5 ms·

>There isn't a will among state government to tear up the houses to replace all the pipes. Nor is there money to fund such a project.

by YATA0 4y ago

rmason 4y ago
Sorry to sound cynical but it's a question of priorities. Michigan just gave General Motors $2 billion to build two EV battery plants, one in Lansing and the other in Detroit which will create 3,000 jobs. The billions are coming from Federal COVID money. The state caused Flint's problem by discontinuing water from Detroit and pulling from a local river without adding a required chemical. This decision was made by an emergency manager appointed by the then governor to save money. This manager took power away from the elected mayor and city council.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  I can't believe paying 750 000$ for a job is ever considered a good idea. If your goal really is only to provide jobs you might as well start a public works program instead of shoveling money to the private sector.
  - kmonsen 4y ago
    Who is going to pay you lobbying money if you do that? Much better to pay 750k and get 10k back as campaign contributions.
  - trashtester 4y ago
    If it is a one-time sum, it may actually make economic sense over some reasonable time period. Consider: 1 industrial job may lead to : - 1-2 jobs in private services in the same area - 1-2 jobs in public services in the same area - industrial activity that can be taxed later - in the case of electric batteries, there may even be some environmental benefits that have value - once the facility is located to some location, it may be expected to grow over time, creating even more jobs and taxable corporate profits In other words, each direct job can easily be around 4 jobs total. Future taxes from 4 jobs + corporate profits (and other taxes) + expected growth + the value environmental benefits may very well be worth the $750 up front investment.
    - sudosysgen 4y ago
      Public works projects do all of that. Also, there are not going to be environmental benefits, the only difference is that the batteries would be getting built somewhere else.
- YATA0 4y ago
  Sorry to sound cynical but it's a question of funding. Flint city council (Democrats) almost unanimously voted to switch the water source to the Flint River to cut costs because they did not have funding for a renegotiated contract with the original water source. The city was effectively bankrupt. >Michigan just gave General Motors $2 billion to build two EV battery plants, one in Lansing and the other in Detroit which will create 3,000 jobs. This is fake news, Michigan state did not give money out to GM. >The state caused Flint's problem by discontinuing water from Detroit and pulling from a local river without adding a required chemical. >This decision was made by an emergency manager appointed by the then governor to save money. Voted almost unanimously by the city council. Everyone loves to leave that detail out.
  - newswasboring 4y ago
    >This is fake news, Michigan state did not give money out to GM. Yes, seems like its just $666Mil (such an odd number lol)[1]. [1] https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/03/michigan-lawmakers-ok-transferring-666m-incentive-to-general-motors-ev-projects.html https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/03/michigan-lawma...
    - YATA0 4y ago
      - newswasboring 4y ago
        I didn't make the original claim. I was just curious. And it's still a lot of money, but I have no skin in this game.
Cthulhu_ 4y ago
The United States is still the richest country in the world. There is plenty of money, they just don't want to give it to people because capitalism. It's ironic as well given how they spend a trillion in the military which seems like an unprofitable investment. They coax kids into joining the army to get or pay for an education, instead of the much cheaper and more profitable option, just pay the kids' education directly.
- YATA0 4y ago
  >There is plenty of money, they just don't want to give it to people because capitalism. Capitalism is the best system ever invented to get money into the hands of people. It's done more to take people out of poverty than any other system in human existence. Capitalism isn't to blame here. >It's ironic as well given how they spend a trillion in the military which seems like an unprofitable investment. Military is federal, Flint water is municipal. This is basic civics. The military is not designed to be a profitable investment. >They coax kids into joining the army to get or pay for an education, instead of the much cheaper and more profitable option, just pay the kids' education directly. They do both, federal government backs student loans, grants, etc. that literally pay for kids' education directly. And again, most education is State, not federal.
  - AngryData 4y ago
    I would think technology did far more work pulling people out of poverty than capitalism. And capitalism is only like 250 years old. You could have made your same argument 500-1000 years ago about feudalism pulling people out of poverty, and yet I doubt anybody would be all that happy to switch to a feudalist system and would heavily criticize any claims that feudalism was the main driving factor behind improvements in technology and living standards.
    - YATA0 4y ago
      >I would think technology did far more work pulling people out of poverty Thanks to capitalism! >And capitalism is only like 250 years old. And the rate of humanity leaving poverty in that time span is greater than any other time in history. >You could have made your same argument 500-1000 years ago about feudalism pulling people out of poverty Err, no? If anything, that pushed even MORE people into poverty. No one sane would ever make that argument. >yet I doubt anybody would be all that happy to switch to a feudalist system and would heavily criticize any claims that feudalism was the main driving factor behind improvements in technology and living standards. Because you're inventing a fictional strawman. Feudalism did the opposite of your claim.

>There isn't a will among state government to tear up the houses to replace all the pipes. Nor is there money to fund such a project.

by YATA0 4y ago

>There isn't a will among state government to tear up the houses to replace all the pipes. Nor is there money to fund such a project.

rmason 4y ago

Sorry to sound cynical but it's a question of priorities. Michigan just gave General Motors $2 billion to build two EV battery plants, one in Lansing and the other in Detroit which will create 3,000 jobs. The billions are coming from Federal COVID money. The state caused Flint's problem by discontinuing water from Detroit and pulling from a local river without adding a required chemical. This decision was made by an emergency manager appointed by the then governor to save money. This manager took power away from the elected mayor and city council.

sudosysgen 4y ago
I can't believe paying 750 000$ for a job is ever considered a good idea. If your goal really is only to provide jobs you might as well start a public works program instead of shoveling money to the private sector.
- kmonsen 4y ago
  Who is going to pay you lobbying money if you do that? Much better to pay 750k and get 10k back as campaign contributions.
- trashtester 4y ago
  If it is a one-time sum, it may actually make economic sense over some reasonable time period. Consider: 1 industrial job may lead to : - 1-2 jobs in private services in the same area - 1-2 jobs in public services in the same area - industrial activity that can be taxed later - in the case of electric batteries, there may even be some environmental benefits that have value - once the facility is located to some location, it may be expected to grow over time, creating even more jobs and taxable corporate profits In other words, each direct job can easily be around 4 jobs total. Future taxes from 4 jobs + corporate profits (and other taxes) + expected growth + the value environmental benefits may very well be worth the $750 up front investment.
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    Public works projects do all of that. Also, there are not going to be environmental benefits, the only difference is that the batteries would be getting built somewhere else.
YATA0 4y ago
Sorry to sound cynical but it's a question of funding. Flint city council (Democrats) almost unanimously voted to switch the water source to the Flint River to cut costs because they did not have funding for a renegotiated contract with the original water source. The city was effectively bankrupt. >Michigan just gave General Motors $2 billion to build two EV battery plants, one in Lansing and the other in Detroit which will create 3,000 jobs. This is fake news, Michigan state did not give money out to GM. >The state caused Flint's problem by discontinuing water from Detroit and pulling from a local river without adding a required chemical. >This decision was made by an emergency manager appointed by the then governor to save money. Voted almost unanimously by the city council. Everyone loves to leave that detail out.
- newswasboring 4y ago
  >This is fake news, Michigan state did not give money out to GM. Yes, seems like its just $666Mil (such an odd number lol)[1]. [1] https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/03/michigan-lawmakers-ok-transferring-666m-incentive-to-general-motors-ev-projects.html https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/03/michigan-lawma...
  - YATA0 4y ago
    - newswasboring 4y ago
      I didn't make the original claim. I was just curious. And it's still a lot of money, but I have no skin in this game.

Cthulhu_ 4y ago

The United States is still the richest country in the world. There is plenty of money, they just don't want to give it to people because capitalism. It's ironic as well given how they spend a trillion in the military which seems like an unprofitable investment. They coax kids into joining the army to get or pay for an education, instead of the much cheaper and more profitable option, just pay the kids' education directly.

YATA0 4y ago
>There is plenty of money, they just don't want to give it to people because capitalism. Capitalism is the best system ever invented to get money into the hands of people. It's done more to take people out of poverty than any other system in human existence. Capitalism isn't to blame here. >It's ironic as well given how they spend a trillion in the military which seems like an unprofitable investment. Military is federal, Flint water is municipal. This is basic civics. The military is not designed to be a profitable investment. >They coax kids into joining the army to get or pay for an education, instead of the much cheaper and more profitable option, just pay the kids' education directly. They do both, federal government backs student loans, grants, etc. that literally pay for kids' education directly. And again, most education is State, not federal.
- AngryData 4y ago
  I would think technology did far more work pulling people out of poverty than capitalism. And capitalism is only like 250 years old. You could have made your same argument 500-1000 years ago about feudalism pulling people out of poverty, and yet I doubt anybody would be all that happy to switch to a feudalist system and would heavily criticize any claims that feudalism was the main driving factor behind improvements in technology and living standards.
  - YATA0 4y ago
    >I would think technology did far more work pulling people out of poverty Thanks to capitalism! >And capitalism is only like 250 years old. And the rate of humanity leaving poverty in that time span is greater than any other time in history. >You could have made your same argument 500-1000 years ago about feudalism pulling people out of poverty Err, no? If anything, that pushed even MORE people into poverty. No one sane would ever make that argument. >yet I doubt anybody would be all that happy to switch to a feudalist system and would heavily criticize any claims that feudalism was the main driving factor behind improvements in technology and living standards. Because you're inventing a fictional strawman. Feudalism did the opposite of your claim.