Posted on 05/06/2019 11:20:44 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
President Trump and the Democratic Party congressional leaders agreed this week to spend $2 trillion on infrastructure in order to create jobs. It’s never going to happen - and that is a good thing.
The infrastructure spending Trump agreed to with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer is DOA for several reasons. The federal budget doesn’t have the money, and congressional Republicans don’t have the inclination to dig yet another deep hole of debt. The idea itself is less than serious; apparently Trump embraced it because $2 trillion sounds like more than $1 trillion. In any event, this will be the third time Trump reached a pact with Democrats, only to walk away (gun reform, immigration.)
Moreover, the huge spending on infrastructure cannot take place for a simple reason: The United States does not have the skilled trades people to turn this $2 trillion dream into reality. You can promise all of the money you want to for construction, you still need enough trained people to handle earth movers and other complex equipment. The United States doesn’t have enough people like that to take on trillions of new dollars in infrastructure spending. It doesn’t even have the skilled people to pursue the public and private projects that are already on the board.
Not only is the national unemployment rate at lows not seen in decades like most industrialized countries, the United States is particularly short of skilled people in construction. The CEO of the trade group Associated Builders and Contractors last year said the construction industry already added 330,000 jobs in 2018, and had another 400,000 to 500,000 jobs that needed filling.
As a result of the skilled labor shortage, infrastructure projects are already moving at a crawl, like an airport with jets stacked on top of each other.
A survey by the National Association of Home Builders found that 70 percent of builders reported difficulties hiring carpenters, over 60 percent attracting masons, and more than half finding electricians, plumbers, painters, and roofers.
General contractors who repair roads, bridges, and other large infrastructure projects face a similar challenge. A national survey released by the Association of General Contractors of America found 70 percent of respondents had a “hard time” filling skilled labor positions.
Why then the assumption that there are plenty of people available to fill skilled positions? To a large degree, it reflects an elitist view, that anyone can take part in infrastructure projects, it’s not complex like law or banking. Just give them a svelte; it worked 90 years ago.
It also reflects a popular view of the economy that is the opposite of the truth: It assumes that we are short of jobs. In fact, we are short of people with the skills and inclination to perform the tasks that need performing.
There is no magic bullet that can solve our economic problems, meet infrastructure needs, and generate employment all at once. Politicians should stop looking for one, let alone promise $2 trillion on it.
We need corporate welfare to the tune of trillons to create jobs in this economy?
Snowflakes no get fingernails dirty.
How long will it take to pay off the $2 Trillion? If as the dems recommend, doubling the federal gas tax (+18 cents per gallon) it will take 70 years to pay off.
Or alternatively
To pay off the $2 Trillion in under 2 years - the tax would have to be raised to $10 per gallon.
With about two years of on-the-job training, there will be plenty of opportunities with people with B.A. degrees in English, History, Art History, Sociology, and any of the various Studies degrees.
“The United States does not have the skilled trades people to turn this $2 trillion dream into reality. “
good grief...
I would posit these three facts.
1. Our infrastructure needs updating.
2. Someone is going to tackle the job, a Republican or a Democrat.
3. Which party will use a little more common sense about the ways they address the overall program?
The Republican will disburse the cost across the states. The fed will take on debt, but the states will also foot more of the bill.
The Democrat will turn it into a jobs program, hire only union labor, and run up the bill to $6 trillion making political donations along the way with our tax dollars.
Our grandkids credit card is already maxed out.
The simple truth here is that most voters just don’t see it as a major priority.
Democrats have no idea how to fix things, especially physical things like roads and airports.
No idea at all. Their involvement just means billions of money going to waste
Doesn’t have the money?
Heck. They can just print some more!
Who cares! This is just another example of his genius at the rope-a-dope technique...
Since when have the Democrats or the Republicans cared about paying for anything that they appropriated?
[[college welfare system]]
Excellent description.
There’s another reason.
This wasn’t about infrastructure.
Money is fungible and the states need a bailout, this one short-term, to help cover skyrocketing public pensions, public bennies, Medicaid and other welfare costs.
But nobody wants to call it a bailout.
You have a good point, especially if this money ends up in the states General Fund.
I believe that is presently where state road fuel taxes end up right now. - Tom
Yes, hopefully Trump will get his mind right and not go dem on us with crap like this.
i thought we had more job openings then jobless people currently so why create more jobs?
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.