4 ms·

selectively giving away free money to big business is straight corruption. there is no other way to put it. everyone involved should lose re election and get in

by tancop 4mo ago

selectively giving away free money to big business is straight corruption. there is no other way to put it. everyone involved should lose re election and get investigated by the financial crimes unit. but i dont think "leave it up to the market" is a better idea. investments like this just need to be transparent, open to everyone and set up strict punishment for stealing the money with prison for executives. if they wanted to actually create jobs they would support small companies and set up open competitive programs based on project quality. or start a state investment bank giving super low interest loans so factories can expand without cutting profitable divisions like in china.

tantalor 4mo ago
One idea I like is directly funding apprenticeship. It pays for job training and classroom instruction on a per-individual basis. The jobs are in long-term career sectors like advanced manufacturing, shipbuilding, aviation, healthcare, and technology. Here's one example: https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/osec/osec20250923 https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/osec/osec20250923 In Georgia, the employer is reimbursed $2,500 when an apprentice starts and up to $10,000 when they finish. They can also get up to 75% of the apprentice's hourly wage covered during their initial on-the-job training.
- diogenescynic 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - glenpierce 4mo ago
    The reason you never hear that is because waste and fraud are very low in reality. That’s why this made the news. It’s uncommon. We should be using the government to help people and when we do, it often does a good job. Examples: Roads, libraries, fire departments, schools, safety regulations…
    - coryrc 4mo ago
      Our public transportation infrastructure literally cost 10x per mile than France or Hong Kong. That's not waste to you? For what California has spent/is spending on high-speed rail from nowhere to nowhere, China blanketed their country? Notice you also left out police. How's our spending working there?
      - windows_hater_7 4mo ago
        I’d note that China does not need democratic approval for any of its projects and thus is substantially more efficient.
        cindyllm 4mo ago
        [dead]
        D_Alex 4mo ago
        And what lesson should be drawn from that?
        camgunz 4mo ago
        That it's easy to build things when you oppress and enslave people.
        throwaway85825 4mo ago
        We seem to get the worst of both.
        coryrc 4mo ago
        We don't either. It's a Democratic Republic. Our electeds could do their job.
      - dgoldstein0 4mo ago
        California high speed rail has been a mess. Which is likely in part because politics dictating routes has raised the costs and timelines substantially. On a smaller scale SF was building a new subway in 2013 that had been on the drawing board for years. I remember thinking maybe I'd ride it to work one day. Opened in 2023 or 2024, after I had moved offices twice and then went to work from home. It's not a terrible line but because it had to go to the center of our Chinatown instead of 2 blocks over, it took quite a bit longer and became the deepest subway line in the city. Several other bits of stupidity too in that project but a big piece of the delayed timeline was that tunneling in SF is hard. Plenty of other transit projects exist that have made real differences. Personally I'm a fan of the simple improvements: revised bus routes with dedicated bus lanes and improved stop & shelters, added bike lanes, etc. those sorts of projects are relatively cheap investments and while no single one is a silver bullet they add up. On a bigger scale - Caltrain's electrification was a big win. Both kinds of projects are easier than building whole new tracks or digging new tunnels. Extend and improve the existing systems. Most cities have something to start from.
  - ZenoArrow 4mo ago
    > I'd rather they just lower our taxes and quit squandering our money on these programs that never work. Would you support cutting military spending? It's a lot higher than other countries.
    - WalterBright 4mo ago
      > It's a lot higher than other countries. That's because the US also defends the free world. Besides, not spending enough on the military can get very, very expensive.
      - deaux 4mo ago
        > That's because the US also defends the free world. The US invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Iraq have sure helped defend the free world. How many trillions went into those combined? Fantastic return per $ of "free world defense".
        paulddraper 4mo ago
        Don’t forget Ukraine!
        deaux 4mo ago
        Unfortunately Ukraine too is a rounding error compared to the invasions. It's negligible compared to Afghanistan on its own, let alone if you include Iraq.
        WalterBright 4mo ago
        Consider all the US bases in Europe, there to defend Europe against Russia. And the bases in the Pacific and Japan. Greenland, too! When I lived in Germany in the 70s, we were driving on the Autobahn one day, and I saw a jet hedgehopping at full blast over the countryside. I asked my dad what was going on, and why didn't the Germans complain about it. (Hedgehopping is how you avoid radar detection.) He replied that the Germans didn't particularly like it, but they understood the reason for it. We were in Wiesbaden because my dad worked on the US base and their job was to ensure that there wasn't going to be nuclear combat toe to toe with the Russkies. Later on, we lived near Luke AFB in Arizona, where Luftwaffe pilots were trained. I'd ride my bike out to the flight line and watch those glorious F-104s blast off with their afterburners lit up.
- SecretDreams 4mo ago
  > One idea I like is directly funding apprenticeship. It pays for job training and classroom instruction on a per-individual basis. The jobs are in long-term career sectors like advanced manufacturing, shipbuilding, aviation, healthcare, and technology. This is basically what grad school does too. I'm into funding education further any day of the week. For higher education, I'd only add a string attached like "must practice trade in state that funded you if job is available for x years or must pay back funding pro rated".
- winrid 4mo ago
  You mean what companies used to do before we decided to import cheap labor instead?
betaby 4mo ago
> selectively giving away free money to big business is straight corruption Liberals in canada call that 'making housing affordable', https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/prime-minister-mark-carney-responds-vancouver-bc-condo-plan-9.7248862 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/prime-minist... It feels that in Canada business is impossible unless it's directly funded by the government.
ww520 4mo ago
It's straight corruption, no matter of big or small business. It should have been randomized blind selection of business who have existed for more than a year, and the granted money pays for new employees' taxes. Blind selection takes out the path to corruption (not who you know to get the fund). Randomized to be fair. Government is bad at picking winners or losers anyway. Business more than a year to screen out frauds. Granted money for new employees' taxes to encourage hiring new employees. Paying the taxes only so that the money can be spread out to more people.
browsingonly 4mo ago
> open competitive programs based on project quality This will never, ever happen. There will always be bonus points available, even if they're awarded to "conservative"-leaning feel-good attributes like veteran-owned sponsor businesses. These investments are likely to always fail at their declared purpose. Better to put the money towards free childcare and maybe trying to convince parents to read to their kids.
- abirch 4mo ago
  The government should limit innovation and direct resources to proven ROI spending such as free daycare, nutrition, and public infrastructure
- neonstatic 4mo ago
  > There will always be bonus points available, even if they're awarded to "conservative"-leaning feel-good attributes like veteran-owned sponsor businesses. Why are you singling out "conservative" causes?
diogenescynic 4mo ago
They're always handed out as political favors or lotteries at best. How is a lottery sustainable or scalable? These solutions do not work. It's at best virtue signaling and at worst corruption (as OP says).
paulddraper 4mo ago
Or —- hear me out —- create laws and tax policies compatible with growth, and apply them equally to everyone.
neya 4mo ago
> everyone involved should lose re election and get investigated by the financial crimes unit The flawed assumption here is assuming elections are an exception to every other democratic process riddled with corruption and are operated fair and square, in general.

by tancop 4mo ago

tantalor 4mo ago

One idea I like is directly funding apprenticeship. It pays for job training and classroom instruction on a per-individual basis. The jobs are in long-term career sectors like advanced manufacturing, shipbuilding, aviation, healthcare, and technology. Here's one example: https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/osec/osec20250923 https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/osec/osec20250923 In Georgia, the employer is reimbursed $2,500 when an apprentice starts and up to $10,000 when they finish. They can also get up to 75% of the apprentice's hourly wage covered during their initial on-the-job training.

diogenescynic 4mo ago
[flagged]
- glenpierce 4mo ago
  The reason you never hear that is because waste and fraud are very low in reality. That’s why this made the news. It’s uncommon. We should be using the government to help people and when we do, it often does a good job. Examples: Roads, libraries, fire departments, schools, safety regulations…
  - coryrc 4mo ago
    Our public transportation infrastructure literally cost 10x per mile than France or Hong Kong. That's not waste to you? For what California has spent/is spending on high-speed rail from nowhere to nowhere, China blanketed their country? Notice you also left out police. How's our spending working there?
    - windows_hater_7 4mo ago
      I’d note that China does not need democratic approval for any of its projects and thus is substantially more efficient.
      - cindyllm 4mo ago
        [dead]
      - D_Alex 4mo ago
        And what lesson should be drawn from that?
        camgunz 4mo ago
        That it's easy to build things when you oppress and enslave people.
        throwaway85825 4mo ago
        We seem to get the worst of both.
      - coryrc 4mo ago
        We don't either. It's a Democratic Republic. Our electeds could do their job.
    - dgoldstein0 4mo ago
      California high speed rail has been a mess. Which is likely in part because politics dictating routes has raised the costs and timelines substantially. On a smaller scale SF was building a new subway in 2013 that had been on the drawing board for years. I remember thinking maybe I'd ride it to work one day. Opened in 2023 or 2024, after I had moved offices twice and then went to work from home. It's not a terrible line but because it had to go to the center of our Chinatown instead of 2 blocks over, it took quite a bit longer and became the deepest subway line in the city. Several other bits of stupidity too in that project but a big piece of the delayed timeline was that tunneling in SF is hard. Plenty of other transit projects exist that have made real differences. Personally I'm a fan of the simple improvements: revised bus routes with dedicated bus lanes and improved stop & shelters, added bike lanes, etc. those sorts of projects are relatively cheap investments and while no single one is a silver bullet they add up. On a bigger scale - Caltrain's electrification was a big win. Both kinds of projects are easier than building whole new tracks or digging new tunnels. Extend and improve the existing systems. Most cities have something to start from.
- ZenoArrow 4mo ago
  > I'd rather they just lower our taxes and quit squandering our money on these programs that never work. Would you support cutting military spending? It's a lot higher than other countries.
  - WalterBright 4mo ago
    > It's a lot higher than other countries. That's because the US also defends the free world. Besides, not spending enough on the military can get very, very expensive.
    - deaux 4mo ago
      > That's because the US also defends the free world. The US invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Iraq have sure helped defend the free world. How many trillions went into those combined? Fantastic return per $ of "free world defense".
      - paulddraper 4mo ago
        Don’t forget Ukraine!
        deaux 4mo ago
        Unfortunately Ukraine too is a rounding error compared to the invasions. It's negligible compared to Afghanistan on its own, let alone if you include Iraq.
      - WalterBright 4mo ago
        Consider all the US bases in Europe, there to defend Europe against Russia. And the bases in the Pacific and Japan. Greenland, too! When I lived in Germany in the 70s, we were driving on the Autobahn one day, and I saw a jet hedgehopping at full blast over the countryside. I asked my dad what was going on, and why didn't the Germans complain about it. (Hedgehopping is how you avoid radar detection.) He replied that the Germans didn't particularly like it, but they understood the reason for it. We were in Wiesbaden because my dad worked on the US base and their job was to ensure that there wasn't going to be nuclear combat toe to toe with the Russkies. Later on, we lived near Luke AFB in Arizona, where Luftwaffe pilots were trained. I'd ride my bike out to the flight line and watch those glorious F-104s blast off with their afterburners lit up.
SecretDreams 4mo ago
> One idea I like is directly funding apprenticeship. It pays for job training and classroom instruction on a per-individual basis. The jobs are in long-term career sectors like advanced manufacturing, shipbuilding, aviation, healthcare, and technology. This is basically what grad school does too. I'm into funding education further any day of the week. For higher education, I'd only add a string attached like "must practice trade in state that funded you if job is available for x years or must pay back funding pro rated".
winrid 4mo ago
You mean what companies used to do before we decided to import cheap labor instead?

betaby 4mo ago

> selectively giving away free money to big business is straight corruption Liberals in canada call that 'making housing affordable', https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/prime-minister-mark-carney-responds-vancouver-bc-condo-plan-9.7248862 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/prime-minist... It feels that in Canada business is impossible unless it's directly funded by the government.

ww520 4mo ago

It's straight corruption, no matter of big or small business. It should have been randomized blind selection of business who have existed for more than a year, and the granted money pays for new employees' taxes. Blind selection takes out the path to corruption (not who you know to get the fund). Randomized to be fair. Government is bad at picking winners or losers anyway. Business more than a year to screen out frauds. Granted money for new employees' taxes to encourage hiring new employees. Paying the taxes only so that the money can be spread out to more people.

browsingonly 4mo ago

> open competitive programs based on project quality This will never, ever happen. There will always be bonus points available, even if they're awarded to "conservative"-leaning feel-good attributes like veteran-owned sponsor businesses. These investments are likely to always fail at their declared purpose. Better to put the money towards free childcare and maybe trying to convince parents to read to their kids.

abirch 4mo ago
The government should limit innovation and direct resources to proven ROI spending such as free daycare, nutrition, and public infrastructure
neonstatic 4mo ago
> There will always be bonus points available, even if they're awarded to "conservative"-leaning feel-good attributes like veteran-owned sponsor businesses. Why are you singling out "conservative" causes?

diogenescynic 4mo ago

They're always handed out as political favors or lotteries at best. How is a lottery sustainable or scalable? These solutions do not work. It's at best virtue signaling and at worst corruption (as OP says).

paulddraper 4mo ago

Or —- hear me out —- create laws and tax policies compatible with growth, and apply them equally to everyone.

neya 4mo ago

> everyone involved should lose re election and get investigated by the financial crimes unit The flawed assumption here is assuming elections are an exception to every other democratic process riddled with corruption and are operated fair and square, in general.