BretLudwig
December 3rd 08, 02:02 AM
Obama's upcoming buzzphrase: "human infrastructure"
>>"Establishment media are starting to notice that Obama's plan to add 2.5
million public works jobs in "infrastructure" in 24 months seems
implausible. The LA Times observes:
One detail of the recovery plan that may not emerge until closer to
Inauguration Day is how the money will be disbursed for infrastructure
projects. Such undertakings often require long lead times to prepare
engineering studies and environmental surveys and address other technical
issues, possibly delaying their stimulative effect.
You don't say?
Consider the Big Dig in the heart of Blue State America, Boston. This 3.5
mile freeway tunnel was conceived in the 1970s, officially proposed in
1982, got federal funding in 1987, and the first dirt was turned in 1991.
By the end of 2003 it was more or less usable and by the end of 2004, it
was reportedly 95% finished. Then, it started leaking.
It supposedly cost about $14 or $15 billion (assuming it's done, which it
probably isn't), up from an initial estimate of $4 billion in today's
dollars.
Now, here's an interesting number: at its peak, the Big Dig employed about
5,000 construction workers. That's a lot of construction workers relative
to most big projects. But it's a tiny number compared to Obama's 2.5
million number. So, Obama is proposing, in effect, to have 500 Big Digs
going full blast in 24 months.
Even assuming away the lead time issue, just notice from the Big Dig that
infrastructure is a very, very expensive way to create jobs. This isn't
1935. Public works workers need more than just shovels. The capital
requirements for infrastructure jobs are enormous.
The next thing the media are going to notice about infrastructure projects
is that they and the rest of Obama's base don't actually want jobs
operating, say, a jackhammer. If a journalist gets laid off by his
newspaper, is he going to want Obama to give him a jackhammer job? Of
course not. He's going to want Obama to get him a job where he sits at a
desk with a computer and a phone in an air-conditioned office.
In fact, Obama's people don't want anybody operating a noisy, smelly
jackhammer anywhere near them. It's not that they're against
infrastructure per se. Indeed, they would like infrastructure to have been
built, but Obama People are going to oppose via lawsuits the actual
building of infrastructure anywhere close to them, with its attendant
racket, odors, and traffic jams. Not in my back yard!
In contrast to infrastructure jobs, Obama will eventually realize,
makework office jobs are relatively cheap and easy to create. To employ
people to administer programs aimed at, say, enhancing outcomes among our
troubled youths, you don't need an environmental impact statement. You
don't need to buy a bulldozer for a new worker, just a computer, a desk,
and a chair. (Eventually, you'll need guys with jackhammers to come build
another office building for all the new staffers, but you can squeeze them
in for awhile.) And every bureaucracy already has lots of existing plans on
file to hire more staffers to help them do whatever it is they do.
And Obama's kind of people like office jobs administering social work
programs a lot more than they like jackhammer jobs. So, it's a win-win
proposition!
Therefore, expect to hear the term "human infrastructure" a lot this
winter as the Obama Administration starts to realize that actual
infrastructure projects aren't going to make much of a dent in the
unemployment rate before the 2010 elections, but hiring a ton of people to
staff, say, innovative programs to foster excellence in public schools are
an easy way to provide jobs for the boys (and girls)."<<
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/11/obamas-upcoming-buzzphrase-human.html
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html
>>"Establishment media are starting to notice that Obama's plan to add 2.5
million public works jobs in "infrastructure" in 24 months seems
implausible. The LA Times observes:
One detail of the recovery plan that may not emerge until closer to
Inauguration Day is how the money will be disbursed for infrastructure
projects. Such undertakings often require long lead times to prepare
engineering studies and environmental surveys and address other technical
issues, possibly delaying their stimulative effect.
You don't say?
Consider the Big Dig in the heart of Blue State America, Boston. This 3.5
mile freeway tunnel was conceived in the 1970s, officially proposed in
1982, got federal funding in 1987, and the first dirt was turned in 1991.
By the end of 2003 it was more or less usable and by the end of 2004, it
was reportedly 95% finished. Then, it started leaking.
It supposedly cost about $14 or $15 billion (assuming it's done, which it
probably isn't), up from an initial estimate of $4 billion in today's
dollars.
Now, here's an interesting number: at its peak, the Big Dig employed about
5,000 construction workers. That's a lot of construction workers relative
to most big projects. But it's a tiny number compared to Obama's 2.5
million number. So, Obama is proposing, in effect, to have 500 Big Digs
going full blast in 24 months.
Even assuming away the lead time issue, just notice from the Big Dig that
infrastructure is a very, very expensive way to create jobs. This isn't
1935. Public works workers need more than just shovels. The capital
requirements for infrastructure jobs are enormous.
The next thing the media are going to notice about infrastructure projects
is that they and the rest of Obama's base don't actually want jobs
operating, say, a jackhammer. If a journalist gets laid off by his
newspaper, is he going to want Obama to give him a jackhammer job? Of
course not. He's going to want Obama to get him a job where he sits at a
desk with a computer and a phone in an air-conditioned office.
In fact, Obama's people don't want anybody operating a noisy, smelly
jackhammer anywhere near them. It's not that they're against
infrastructure per se. Indeed, they would like infrastructure to have been
built, but Obama People are going to oppose via lawsuits the actual
building of infrastructure anywhere close to them, with its attendant
racket, odors, and traffic jams. Not in my back yard!
In contrast to infrastructure jobs, Obama will eventually realize,
makework office jobs are relatively cheap and easy to create. To employ
people to administer programs aimed at, say, enhancing outcomes among our
troubled youths, you don't need an environmental impact statement. You
don't need to buy a bulldozer for a new worker, just a computer, a desk,
and a chair. (Eventually, you'll need guys with jackhammers to come build
another office building for all the new staffers, but you can squeeze them
in for awhile.) And every bureaucracy already has lots of existing plans on
file to hire more staffers to help them do whatever it is they do.
And Obama's kind of people like office jobs administering social work
programs a lot more than they like jackhammer jobs. So, it's a win-win
proposition!
Therefore, expect to hear the term "human infrastructure" a lot this
winter as the Obama Administration starts to realize that actual
infrastructure projects aren't going to make much of a dent in the
unemployment rate before the 2010 elections, but hiring a ton of people to
staff, say, innovative programs to foster excellence in public schools are
an easy way to provide jobs for the boys (and girls)."<<
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2008/11/obamas-upcoming-buzzphrase-human.html
--
Message posted using http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/group/rec.audio.opinion/
More information at http://www.talkaboutaudio.com/faq.html