Who came up with the idea that infrastructure spending could create Jobs ?, page

Who came up with the idea that infrastructure spending could create Jobs and put money in people's pockets and create demand I don't think it was Keynes/FDR because I think the idea has been around for a lot longer ?

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by mikejohnson2006

---

If you mean in terms of our modern economy it was pushed first by John Maynard Keynes right after the post-war depression following WW1, and also proposed several major pan-European works projects during the Treaty of Versailles .. he was larger scoffed at, at first anyways. During the Great Depression and the collapse of the treaty in which he served as adviser to, several countries adopted his ideas. Particularly Britain and the United States. The belief was that if the State spent money to put people to work, the income generated through public works would be spent in the private sector and thus fuel economic growth through consumer spending. The idea, at the time, was revolutionary. Prior to his theories governments usually tightened spending through austerity and created intentional deflation. Never before had a nation been able to print money and make a real economy without actually producing something.

reply to post by mikejohnson2006

---

Anyone backing their economic knowledge with Keynesian beliefs.

Make work projects at its best.

reply to post by sicksonezer0

---

The original Keynesian idea was not to have the corporate middle man, but the government be the direct employer (New Deal under FDR).

This neo-fascist idea is actually a perversion of Keynesian ideology, which as much as I hate Keynesian economics I have to admit this neo-fascist ideology is far, far worse. It creates the Tiered Economy Phenomenon, where gov spending sticks to the top tiered corporations involved in the projects and workers see very little .. the trickle down effect is nearly non-existent.

reply to post by Flatfish

---

There have been relatively few Federal infrastructure projects, usually the projects are taken on by states or cities.. in fact the last major infrastructure project was the Highway expansions in the 1980's. Everything else was completed by localities or corporations expanding their own business. The largest networks of our infrastructure are powerlines and telephone lines, which were completely built by corporations and still maintained by corporations, our power supply grid, again, privately built and maintained.. and the newest and potentially largest, the broadband/wireless infrastructure which is again .. privately built and maintained. Even our rail system is privately run, built and maintained. Well, Amtrack is technically a GSE. Also hospitals are usually privately owned, etc.. as are airports (or run by states/counties) And when a portion of forest is harvested around where I live who builds the roads to get the material, add turnouts and ramps onto highways etc? The corporations.



Government is not the answer...

reply to post by GoalPoster

---

The little guy is expected to go out, buy stuff and have no means to support it in the long run. The movers and shakers stash their dough and put it towards the hedge funds, stock market and other symbolic toilets of greed in this country and watch their riches siphoned out of the wallets of taxpayers grow exponentially.

They've been doing that for thousands of years.

The local resources get depleted.

The wealth gets transfered and never seems to return to the local areas.

Kadaffi did just that for the 40 years he was in power.

Libya's assets were/are all sitting in investment holding tanks in foreign countries.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Flatfish

---

There have been relatively few Federal infrastructure projects, usually the projects are taken on by states or cities.. in fact the last major infrastructure project was the Highway expansions in the 1980's. Everything else was completed by localities or corporations expanding their own business. The largest networks of our infrastructure are powerlines and telephone lines, which were completely built by corporations and still maintained by corporations, our power supply grid, again, privately built and maintained.. and the newest and potentially largest, the broadband/wireless infrastructure which is again .. privately built and maintained. Even our rail system is privately run, built and maintained. Well, Amtrack is technically a GSE. Also hospitals are usually privately owned, etc.. as are airports (or run by states/counties) And when a portion of forest is harvested around where I live who builds the roads to get the material, add turnouts and ramps onto highways etc? The corporations.

Government is not the answer...

Oh, Really? Ever heard of railroad land grants? Here's a little article that may enlighten you as to the real history behind who actually paid for the construction of our first transcontinental railroad;
www.coxrail.com...

The first large land grants came about with the Pacific Railroad Act of 1862
As best I can tell, the first major railroad land grants originated with the 1862 legislation that enabled the transcontinental railroad. At that time, the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads were granted 400-foot right-of-ways plus ten square miles of land for every mile of track built.

For the land grant system to work as planned, the government wanted railroads to sell their land to help pay for the construction of rail lines.

To further help with construction, the government loaned 30-year bonds to the companies which they were required to repay with interest. The government set up a scheme where the companies would be loaned $16,000 per mile for construction across flat land, $32,000 per mile for hilly terrain, and $48,000 per mile for mountain construction.

The Pacific Railroad Act of 1864
It became apparent almost immediately that parts of the 1862 law needed reworking. Because the railroad was so absolutely crucial to the United States, Congress somehow revised the law in the middle of the Civil War.
The Act of 1864 revised several problematic issues, the land grants among them. The 1864 act enlarged land grants from ten to twenty miles of alternating sections on either side of the tracks. Next, it granted full rights to all the minerals underneath all that land.

Over time, parts of most of the land grants became immensely valuable. As western Nebraska was settled, and as the Sierras were developed, both the UP and the CP benefited enormously from selling their land grants. And the Union Pacific benefited dramatically from the huge coal reserves it acquired in Wyoming. Until dieselization in the mid-1950s, the UP mined large tonnages of coal for use in its own steam engines.

Or, how about the "Gadsden Purchase," ever heard of that?

en.wikipedia.org...

The Gadsden Purchase (known as Venta de La Mesilla, or Sale of La Mesilla, in Mexico[2]) is a 29,670-square-mile (76,800 km2) region of present-day southern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico that was purchased by the United States in a treaty signed by James Gadsden, the American ambassador to Mexico at the time, on December 30, 1853. It was then ratified, with changes, by the U.S. Senate on April 25, 1854 and signed by President Franklin Pierce, with final approval action taken by Mexico on June 8, 1854. The purchase was the last major territorial acquisition in the contiguous United States, adding a large area to the United States.
The purchase included lands south of the Gila River and west of the Rio Grande. The Gadsden Purchase was for the purpose of the US's construction of a transcontinental railroad along a deep southern route.

Also, I'm having trouble tracking down which private power company built the Hoover Dam, could you help me with that one? Or maybe you could provide me with the name of an american nuclear power plant that's not insured by the federal government. (because no one else will take on the liability)

Like Elizabeth Warren said, none of these big companies got where they are by themselves.

reply to post by xuenchen

---

Yeah the big boys get all the funds and the rest will be left blowing in the wind there was a state highway near where i live they call it a strip was a major shopping district.

It was in major disrepair and the local boys asked for state for permission to revamp it they gave up ownership rights and the city did one hell of a job of reconstruction.

All footed by them and not the Feds which makes the biggest point of this post the people dont own the roads and bridges and what not the State Government does which means just another bailout for the state off the backs of people who do not even live there.

This is maddening.

reply to post by Flatfish

---

Oh, Really? Ever heard of railroad land grants? Here's a little article that may enlighten you as to the real history behind who actually paid for the construction of our first transcontinental railroad;

Yes, the Government granted then land with no intrinsic value (never been settled, unreachable) and granted LOANS to have the railroad built, which were repaid.

Or, how about the "Gadsden Purchase," ever heard of that?

What does that have to do with infrastructure? We also purchased much of the Western United States, we also purchased Alaska. Mmkay, and?

Also, I'm having trouble tracking down which private power company built the Hoover Dam, could you help me with that one?

It was built by a company called Six Companies, Inc

Morrison-Knudsen Co., Utah Construction Co., J. F. Shea Co., Pacific Bridge Co., MacDonald & Kahn Ltd. and a joint venture of W. A. Bechtel Co., Henry J. Kaiser, and Warren Brothers. The reason these construction companies got together was simple: no single construction company could raise the $5 million needed to secure the performance bond.

The Hoover Dam itself was actually mortgaged to rate users, at a cost of $140 million dollars, the rates of home owners and businesses that get power from the dam paid a portion of the rate to the Treasury .. it was paid off in 1987.

Or maybe you could provide me with the name of an american nuclear power plant that's not insured by the federal government.

It's insured and regulated by the Government because of how dangerous the facilities can be.. hypothetically if a plant had a meltdown that company would cease to operate?

Anyways, yes the Government in the past has LOANED money for a major infrastructure projects.. but NEVER in our history have we thrown money at so many projects in the form of grants .. it is the height of asinine stupidity. I wouldn't have a problem with it at all if the cities and states that benefit from this had to repay it, but then again cities and states wouldn't likely take the debt burden just to repave a road that in all likeliness doesn't even need to be repaved.

Economically, that is economic principles, the governments actions make no sense at all.

Exclusive - Obama\'s Literary Agent in 1991 Booklet: \'Born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Haw
  Posted 12 days ago with 242 member flags

Ron Paul is NOT dropping out, the Mainstream Media is LYING.
  Posted 15 days ago with 111 member flags

Report: Romney Will Be Disqualified From Race Due To Fraud
  Posted 18 days ago with 105 member flags

Evidence of Vote Flipping in GOP Primary Elections
  Posted 7 days ago with 88 member flags

CNN Asks Ron Paul To Drop Out & Endorse Romney Despite His Chances To Win
  Posted 19 days ago with 70 member flags

Fox News Analyst: First American to shoot down drone will be a hero
  Posted 14 days ago with 68 member flags

Mitt Romney scared Ron Paul is winning!!!
  Posted 7 days ago with 62 member flags

Let\'s just say it: Political Parties are the Problem
  Posted 12 days ago with 60 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: