|
willbeurdaddy -> RE: New Reublican Governor's cut jobs as first act. Why? (11/7/2010 3:38:13 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Malkinius
{fast reply}
Greetings all....
The usual misinformation and convenient dropping of information has been rampant here.
First off, we have had the usual glorification of European rail systems without the reminder that the distances between cities in Europe is matched only in the metro complex in the US between Washington DC and Boston and small parts of California. Other things matter as well in the viability of light passenger rail. Distance between stops matters. Percentage of the population with personal transportation matters. Size of city and access to rail hubs matters. The distance people want/need to travel on a regular basis matters. In the northeast US there is commuter rail going to New York City that stretches not only into upstate New York, but New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts. I am talking about daily commuters, not just people who travel on special occasion. In Chicago the commuter rail lines run from South Bend, Indiana to Milwaukee to get people into downtown Chicago. Where there is enough density passenger rail exists and except for the criminal element among politicians ripping off as much as they can are in general making money. They do not and sorry folks, can not make money elsewhere. Not enough traffic and the cost per mile is too high.
Second, highways. The interstate system was a direct copy by President Eisenhower of the German Autobahn system. Therefore if it was originally a European idea instead of American, it must be a good thing, right? <evil grin> Due to the distance between places in the US, roads are required. That is a simple fact in today's world. Reality doesn't go away because it doesn't fit your ideology. People like being able to go where they want when they want. It is much more efficient than having to wait on limited public transportation which may not go where you need to go. Also, the comment about fuel prices not being predictable as technology is changing was a good one. Keep that in mind. I do recall the days when the anti-car types claimed that gas prices should be at least $3 to $5 a gallon so that people would switch to public transportation because the price would keep people from driving. It slowed them down a bit and then those who wanted the high prices didn't want to pay them and complained about it because it now cost too much to run their SUV's.
Third, yes, everyone can look at a project and see the extended jobs that come from specific works projects. I forget the exact multiplier but I think it is around three or four times. Since most of the military budget is spent in the US, that means that the money the US spends on the military is multiplied by three or four times inside the US. Cut the military budget and lose jobs, sometimes high paying industrial and union jobs. (Think military vehicles, planes, ships and construction.) The same is true for NASA. They don't ship dollar bills into space and push them out the airlock after all. They spend them here on Earth and mostly inside the US. The great place to cut spending also means cutting US jobs. Why do you think there was a military base in every state and almost every congressional district? Jobs.
Those are just a few quick things to think about and discuss as you continue on.
Be well.....
Malkinius
The economic multiplier for government jobs, not including the military, is on the order of 1.7. Military is lower because of overseas deployment. Private sector jobs have a multiplier around 3 to 3.5.
|
|
|
|
