It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Seattle Green Jobs Program Gets $20M, Creates 14 Posts

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Ain't that grand? Spend Waste $20 million on a green jobs program intended to weatherize homes in the Seattle area and you create a total of 14 jobs, most of them administrative. And the lordly sum of three houses get weatherized!:shk:

I certainly hope that more green jobs are not part of Obama's "jobs program" that we are waiting with bated breath for.


A green jobs program in one of America's greenest cities is being called a bust 16 months after a $20 million federal grant to weatherize homes in Seattle ended up putting just 14 people to work in mostly administrative jobs and upgrading only three homes in the area.

Green Jobs Scam


So who's getting rich with this scam? Obama's union cronies, of course:


Contractors who do the energy audits and home retrofits blame government for getting in the way. To be a participating business in Seattle, the contractor is required to pay workers $21 an hour with full benefits, including retirement pay. But according to several small business owners in the area, the prevailing wage for new workers who lay insulation is $12. per hour.


Guess what the keystone of his new jobs program will be? My guess? Another stimulus package!




posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
I predict little response to this thread. It seems that unless its an anti-Republican/tea party/conservative/libertarian thread, nobody really cares. I blame a mass media who has brain washed the public to think anything critical of Democrats is to be ignored.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Gannicus
 

I disagree with that. From what I've seen most of the members here lean more to the conservative side.
There probably won't be much response because this isn't much of a surprise to me at least. The Gov't wastes tons of money like this, and you won't see this in the MSM.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I heard about this a couple of weeks ago. I assumed there had already been discussion on it. Nobody here will care because I doubt many pay taxes so its just wasting other people's money and think its hilarious. The more debt and redistribution the better in their eyes.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


I didn't realize it was such an "old" story. Fox News published it just yesterday. It does, however, bring up several points should Obama ask for more stimulus money:

Were there any cost benefit studies done on these green jobs? Look at this:


But Myers and others say the biggest problem with the program is government is trying to create a market that consumers don't want. The average homeowner in the U.S. pays about $2,000 a year for energy.

The weatherization upgrades are aimed at saving 15 percent on energy consumption. If the retrofit costs $10,000 even with all the government incentives, it will take over 30 years to pay off through lower energy bills.



"The problem is the policies the politicians choose, whether green jobs or retrofits, are based on appearance," Myers said. "They choose things that look good, rather than what's best for the environment."


Image, not substance. Keep the enviro vote in your pocket.

And finally, a post mortem shows the program is an abject failue.


Among the other cities having trouble fulfilling the green jobs promise are Toledo, Kansas City and Phoenix. So far, those cities have created a combined 72 jobs with $65 million in grants.

The difficulty is magnified on the federal level. President Obama once said he wanted to create 5 million green jobs over 10 years. The 2009 stimulus package included $5 billion toward that goal.

A chunk of that money went for weatherization programs, but according to a Department of Energy inspector general report one year later, "only two of the 10 highest-funded recipients completed more than 2 percent of planned units."


But is anybody listening? Yep -- you can be sure the unions are!
edit on 30-8-2011 by mishigas because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 07:43 PM
link   
What all this doesn't say is how much was spent. I'm not going to bother to look it up because this stuff is spun like this all the time. It may have had 20 million allocated - but that doesn't mean that the money was distributed.

With out proof it is more faux outrage for the Lemmings. Just watch the freepers tear into this -- not one will ask -- can that be true -- not one.



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by mishigas
 


I need help getting one of these grants/contracts. Seriously, I've got a plan to do something similar, except it will actually work, and it will create hundreds of jobs, and impact hundreds of homes, and it will also impact the housing market and toxic bank debt drain. My price tag (before reading this thread) is $20M, and I've already got some groundwork laid for the project.

This thread has renewed my vigor to pursue my own plan!!!

Thanks OP!



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by spyder550
 



What all this doesn't say is how much was spent. I'm not going to bother to look it up because this stuff is spun like this all the time. It may have had 20 million allocated - but that doesn't mean that the money was distributed.

With out proof it is more faux outrage for the Lemmings. Just watch the freepers tear into this -- not one will ask -- can that be true -- not one.


So it makes a difference if it has all been spent or not?
Are you kidding???

What, they're gonna turn in any unused portion, and the feds are gonna use it to lower the deficit or some other noble thing?


Man, you're a riot!




top topics



 
2

log in

join