3 Reasons to Build the Keystone XL Pipeline

[Cigar]

If you don't get this, then you ARE lost.

Putting people to work building/rebuilding infrastructure creates revenue 2 ways, by folks paying sales and income taxes and by putting other people to work.

Increased infrastructure spending demonstrates a multiplier of 1.44.

Here's more fancy multiplier numbers you can spend the day disparaging under the guise of offering constructive criticism...

http://www.epi.org/publication/putti...onger_economi/

Don't bother ... it's beyond their comprehension

[killianr1]

So you have no problem putting a few thousand people to work, but putting a Million to work on the countries infrastructure is a problem

This sounds vaguely familiar. Didn't we just pass a jobs stimulus program a couple years ago? Weren't we supposed to rebuild the infrastructure?
I do remember last week the battery company in Michigan that got $150,000,000 in stimulus monies. Investing in green energy is great!

The report indicated that they did spend $1,000,000 on salaries for people who went in and played videos all day, $800,000 is being repaid to the federal governmnet and the remaining $148,000,000 is missing in action. They produced 0 batteries in their 3 year endeavor. Nice work if you can get it. The only green energy that came out of this was the energy they produced to stash the $148,000,000.

Another perfect example of how the governmnet can manage your money better than you.

[zelmo1234]

Wow ... if I didn't see in writing, no one would believe it.

Shocking how Republicans are out of office.

Ever wonder how Gas Stations get their Gas or better yet, how their customers get to their Jobs to pay for the Gas they have to drive to?

I was not aware that roads were bing closed, is that the new scare tactic. To do public works projects, you first have to take the money out of the economy to put it back into the economy.

If you want to get more raods and bridge work done, do away with prevailing wage, which forces companies to pay a much hagher wage to there employee's, so when they are working for private industry and doing parking lots, and driveways, they are happy to be working for 15 dollars an hour, but put them on a road, and the get 28.50 in MI. So if you just change that law, employers would be albe to increase there staff by 40% and you could get a lot more work done for the same money?

What would be wrong with that Cigar.

[zelmo1234]

Well I don't know how your Governors and local representatives are using your money, but I can tell you the nice new roads, bridge repairs and traffic lights near me were money well spent. New business are popping up all over and property values are going up.

Yes it appears that things are going?????? Well really Bad in your state??? so where do you live, in a bubble?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_970264.html

Not good for business

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...9.photogallery

So they are leaving

http://www.cityrating.com/cost-of-living/illinois/

Cost of living is higher?

https://www.google.com/publicdata/ex...0in%20illinois

And there are no jobs?

Sounds like a great place to live????

[Chris]

Well I don't know how your Governors and local representatives are using your money, but I can tell you the nice new roads, bridge repairs and traffic lights near me were money well spent. New business are popping up all over and property values are going up.

Can you show a relationship between those two? That might indicate a possible multiplier effect.

[Chris]

If you don't get this, then you ARE lost.

Putting people to work building/rebuilding infrastructure creates revenue 2 ways, by folks paying sales and income taxes and by putting other people to work.

Increased infrastructure spending demonstrates a multiplier of 1.44.

Here's more fancy multiplier numbers you can spend the day disparaging under the guise of offering constructive criticism...

http://www.epi.org/publication/putti...onger_economi/

Drop the well poisoning as this is under Other Discussion for more serious discussion.

As for multipliers, here's what your link offers:

The fiscal multipliers used in evaluating the potential employment impact were estimated by Zandi (2010, 2011), and are consistent with those published by CBO (Elmendorf 2010; CBO 2011b).

IOW, it's based not on economic facts but CBO projections. It's guesswork, promises.

Putting people to work building/rebuilding infrastructure creates revenue 2 ways, by folks paying sales and income taxes and by putting other people to work.

With money taken from people who would spend it in other ways. Are you familiar with Bastiat's That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen. It demonstrates rationally, that redistribution you advocate is at best a wash if not a loss.

[Chris]

Don't bother ... it's beyond their comprehension

Friendly warning: This is a topic under Other Discussions for serious discussion, not mere insults. See rules @ http://thepoliticalforums.com/thread...nd-Regulations. PM a moderator if you need help understanding the rules.

[zelmo1234]

If you don't get this, then you ARE lost.

Putting people to work building/rebuilding infrastructure creates revenue 2 ways, by folks paying sales and income taxes and by putting other people to work.

Increased infrastructure spending demonstrates a multiplier of 1.44.

Here's more fancy multiplier numbers you can spend the day disparaging under the guise of offering constructive criticism...

http://www.epi.org/publication/putti...onger_economi/

What you can't say is if you left that money in the private sector, what would have happened. For Example, because of new taxes and Obamacare, I can not arrord to invest in new multi unit housing and new developments in this country

?so this meanst that several of the crews that I usually hire, are un, or under employed. because there is no new housing, and apartments, the rents and prices are higher, so this takes disposable income away from the poor and middle class.

Because I have turned to buying forclosures and tax reposessions, the prices of these have gone higher making it impossible for the middle class to take advantage of very inexpensive housing.

Because of this, the local merchants need less people because the crews are not buying lunch and breakfast and gas ect in these communities. So these workers go and get a job from the govenrment that took the taxes from me? Now you have switcher that tax base to washigton instead of your local area, You have switched that to the state and they have workers that help to redistribute the money and then what is left, about 40 cents on the dolar makes it back to the community.

So is it really a multiplyer of 1.44? Not really it takes money that should ahve been 100% local and spreads it out with little making it back to the streets.

[nic34]

sorry zel, can't engage you here...rulez and all....

We DO know that when people have a job they spend most of what they make on goods and services... so where does everybody think all that money goes....?????

[Chris]

sorry zel, can't engage you here...rulez and all....

But even if we DO know that when people have a job they spend most of what they make on goods and services... so where does everybody think all that money goes....?????

You can't engage with off-topic insults like "If you don't get this, then you ARE lost." But you can certainly engage with rational arguments.

As to your question why do you ignore where the money comes from? If nothing else it costs in terms of administrative costs to redistribute the money from where it comes from to where it goes. Next you have to demonstrate that the where it goes is more beneficial than where it would have gone if left in the hands of those it's taken from. You don't demonstrate that by referring to CBO projections, you need facts, and those are hard to come by.