - wcco.com (http://wcco.com/local/budget.cuts.state.2.922754.html - broken link)
Minnesota Independent: News. Politics. Media. » Pawlenty budget slashes family planning programs
In State of the State, Pawlenty hopes for job growth, but turns his back on most effective measures « Minnesota Budget Bites
Nothing Up His Sleeve: Pawlenty's Budget Is Smoke And Mirrors, A Cruel Hoax | DUSTYTRICE.COM (http://www.dustytrice.com/?p=618 - broken link)
While Feds offer relief, Pawlenty budget offers devastation (http://www.insightnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3981: while-feds-offer-relief-pawlenty-budget-offers-devastation&catid=10:news&Itemid=6 - broken link)

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by pirate_lafitte

I hope not. From what my father tells me about the Upper Midwest, MN and WI specifically, those places are usually more humane towards the unemployed than Georgia.

Considerably more, at least as far as I'm aware. I was exaggerating, of course, but that's the direction they're headed. Smaller government, fewer programs.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

As to hype of running out of unemployment funds, I wasn't speaking of the unemployment funds themselves, but rather specifically speaking to funding for employment & training agencies (e&t) or employment services for the unemployed. This hits close to home for me as I've actually had to lay off several senior employment counselor staff at my (largely government funded) agency over the past couple of months. There are some coffers related to employment services and other funds, but Pawlenty has already gotten his hands on many of these to fill budget shortfalls in totally unrelated budget areas (unethical in my view) - specifically the state's TANF (temporary assistance to needy families) reserves which fund employment services for families on welfare.

Also, if you look at Pawlenty's proposed cuts to Health and Human Services in Minnesota, the largest funder of the services I am speaking to in this and last post, the figures are much closer to 50% than 5% (i believe the correct number is 35%)- see below (several of these sources are pretty slanted, but you get the drift):

Fiscal fight: DFLers say Pawlenty agencies are gumming up the budget process | Politics in Minnesota
MN Progressive Project:: Pawlenty's budget: the amputation diet plan
MPR: Pawlenty uses stimulus money to reverse budget cuts
Pawlenty's Budget Would Shed State Jobs In Minn. - wcco.com (http://wcco.com/local/budget.cuts.state.2.922754.html - broken link)
Minnesota Independent: News. Politics. Media. » Pawlenty budget slashes family planning programs
In State of the State, Pawlenty hopes for job growth, but turns his back on most effective measures « Minnesota Budget Bites
Nothing Up His Sleeve: Pawlenty's Budget Is Smoke And Mirrors, A Cruel Hoax | DUSTYTRICE.COM (http://www.dustytrice.com/?p=618 - broken link)
While Feds offer relief, Pawlenty budget offers devastation (http://www.insightnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3981: while-feds-offer-relief-pawlenty-budget-offers-devastation&catid=10:news&Itemid=6 - broken link)

I read the one from MPR. Pawlenty might be increasing funding to education, but he shouldn't be cutting things. He should have used the stimulus money to keep everything. He should spread the money around for everything. It might reduce the blow.

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

Considerably more, at least as far as I'm aware. I was exaggerating, of course, but that's the direction they're headed. Smaller government, fewer programs.

Where it's headed isn't a good thing.