barthel:

… previous posts omitted …

Uh…well, sure, if you think that defecit spending in and of itself is a bad thing, then I guess it makes sense to be against public works projects.  But it’s not like they don’t desperately need to be done, recession or no recession.  There haven’t been any major public works projects in 40 years, which in many cases includes even upkeep.  Private industry isn’t going to take care of this.  If we can employ people while also reducing energy and transportation costs for the future, then cool, we can pay a little more money for it than whatever mythical private corporation engaged in building roads that would be free to the public would pay.  Again, this is only a problem if these programs work alone; while we’re employing people whose existing skill is in construction we can also provide incentives to get people into nursing or other areas where there’s a lower supply of labor (though, of course, this is the exact opposite problem we have right now, so I can see why it wouldn’t the biggest concern on policymakers’ minds).  And any new policy is legally required to be analyzed for economic efficiency, so I don’t know what it’s supposed to be about, exactly.  Making everything bad and wrong?  Well, OK, you can think that, but then why would I care about your opinions on public policy?

And fair enough about the stimulus checks, but what sort of aid should we be providing to non-construction workers?

Heh. I should start by saying that I’m not reblogging barthel just to argue with him (though it has provided me with some mental stimulus and enjoyment). I doubt I’d read him if I just disagreed with him. So, barthel, You make some excellent points, and I didn’t mean to irritate you. There are genuine infrastructure problems. I’m not so anti-government that I think the government should leave all infrastructure to private industry. But there’s no good reason for the government to pay extra for such projects either. There actually was a time when government jobs payed less than private industry jobs. For public work projects, that changed in 1931 with the Davis-Bacon act (other government jobs still paid less). Taxpayers are still burdened by this law. Public works projects should pay a discount. The job security alone should make that obvious.

These projects have been needed for years. The levees on the Sacramento river are a disaster waiting to happen. Popular Mechanics (or some such magazine) recently had a big issue on America’s failing infrastructure with many similar problems. But, if they were so important, why weren’t they funded when the government was increasing tax revenues? Instead, the government invested in massive waste. California split the responsibilities of their department of public health into two separate departments, and added a large number of jobs to accomplish the same goals. Now, the same amount of work gets done by twice the number of state employees, and the levees deteriorate for a few more years. More locally (and more quantifiable), the Santa Barbara local government has increased their permitting office staff an order of magnitude while the number of permits processed has remained the same. When the tax revenue starts to fall, the politicians cry that education must be cut. Why? Because tax hikes are easier to digest for education than for idle government employees elsewhere. When I see that kind of ridiculous waste going on for years, and the infrastructure crumbles the entire time, I have to ask “Why now?”

My argument isn’t that we don’t need infrastructure improvements. And while there are areas where I will argue against government over private industry, I won’t extend that argument to infrastructure projects. I’m not even arguing that now isn’t an acceptable time to fund the projects (though I question why it wasn’t acceptable years ago). But, I am arguing that now is not the time to pay above-market rates to subsidize an industry that is clearly experiencing an oversupply of labor.

As far as aid to non-construction workers, I don’t intend to solve their problems. If you do intend to solve their problems for them, I’d suggest retraining or education. I brought the whole thing up to make two points: 1) that the government has chosen to help one group of people over another, and 2) that the stimulus programs are going to be a lot less effective than the rosy forecasts predict. I made the first point because I don’t see why a construction worker is any more deserving than a chef, hair stylist, or veterinarian. I made the second point only to help educate people and help set their expectations. Or, I failed to make my points, and blame the fact that it’s a holiday.