quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Will that money result in a road construction project? Yes.
Do road construction projects employ people? Yes.
Is the purpose of the stimulus project to prevent and reverse job losses? Yes.

What's so hard to figure out?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Seems its modeled on existing such tunnels that work. It also turn sout this is a public safety as well as environmental project. This looks like exactly teh sort of thing I want my tax dollars spent on. Much better than paying another dime to KBR or Blackwater.
http://www.lakejacksonturtles.org/tdo010909.htm

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Will that money result in a road construction project? Yes.
Do road construction projects employ people? Yes.
Is the purpose of the stimulus project to prevent and reverse job losses? Yes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Will that money result in a road construction project? Yes.
Do road construction projects employ people? Yes.
Is the purpose of the stimulus project to prevent and reverse job losses? Yes.

What's so hard to figure out?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aileen1968

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Will that money result in a road construction project? Yes.
Do road construction projects employ people? Yes.
Is the purpose of the stimulus project to prevent and reverse job losses? Yes.

What's so hard to figure out?

You don't think they could have come up with a better road project????
How much are they gonna spend to teach those turtles to use the tunnel? They have such big brains and all. The turtles, not the planners.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

The liberal Dems whined about the way the GOP administration responded to Hurricane Katrina and from reports the area still needs much rebuilding. Now it's a forgotten cause since Bush is no longer in the White House to beat up about it. I like turtles as much as the next guy - they make tasty soup -  but we could be spending that stimulus money that we don't have in New Orleans and still be creating work for people while we help other people at the same time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Libertaire

Many governments claim that they are pumping money 'into' the economy. What they seem to forget is where the money came from, if not from the economy through taxation. The person who thinks that these policies actually work must also accept that the government understands where investment should take place. These people are ignorant of the economic calculation problem and the failures of economic planning as espoused by both socialist and keynesian economic policies.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth


Actually, these sorts of tunnels aren't just for turtles; they're for all sorts of wildlife - including, in Florida, crocodiles (which are about as un-fun to run into as deer).

This sort of thing is actually a good idea, both from a minimal ecological impact perspective, and from a road hazard perspective.

But don't let a little logic stop you from railing about those librul demoncrats and their hi-larious attempts to shave the whales.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Libertaire

Many governments claim that they are pumping money 'into' the economy. What they seem to forget is where the money came from, if not from the economy through taxation. The person who thinks that these policies actually work must also accept that the government understands where investment should take place. These people are ignorant of the economic calculation problem and the failures of economic planning as espoused by both socialist and keynesian economic policies.

You know what "pump" means, right? This is about wealth circulation, not wealth creation (and no, not wealth redistribution either.) The thing is, money is useless if it's not flowing through the economy. So, to get it moving again, you siphon it out of some areas and blast it through others high-pressure. Once the stagnation clears up, it all rights itself. Yes, that means spending money you wouldn't otherwise think you could afford to sometimes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Libertaire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Libertaire

Many governments claim that they are pumping money 'into' the economy. What they seem to forget is where the money came from, if not from the economy through taxation. The person who thinks that these policies actually work must also accept that the government understands where investment should take place. These people are ignorant of the economic calculation problem and the failures of economic planning as espoused by both socialist and keynesian economic policies.

You know what "pump" means, right? This is about wealth circulation, not wealth creation (and no, not wealth redistribution either.) The thing is, money is useless if it's not flowing through the economy. So, to get it moving again, you siphon it out of some areas and blast it through others high-pressure. Once the stagnation clears up, it all rights itself. Yes, that means spending money you wouldn't otherwise think you could afford to sometimes.

And therein lies the problem. If these jobs do not actually create wealth then what use are they? If they are not creating extra taxable income and stimulating further wealth creation, they are useless. Indeed, wealth creation is stimied by the very tax that was used to collect these funds.

You also assume that the government knows where exactly to invest these funds at any given time. History has shown that governments do not know how best to invest capital, as we have seen in command economies.

What this has lead to now is a policy of massive deficit spending, supported by a policy of quantitative easing (printing money out of thin air) which can only lead to inflation by the end of this year.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Asherdelampyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: Libertaire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

quote:

ORIGINAL: Libertaire

Many governments claim that they are pumping money 'into' the economy. What they seem to forget is where the money came from, if not from the economy through taxation. The person who thinks that these policies actually work must also accept that the government understands where investment should take place. These people are ignorant of the economic calculation problem and the failures of economic planning as espoused by both socialist and keynesian economic policies.

You know what "pump" means, right? This is about wealth circulation, not wealth creation (and no, not wealth redistribution either.) The thing is, money is useless if it's not flowing through the economy. So, to get it moving again, you siphon it out of some areas and blast it through others high-pressure. Once the stagnation clears up, it all rights itself. Yes, that means spending money you wouldn't otherwise think you could afford to sometimes.

And therein lies the problem. If these jobs do not actually create wealth then what use are they? If they are not creating extra taxable income and stimulating further wealth creation, they are useless. Indeed, wealth creation is stimied by the very tax that was used to collect these funds.

You also assume that the government knows where exactly to invest these funds at any given time. History has shown that governments do not know how best to invest capital, as we have seen in command economies.

What this has lead to now is a policy of massive deficit spending, supported by a policy of quantitative easing (printing money out of thin air) which can only lead to inflation by the end of this year.

They are creating jobs
but is that really a good arguement? What jobs are being created? what are the pay rates of those jobs, what is the length?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Asherdelampyr

For one, it isnt outside the market, at least not in the way that you seem to be suggesting
Pay rate is easy to determine, they will go as they always have by either the State average or they will just pick the company that makes the best Bid on the project
Length will be determined by how long it takes to get the project completed the way I see this playing out is:

Government says "We want x tunnels built in this area"
Companies bid, the lowest bid (Hopefully from a reputable company) gets the job
the company decides the rest

Creating jobs can be a good argument, you just have to look at what else it does, and what kind of jobs are made in the process. My point is that we cant just say "It must be good because it creates jobs" However in this case, after reading through all the linkage provided I think it may just be a decent idea