> E: We do have other places we could do this work, but just not as cheaply as we can do it here, by inconveniencing the local population for days by removing t

> E: We do have other places we could do this work, but just not as cheaply as we can do it here, by inconveniencing the local population for days by removing their bridge No not really. My father works for a company that builds large yachts company in the UK. He has built yachts for F1 drivers and team owners for the last 20 odd years. These yachts while large aren't on this size and it is true that the number of places where this work can be done is limited (there are literally only a few places left in the UK itself). With something of this size there is probably only a few places where it can be done in the whole of Europe if not the entire world. You are assuming the worst intentions here. > And Rotterdam will probably do what they say. Because they're right- the corporations do control them this way. The number of jobs that were provided by building this large yacht probably has enriched everyone in the city. Working people understand the trade-off. EDIT: Other people have noted that the bridge itself doesn't carry traffic.