6 ms·

You want Government to spend on Infrastructure, sure. Get ready to pay through your nose for that infrastructure. I am from NJ and they are trying to build up

You want Government to spend on Infrastructure, sure. Get ready to pay through your nose for that infrastructure. I am from NJ and they are trying to build up rail tunnel to connect to NY and here's the cost comparison: "Lotschberg Base Tunnel, world’s longest land tunnel, dug under a mountain at the peak of the world economic boom and completed in 2007; 21.5 miles long, about $4.5 billion (might be 1998 dollars, though); cost per mile: $209 million Gotthard Base Tunnel, when completed in 2017 will become the world’s longest railway tunnel; at least 35.4 miles plus additional tunnels, shafts and passages totaling 94.3 miles, about $10.2 billion; cost per mile: $288 million Channel Tunnel or “Chunnel”, connecting France and England, world’s longest undersea tunnel; 31.4 miles, opened 1994, cost $7.4 billion (might be 1985 dollars and the cost overruns did lead to bankruptcy); cost per mile: $235 million Wushaoling Tunnel, traveling through four regional fault zones; 13 miles long, opened 2006, cost $845 million; cost per mile: $65 million New Jersey-New York Mass Transit/ARC Tunnel, scheduled for completion in 2018; 3.5 miles long, cost $11-14 billion; cost per mile: $3.7 billion (I used $13 billion for this calculation)" From http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2010/10/08/new-jerseys-canceled-railroad-tunnel-in-perspective/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2010/10/08/new-jerseys-ca... Exactly how many jobs do you think infrastructure jobs will create? And what about all those people who are not in infrastructure sector? What about the school teachers which he keeps talking about? Also, how does increasing social safety net CREATE new jobs? You are simply handing out money.

kenjackson 16y ago
Depending on traffic, those costs seem like they might be great deals. In any case, the money paid to people for infrastructure, results in those people spending the money, that (a) helps lift the economy (b) increases tax revenue, which results in more state/local funds to hire teachers.
yequalsx 16y ago
When poor people get money they spend it. Almost all of it. Very little goes into a bank account. This increase in spending leads to more jobs for obvious reasons.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  This is popular misconception. It sounds good, but it just isn't true. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~shapiro/TaxRebates.pdf http://www-personal.umich.edu/~shapiro/TaxRebates.pdf
  - anigbrowl 16y ago
    The reliability of that data is somewhat questionable, given that studies since then have taken issue with these findings, both in relation to the 2008 tax rebates (1) and later analysis of rebates paid in 2001 (2). 1. http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/1541 http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/1541 2. http://www.nber.org/papers/w10784 http://www.nber.org/papers/w10784 Whichever interpretation one places on it, it strikes me that the arguments for against payments are fundamentally identical to those regarding tax cuts.
    - yummyfajitas 16y ago
      Regarding link 1, it reports spending as a % of household income. That's a silly way to report the data. A quick google search suggests the average household income of $70k in greater LA. Treating low income households as earning $15k (an overestimate) and treating all other households as earning $70k (an underestimate, since low income households are excluded), we find that high income households spend 2x more as a result of stimulus. (Rough numbers, but it's the best I can do. They don't provide all necessary data to get precise numbers.) Link 2 is gated, I can't get in. See also this paper, which shows the same effect happened in the current recession. http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16246 http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16246 (Ungated: http://ow.ly/2Fx1i http://ow.ly/2Fx1i )
  - yequalsx 16y ago
    The abstract says it's a survey of what people intended to do. The paper is 55 pages long and given what the abstract says I'm guessing they didn't follow up to see what people actually did. People intend to lose weight but often times don't follow through. The multiplier effect of giving money to poor people is much higher than giving it to rich people.
Anechoic 16y ago
Lotschberg Base Tunnel and Gotthard Base Tunnel Apples and oranges. Yes, they're all train tunnels, but the Lotschberg and Gotthard tunnels were/are being built using tunnel boring techniques in relative remote areas. ARC is going to require tunnel boring and submerged tunnel techniques in one of the densest and busiest city and waterway in the world (not to mention that the Lotschberg tunnel is single-tracked). Exactly how many jobs do you think infrastructure jobs will create? And what about all those people who are not in infrastructure sector? Large infrastructure projects suck in people from a variety of sectors including construction, engineering, architecture, IT, GIS, environmental, archaeological/historical, construction materials, office supply, delivery services, transportation, PR/media, law, police & fire, security, retail, and food preparation (and that's off the top of my head). What about the school teachers which he keeps talking about? Again, infrastructure projects get money moving again, which increases tax receipts and provides more budget for essentials like schools.
- solutionyogi 16y ago
  Yes, Apples and Oranges. Though it looks like Swiss project is more technically challenging than the NJ/NY one. Few more comments from Philip who did some more research: "Tyler: Thanks for the insider’s perspective on this. You imply that this new tunnel is an exceptionally challenging project, more challenging than the Swiss tunnels, for example, and hence the staggering cost. I’m having a hard time understanding this. The NJ/NY tunnel is billed as necessary to replace and/or augment a “100-year-old” existing rail tunnel. Page 6 of http://www.arctunnel.com/pdf/deis/4_1_0013.pdf http://www.arctunnel.com/pdf/deis/4_1_0013.pdf makes it look like tunneling under the Hudson means going through sand and mud. This was apparently well within the capabilities of civil engineering circa 1910. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel says that the maximum overburden of the new Swiss tunnel is 2500m, i.e., there are 8200′ of rocks pressing down on the tunnel (generates a lot of water pressure if nothing else). http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gotthard_base_tunnel/The_tunnel/Tunnelling_through_a_mountain.html?cid=28276254 http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gotthard_base_tunnel/Th... talks about the granite that they are tunneling through in places." http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2010/10/08/new-jerseys-canceled-railroad-tunnel-in-perspective/#comment-162705 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2010/10/08/new-jerseys-ca...

kenjackson 16y ago

Depending on traffic, those costs seem like they might be great deals. In any case, the money paid to people for infrastructure, results in those people spending the money, that (a) helps lift the economy (b) increases tax revenue, which results in more state/local funds to hire teachers.

yequalsx 16y ago

When poor people get money they spend it. Almost all of it. Very little goes into a bank account. This increase in spending leads to more jobs for obvious reasons.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
This is popular misconception. It sounds good, but it just isn't true. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~shapiro/TaxRebates.pdf http://www-personal.umich.edu/~shapiro/TaxRebates.pdf
- anigbrowl 16y ago
  The reliability of that data is somewhat questionable, given that studies since then have taken issue with these findings, both in relation to the 2008 tax rebates (1) and later analysis of rebates paid in 2001 (2). 1. http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/1541 http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/1541 2. http://www.nber.org/papers/w10784 http://www.nber.org/papers/w10784 Whichever interpretation one places on it, it strikes me that the arguments for against payments are fundamentally identical to those regarding tax cuts.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    Regarding link 1, it reports spending as a % of household income. That's a silly way to report the data. A quick google search suggests the average household income of $70k in greater LA. Treating low income households as earning $15k (an overestimate) and treating all other households as earning $70k (an underestimate, since low income households are excluded), we find that high income households spend 2x more as a result of stimulus. (Rough numbers, but it's the best I can do. They don't provide all necessary data to get precise numbers.) Link 2 is gated, I can't get in. See also this paper, which shows the same effect happened in the current recession. http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16246 http://papers.nber.org/papers/w16246 (Ungated: http://ow.ly/2Fx1i http://ow.ly/2Fx1i )
- yequalsx 16y ago
  The abstract says it's a survey of what people intended to do. The paper is 55 pages long and given what the abstract says I'm guessing they didn't follow up to see what people actually did. People intend to lose weight but often times don't follow through. The multiplier effect of giving money to poor people is much higher than giving it to rich people.

Anechoic 16y ago

Lotschberg Base Tunnel and Gotthard Base Tunnel Apples and oranges. Yes, they're all train tunnels, but the Lotschberg and Gotthard tunnels were/are being built using tunnel boring techniques in relative remote areas. ARC is going to require tunnel boring and submerged tunnel techniques in one of the densest and busiest city and waterway in the world (not to mention that the Lotschberg tunnel is single-tracked). Exactly how many jobs do you think infrastructure jobs will create? And what about all those people who are not in infrastructure sector? Large infrastructure projects suck in people from a variety of sectors including construction, engineering, architecture, IT, GIS, environmental, archaeological/historical, construction materials, office supply, delivery services, transportation, PR/media, law, police & fire, security, retail, and food preparation (and that's off the top of my head). What about the school teachers which he keeps talking about? Again, infrastructure projects get money moving again, which increases tax receipts and provides more budget for essentials like schools.

solutionyogi 16y ago
Yes, Apples and Oranges. Though it looks like Swiss project is more technically challenging than the NJ/NY one. Few more comments from Philip who did some more research: "Tyler: Thanks for the insider’s perspective on this. You imply that this new tunnel is an exceptionally challenging project, more challenging than the Swiss tunnels, for example, and hence the staggering cost. I’m having a hard time understanding this. The NJ/NY tunnel is billed as necessary to replace and/or augment a “100-year-old” existing rail tunnel. Page 6 of http://www.arctunnel.com/pdf/deis/4_1_0013.pdf http://www.arctunnel.com/pdf/deis/4_1_0013.pdf makes it look like tunneling under the Hudson means going through sand and mud. This was apparently well within the capabilities of civil engineering circa 1910. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel says that the maximum overburden of the new Swiss tunnel is 2500m, i.e., there are 8200′ of rocks pressing down on the tunnel (generates a lot of water pressure if nothing else). http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gotthard_base_tunnel/The_tunnel/Tunnelling_through_a_mountain.html?cid=28276254 http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Specials/Gotthard_base_tunnel/Th... talks about the granite that they are tunneling through in places." http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2010/10/08/new-jerseys-canceled-railroad-tunnel-in-perspective/#comment-162705 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2010/10/08/new-jerseys-ca...