Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Post-storm construction hiring may aid US economy
Yahoo ^ | 11/4/12 | ALEX VEIGA and MATTHEW PERRONE Associated Press

Posted on 11/04/2012 11:12:52 AM PST by mdittmar

Hiring in the long-depressed U.S. construction industry will get a boost from the rebuilding that will follow Superstorm Sandy. Those jobs, in turn, could raise economic growth, analysts say.

The modest lift to the economy is expected to come in the first months of 2013. Construction firms, contractors and local governments will hire to rebuild or renovate homes, buildings, roads and bridges that were damaged or destroyed.

"This is going to be a net positive, particularly in the mid-Atlantic," said Sophia Koropeckyj, managing director Moody's Economy.com.

Sandy inflicted up to $50 billion in estimated losses from property damage, lost business and additional living costs. The damage was concentrated near the coastlines of New Jersey and New York City.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last
obama just needs more storms;)
1 posted on 11/04/2012 11:12:58 AM PST by mdittmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

America needs more hurricanes. Help keep “global warming” alive! These people are all on drugs.


2 posted on 11/04/2012 11:16:31 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (The Red Cross says, Vote For Obama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Teh stupid is strong in this one.


3 posted on 11/04/2012 11:19:29 AM PST by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

OMG...these idiots....just like Pelosi saying FOOD STAMPS are good for the ECONOMY....


4 posted on 11/04/2012 11:19:40 AM PST by goodnesswins (What has happened to America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Since the gummint is paying for all this, it is a net zero for the economy.

One hand just taking from the other.


5 posted on 11/04/2012 11:20:33 AM PST by freedumb2003 (We can’t just leave it (food choice) up to the parents. -- moochele obozo 2/12/2012 (cnsnews))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Very few people with a few notable exceptions like Rush Limbaugh, actually understand how a free market driven economy really operates. To the author of this article, a vast tsunami of insurance claims, shady contractors with armies of illegals, labor unions, and government handouts obtained through high taxes will “turn around” the economy. You’d have to be on crack to believe such an outlandish thing.


6 posted on 11/04/2012 11:21:14 AM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

The Obama campaign will paraphrase Mitt Romney and say, “For love of country, break a window.”


7 posted on 11/04/2012 11:21:14 AM PST by 1raider1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

They think obama may eventually be blamed for the hurricane. So, his worshippers can say it was a good thing.


8 posted on 11/04/2012 11:22:01 AM PST by Terry Mross (To former friends and relatives. Don't ever contact me if you still support obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Even true it would only help local unions as they drive others away!


9 posted on 11/04/2012 11:22:28 AM PST by nclaurel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Broken Window Fallacy headline, these folks are economic fools.

If you don’t know what I’m talking about, the following is required reading:

That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen
by Frederic Bastiat, 1850
http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html


10 posted on 11/04/2012 11:22:57 AM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Why wait for hurricanes? Why not knock down 10% of our commercial and residential structures every year? That would creasat millions of jobs. Bulldozers are much more predictable than the weather. /s


11 posted on 11/04/2012 11:24:28 AM PST by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar
Sandy inflicted up to $50 billion in estimated losses from property damage...

Raise your hand if you believe that loss is actually a plus!

Any demonrats here? I bet you dumba$$ demonrat lurkers got your hands in the air!

12 posted on 11/04/2012 11:25:12 AM PST by raybbr (People who still support Obama are either a Marxist or a moron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1raider1

LOL!


13 posted on 11/04/2012 11:25:33 AM PST by mdittmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

The broken window fallacy is strong with these two.


14 posted on 11/04/2012 11:27:42 AM PST by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the Occupation Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar
I love Rush, but imo he avoids econ discussions because he gets in over his head. Witness the fact that he had to read I, Pencil just the other day. On the other hand, he might avoid econ discussions because he's decided his listeners tune them out.

Ya want an econ discussion? Listen to Levin.

15 posted on 11/04/2012 11:28:15 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar
Very few people with a few notable exceptions like Rush ....

An order of magnitude higher, IMHO, would be Milton Friedman types. I recently viewed "Free To Choose"... excellent material, and our society would be well served to review what he had to say.

16 posted on 11/04/2012 11:30:59 AM PST by C210N ("ask not what the candidate can do for you, ask what you can do for the candidate" (Breitbart, 2012))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

Thank you for the timely reminder. Nothing learned in the last 160+ years. I taught Hazlitt’s version of this in my economics classes for years.


17 posted on 11/04/2012 11:31:32 AM PST by Founding Father (The Pedophile moHAMmudd (PBUH---Pigblood be upon him))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy
Ya want an econ discussion? Listen to Levin.

I love Levin, especially when it comes to the Constitution and political philosophy, but when it comes to economics Stuart Varney or Larry Kudlow are better.

18 posted on 11/04/2012 11:33:01 AM PST by frogjerk (OBAMA NOV 2012 = HORSEMEAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar
There is an economic principle known as "the broken window fallacy".

Walter Williams explained it best, but I can say this is pure B.S.

19 posted on 11/04/2012 11:33:10 AM PST by elkfersupper ( Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

These reporters are such ignoramus economic idiots.

Any dollars spent on construction will be coming out of NOT buying other stuff which would have been bought otherwise.

If hurricanes improve the economy why not push for more “climate change”....yeah baby burn more fossil fuels! Such idiocy!!

There are only 4 events which improve economy:

1. Mining: includes extraction of minerals, fuels, etc.

2. Manufacturing: This event enhances value of raw materials into finished goods, creating additional wealth. Also includes power plants, house & building construction etc.

3. Agriculture: Seeds & fertilizer are lot cheaper than the harvested products. This also includes poultry, fish & animal farming. Less input cost, more output value.

4. Creation of intellectual items & products: This includes such items as software, new product development etc. which all have a demand in the market place. Invention of “Windows” operating system for PC’s is a good example. This type of activity increases productivity, which creates more wealth.

All service activities such as retailing, lawyers, accountants, repairing of hurricane damaged properties etc do not create additional wealth. These are all dependent and users of existing wealth. Without additional wealth creation there is no increase in economy.


20 posted on 11/04/2012 11:34:16 AM PST by entropy12 (The radical socialist from Chicago and Acorn lawyer must be defeated! VOTE him out!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
Broken Window Fallacy headline, these folks are economic fools.

Beat me to it. Wealth is created by creating new wealth. Amazing how many people can't understand such a simple concept.

21 posted on 11/04/2012 11:37:42 AM PST by Hugin ("Most times a man'll tell you his bad intentions, if you listen and let yourself hear."---Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JohnBrowdie

if they rebuild with the same philospy used to rebuild WTC there will be a lot of people without a home for a long time. WTC should have been finished, not still building.


22 posted on 11/04/2012 11:39:50 AM PST by bravo whiskey (if the little things really annoy you, maybe it's because the big things are going well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

I’ll give ya’ Kudlow, I don’t listen to Varney. I like Levin because he frames his econ discussions in terms of liberty.


23 posted on 11/04/2012 11:42:51 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

Not quite true (unless I misunderstood you). Provision of services can create wealth just like the manufacturing of goods, or mining, etc.


24 posted on 11/04/2012 11:46:56 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SC_Pete

I just threw your comment in over there. I’ll try to remember to look in later to see if I get any comments back, or if it gets deleted.


25 posted on 11/04/2012 11:51:47 AM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Services do not create ADDITIONAL wealth. It is simply a transfer of wealth from the buyer to the seller. Without creating ADDITIONAL wealth, it is impossible to create ADDITIONAL economic value.

You will notice I did not include health services in my list of services. That is because this service helps us recover from health problems and that means more productive time is available to us. But this activity is not a big contributor to wealth creation.


26 posted on 11/04/2012 11:52:59 AM PST by entropy12 (The radical socialist from Chicago and Acorn lawyer must be defeated! VOTE him out!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

BS. Say I’m a chemical engineer, and and and I create a new method to process those vaunted ores . . . have I created wealth, or not?


27 posted on 11/04/2012 12:01:06 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

LOL! Thanks. I’ll check it out. :)


28 posted on 11/04/2012 12:01:12 PM PST by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

$50 Billion?? Pffttt!! Just wait’ll Obama’s army hits the streets on Wednesday. We’ll have jobs galore rebuilding after they are finished.

Of course, not a whit of this adds to our nations wealth or well-being. If it did, we could burn down all the cities and rebuild them.


29 posted on 11/04/2012 12:03:02 PM PST by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

No wonder our economy is in the shape it is if people believe this irrational garbage. I guess when the democrats burn down their cities after Odumbo looses that will bring about prosperity with all the new spending to reconstruct. God save us from fools and tyrants.


30 posted on 11/04/2012 12:03:36 PM PST by albionin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SC_Pete

I figure I’ll ease in the Broken Windows Fallacy aspect later.


31 posted on 11/04/2012 12:06:38 PM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

Rush does pretty good on economics considering he didn’t finish college and hasn’t studied economics. He clearly has a strong interest, is widely read, and I’m sure lots of smart people have privately tutored him. But you are right — he often gets in way over his head. Example: his explanation of work force participation rate is close, but not dead-on.

However his reach is huge and he does yeoman’s work in this area even if not always 100% right.


32 posted on 11/04/2012 12:07:26 PM PST by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

I just responded to you over there. I supported your brilliance. :)


33 posted on 11/04/2012 12:15:29 PM PST by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

If you invent a new process which is more productive over existing methods, then you ARE CREATING additional wealth.
That falls under the 4th item in my list of wealth creators.

In summary ANYTHING which increases productivity is a wealth creator.

I spent many years (23 to be exact) in an outfit which designed and manufactured heavy machinery. My contribution was to computerize many engineering activities and computerize manufacturing processes, which were all done manually before. The productivity jumped by orders of magnitude, especially in manufacturing. In the engineering area, my computer programs generated enough details to purchase long delivery items such as forgings, castings and steel plates 3-4 weeks sooner, which helped my company promise delivery of machines 3-4 weeks sooner, which was a competitive advantage over competitors when customers needed the machines ASAP..


34 posted on 11/04/2012 12:21:39 PM PST by entropy12 (The radical socialist from Chicago and Acorn lawyer must be defeated! VOTE him out!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar

Spending ones way out of debt is like trying to screw ones way out of aids


35 posted on 11/04/2012 12:31:52 PM PST by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar
job growth in construction typically spurs hiring for other jobs, like architects, real estate agents and sellers of appliances, building materials and office equipment.

money spent on fixing damage means less money available to spend on other things.

36 posted on 11/04/2012 12:36:01 PM PST by mjp ((pro-{God, reality, reason, egoism, individualism, natural rights, limited government, capitalism}))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12; 1rudeboy

I’ve followed your side discussion with some interest; please allow me to weigh in. I’ll cut right to the chase.

1rudeboy is right and entropy12 is wrong.

Services* do indeed create wealth.

To begin with, every one of the items in entropy12’s list includes many embedded services. Mining companies use lawyers and accountants. These services may be embedded (provided by employees), or they may be purchased from contractors. Either way, they contribute to the mining activity.

The same thing applies to the other three items on the list. We can also add retail services (and wholesale, etc.)

Furthermore, “services” include such things as transportation. What good would mining do, if there were no means of transporting the minerals to the manufacturers? Does it matter whether the transportation service is embedded withing the mining company, or contracted out to independent trucking companies? Of course not!

entropy12 is correct about the repairing of hurricane-damaged properties. That’s an example of the “Broken window fallacy”, which has been explained quite well in other posts. However, that’s not what you two have been debating — and it absolutely does not belong on entropy12’s list. It’s in a different category altogether.

*Assuming that we’re discussing services provided by the private sector (i.e. willing buyers and willing sellers), and not the government sector, where anything can be wasted.


37 posted on 11/04/2012 12:51:22 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

many economists have shown that over time the “broken window” affect is not a net plus to an economy

if it is not “more of benefit to the economic health” of you and your neighbors to all have to fix broken windows, diverting either income or savings, or both, you would have spent more effectively somewhere else

it cannot be beneficial on an even wider scale


38 posted on 11/04/2012 12:52:16 PM PST by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12; 1rudeboy

When I re-read this post, it became obvious that your disagreement centers around the definition of “wealth creation”.

entropy12 is focused on “growth” — not all “wealth creation”. 1rudeboy is discussing all wealth creation, and is using the terms correctly.


39 posted on 11/04/2012 12:58:53 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Exactly...

Don’t vote him out. Just a few more national disasters and he’s golden.

Not much stinks worse than the byproducts of Democrat desperation.


40 posted on 11/04/2012 1:17:11 PM PST by DoughtyOne (Pres__ent Resident NBC NRD N3pmCs HCR / no birth C / no req docs / no 3pm calls / he can read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar
Vandalism is a virtue then. Who would've guessed? The arsonist is a hero, tornadoes are our economic saviors, the Chicago Fire was urban renewal.........
41 posted on 11/04/2012 1:31:02 PM PST by count-your-change (You don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

As you say, an interesting side discussion.

I’d like to, tentatively, suggest that not all services, and for that matter, not all of any of the other categories mentioned, create (new) wealth.

During the days of the USSR, lots and lots of manufacturing went on, creating “stuff” that nobody wanted. Did the manufacturing of this stuff “create wealth?” I seriously doubt it. In fact, I would suggest that the time, energy and materials sunk into making this stuff reduced the country’s net wealth.

Same with services. The most obvious example is governmental regulation. Much though not all of the effort expended in these services reduces the net wealth of the economy. But of course there is a great deal of consulting and other purely private business services that reduce wealth creation.

I’ve often wondered if it would be possible to create an accurate net wealth creation index for economic activities, organizations and individuals. An activity that is entirely positive in creating wealth would be scored at +100, while one that is entirely negative would be scored at -100, with of course when consumption of wealth and generation balances, the score would be 0.


42 posted on 11/04/2012 1:42:15 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

A couple of more natural disasters and we can grow our way out of debt! Who knew that climate change is good for the economy? These libtards are super-geniuses types.


43 posted on 11/04/2012 1:46:32 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

A couple of more natural disasters and we can grow our way out of debt! Who knew that climate change is good for the economy? These libtards are super-geniuses types.


44 posted on 11/04/2012 1:48:09 PM PST by VRWC For Truth (Roberts has perverted the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
A simple (and very good) first approximation of the “net wealth creation index” you advocate is price of the good or service, in a free market.

Given that we don't have free markets — the government regulation you mention, being the largest hindrance to free markets. Also, government taxation and spending is almost entirely outside of free market forces (although, governments do usually use competitive bids, etc. to bring some market forces to bear). Centrally-planned economies — as in the USSR, also have no free markets. Central planners attempt to use various devices (including, copying prices prevailing in free-market economies) to assign value to goods and services. These efforts always fall short of the results of free markets.

Governments use cost-benefit analysis, and other techniques to attempt to assign a value to projects. This is quite similar to the index you mention. Also, governments and think tanks have produced estimates of the cost of regulations (the -ve side of your index).

45 posted on 11/04/2012 1:59:37 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SC_Pete

Des over there is a complete idiot.


46 posted on 11/04/2012 2:07:09 PM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Let me add a bit to my previous reply to you; regarding the effects of government regulations, and the value of services.

To simplify things, I’ll focus on just accounting services. All businesses use accountants — whether embedded as employees, or contracted out. I’ve stated the case for these services contributing to wealth creation — however, as a side-effect of government regulation, that is not always the case.

Businesses need accountants to see whether they’re winning or losing. Business strategy requires good accounting data (amongst other things). To the extent that accounting leads to better strategies, it definitely contributes to wealth. If all wealth-creating businesses were free to only use the accounting services they wanted to use (and pay for) — then all of those services would be contributing to wealth creation.

However, a great deal of accounting services are used only to satisfy the requirements of various regulations (taxation; affirmative action, environmental, etc.). Not all of that government-imposed accounting is a dead-weight loss; but much of it is. The dead-weight part does not contribute to wealth creation; and some of it may even destroy wealth.


47 posted on 11/04/2012 2:13:42 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

I absolutely agree with you about the superiority of the free market to any sort of central planning. But let’s not give it more credit than it deserves.

Much free market spending does not generate wealth, notably that performed primarily as a display of wealth. Much of it is about as “productive” as the potlatches of the Northwest Coast Indians, where they piled up massive amounts of goods and burned them to demonstrate their wealth. And of course serves exactly the same purpose.

The superiority of the free market is only a general superiority, not a specific one. Just as evolution works in general, with the “fittest” mostly surviving, but doubtless many a beneficial mutation dying out by chance. So the market destroys many good ideas before they can come to fruit.

Which means the market, like evolution and democracy, is the worst possible way to run things, except of course for all the alternatives. It’s not that the market is particularly efficient, it’s that the other systems are so spectacularly ineffecient.

BTW, an off thought struck me the other day while reading FR. The people who believe most strongly in the free market for the economy, in this country, are often disbelievers in evolution for biology. Which is odd when you consider that the two use essentially identical mechanisms.

Meanwhile, of course, those who believe most strongly in evolution and despise the idea of a God that interferes in the world, are disproportionately opposed to the idea of the free market, wanting humans to use their superior intellect to decide winners and losers, rather than leaving it to “chance.”

Seems to me the creationist/market types are somewhat less illogical here. At least they posit an omniscient divine being to control biology, while the evolution/command economy folks rely on admittedly fallible, and inherently ignorant and corruptible humans to control the economy.


48 posted on 11/04/2012 2:39:34 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

I absolutely agree with you about the superiority of the free market to any sort of central planning. But let’s not give it more credit than it deserves.

Much free market spending does not generate wealth, notably that performed primarily as a display of wealth. Much of it is about as “productive” as the potlatches of the Northwest Coast Indians, where they piled up massive amounts of goods and burned them to demonstrate their wealth. And of course serves exactly the same purpose.

The superiority of the free market is only a general superiority, not a specific one. Just as evolution works in general, with the “fittest” mostly surviving, but doubtless many a beneficial mutation dying out by chance. So the market destroys many good ideas before they can come to fruit.

Which means the market, like evolution and democracy, is the worst possible way to run things, except of course for all the alternatives. It’s not that the market is particularly efficient, it’s that the other systems are so spectacularly ineffecient.

BTW, an odd thought struck me the other day while reading FR. The people who believe most strongly in the free market for the economy, in this country, are often disbelievers in evolution for biology. Which is odd when you consider that the two use essentially identical mechanisms.

Meanwhile, of course, those who believe most strongly in evolution and despise the idea of a God that interferes in the world, are disproportionately opposed to the idea of the free market, wanting humans to use their superior intellect to decide winners and losers, rather than leaving it to “chance.”

Seems to me the creationist/market types are somewhat less illogical here. At least they posit an omniscient divine being to control biology, while the evolution/command economy folks rely on admittedly fallible, and inherently ignorant and corruptible humans to control the economy.


49 posted on 11/04/2012 2:40:45 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA; entropy12

I also probably misunderstood entropy’s original comment, but I’m too busy to go back and look at it now.


50 posted on 11/04/2012 2:45:23 PM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson