OT: The Infrastructure Boondoggle

Executive summary: the result of the $1 trillion "infrastructure plan" will be precisely nothing of note, just a bunch of sweetheart handouts to industry via tax breaks and "user fees", paid for by the cuts to Medicare.

Call it the "Buddy Cianci Infrastructure Program" - nobody in Rhode Island other than the mobsters in the construction industry ever loved Cianci for his "improvements."

I'll admit that downtown Providence does look pretty shiny and nice now, though, it's got canals like it's Venice or something. Still, half the city is broke as f*ck because even after all the billions handed over to contractors for the work, and some of the self-described: "Rhode Island boasts some of the most aggressive employment and training tax credit programs in the nation" - the jobs never came.

Reply to
bitrex
Loading thread data ...

What, socialism isn't working for you?

We don't need job training, we need jobs.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

There won't be any provision in the Trump infrastructure plan that the tax break recipients do anything other with the largess but simply pocket it.

Judging by how the telcos handled a similar situation in the Telecom Act of 1996 it won't be big surprise if that's exactly what they do.

I still pay an obscene rate for crappy Internet service, by Bulgarian standards.

Reply to
bitrex

Social-welfare programs by way of private industry "stimulus" is a great way to combine the worst parts of both into a heaping mass of garbage. At least the European socialists have the decency to pick one or the other.

Reply to
bitrex

Or spend it.

I pay about $100 a month for bundled cable TV, telephone, and internet. I get about 130 mbits download. It's all very reliable.

$100 isn't bad.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Since doing more doesn't seem to work, we should try doing less.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Rather like Obama's. Funny how socialism is just like socialism.

I would have thought you'd be happy paying for bum's Obamaphones.

Reply to
krw

That was sweetheart deals for local contractors. Pork barrels rather than a ny kind of socialism.

In Australia the story is that industries can't get workers with the skills that each particular industry needs, and the government privatised all the trade schools and vocational tertiary training, so all the money went into the pockets of people who promised vocational training, collected the stud ent grants and went bankrupt.

Get the right sort of job training, and you can get a job. Good luck findin g out what that training might be or where you could get it, any place outs ide of Denmark. Germany has a long history of tertiary training via apprent iceships, and more of it's work force has some kind of tertiary training th an any other country's, but its mainly directed at school leavers.

formatting link

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

n"

ts

ed

now,

he

r to

and

t

ct

er.

You've been listening to James Arthur. Hoover didn't spend enough on econom ic stimulus to have any visible effect, so clearly when Roosevelt spent a w hole lot more, and it did seem to work, it can't possibly have been the sti mulus spending that did the trick.

Private industry "stimulus" is pretty much always pork barrel spending desi gned for fat cats by fat cats. Any job creation involved is window dressing .

Stimulus spending ought to put money in the pockets of people who can be re lied on to spend it promptly. Put a Republican politician in the loop and i t ends up in the pockets of people likely to vote Republican (who tend to b e less likely to spend it immediately).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

"
s
d

ow,

e

to

nd

Obama's stimulus spending was distributed by a Republican controlled Congre ss for most of the time it was running. Stimulus spending isn't socialist - though socialist spending can stimulate the economy, and rather more effec tively than pork-barrel stimulus distributed by fat cats to fat cats.

Trump is just lining up some more pork barrel deals to keep his richer supp orters happy.

The Telecom act predates Obama by a few years.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

lan"

outs

o
e

oved

e now,

the

ver to

sland

dit

he

Act

n

at

ther.

omic stimulus to have any visible effect, so clearly when Roosevelt spent a whole lot more, and it did seem to work, it can't possibly have been the s timulus spending that did the trick.

signed for fat cats by fat cats. Any job creation involved is window dressi ng.

relied on to spend it promptly. Put a Republican politician in the loop and it ends up in the pockets of people likely to vote Republican (who tend to be less likely to spend it immediately).

Actually Hoover started many economic programs that FDR retained and expand ed into the New Deal. The main difference between the two was Hoover firmly believed in balancing the books with zero federal deficit, whereas Rooseve lt clearly put that belief aside for later administrations to deal with. Ho over made a few mistakes by listening to bad advisers. He was afterall a mi ning engineer by training, not a lifelong politician, lawyer, economist, mi litary general or any of the other usual crowd.

formatting link

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

You're not going to get them because no one, not even American industry, wants American workers. They cost too much and they're bad employees, more trouble than they're worth. Imagine that.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

I think this is where I'm supposed to say you just don't like Trump's stimulus because he's black and you're racist :-), but instead I'll just say congratulations, you're becoming a conservative.

Cheers, James Arthur

Reply to
dagmargoodboat

I think the reason these crazes come in eight-year cycles is that eight years is about how long it takes our universities to turn out a new crop of suckers.

Yep, which is what people create if you let them, unless you pay them not to.

Cheers, James Arthur

Reply to
dagmargoodboat

I'm confused. I thought we didn't have enough highly skilled workers for the jobs we have now. Isn't that the idea behind the H1-B program?

So we don't need jobs or training, we need foreign workers?

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

If you don't want the phone or TV you still pay $80 or so. That's not so great.

I only get a handful of Mbps, but that's all I really need for video and such. I pay $50 and that was after a recent rate hike.

Internet is not great here in the US. Not many get 130 Mbps but nearly everyone pays the better part of a C-note each month with little choice.

--

Rick C
Reply to
rickman

James Arthur wants to co-opt every sensible reaction to human absurdity as "conservative". Even socialists can recognise a boondoggle when they see one.

The sort of conservative who votes for Trump clearly can't.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

You do not understand; those trainers now _have_ a job...

Reply to
Robert Baer

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.