Metro Jacksonville

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=worldwide&sid=aBcPiaRqqffg (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&refer=worldwide&sid=aBcPiaRqqffg)

Obama Plans Largest Building Program Since 1950s (Update1)

By Hans Nichols

Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- President-elect Barack Obama said he’ll make the “single largest new investment” in roads, bridges and public buildings since the Eisenhower Administration to lift the sagging economy and create jobs.

Obama, in his weekly radio speech today, said his plan to create or preserve 2.5 million jobs will also include making public buildings more energy efficient, repairing schools and modernizing health care with electronic medical records.

“We won’t just throw money at the problem,” he said. “We’ll measure progress by the reforms we make and the results we achieve -- by the jobs we create, by the energy we save, by whether America is more competitive in the world.”

Obama spoke a day after a government report showed employers in the U.S. slashed 533,000 jobs last month, the biggest decline in 34 years. The losses are “another painful reminder of the serious economic challenge our country is facing,” Obama said.

The speech offered the first details of Obama’s job- creation program. He said the investment in infrastructure will be the largest since President Dwight D. Eisenhower created the interstate highway system a half-century ago.

“When Congress reconvenes in January, I look forward to working with them to pass a plan immediately,” he said. Obama takes office as the 44th president on Jan. 20.

Congressional Democrats

With the economy heading toward the longest and deepest recession since World War II, pressure is rising for a spending program that will create new jobs. Congressional Democrats have said they will send Obama an economic stimulus package as soon as he takes office. New York Senator Charles Schumer late last month put the size of such a program at between $500 billion and $700 billion.

In addition to investing in infrastructure, requiring energy standards on public buildings and updating health-care practices, Obama said that he will start a “sweeping effort to modernize and upgrade school buildings” and will boost broadband access across America.

To the states that will be the conduits for the funding, he had a simple message: “use it or lose it.”

“If a state doesn’t act quickly to invest in roads and bridges in their communities, they’ll lose the money,” he said.

Obama’s plan to make public buildings more energy efficient should reduce the government’s energy bill, which he called the highest in the world. He plans to replace heating systems and install energy-efficient light bulbs.

Internet Upgrade

Obama also plans to upgrade Internet infrastructure, calling it “unacceptable that the United States ranks 15th in the world in broadband adoption.”

Upgrading health care is the final component of the plan. By introducing new technology and electronic medical records, he said health-care workers could “prevent medical mistakes, and help save billions of dollars each year.”

Obama, in Chicago for the weekend, has no public events scheduled for today. Tomorrow, he will mark the anniversary of the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor with a news conference in Chicago, according to a statement from his transition team.

Obama will announce his choice to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs at the news conference, according to a Democratic aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

To contact the reporter on this story: Hans Nichols in Chicago at hnichols2@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: December 6, 2008 15:12 EST

http://www.youtube.com/v/iGpIT2bVZDw&hl=en&fs=1

Hope he knows where all the money is going to come from to initiate all of these things on his "shopping list."  Anyway, sounds good on paper.

Heights Unknown

After attending meetings, meetings and more meetings about the need for increased mass transit funding, I wonder if we'll ever get past the "talking a good game" stage.  In any event, I can't say this isn't unexpected.  But it may be another missed opportunity to create a more livable Jacksonville.  It will be interesting to see what type of projects our peer cities end up pushing for.

QuoteJacksonville's mayor wants to get projects attached to federal infrastructure program.

In addition to relying on local funding, I will be working with congressional leaders to seek federal funding under the much-talked-about federal economic stimulus plan.

President-elect Barack Obama has announced a two-year plan to save or create more than 2.5 million jobs, specifically mentioning the need to put Americans to work rebuilding roads and infrastructure.

I believe that with strong advocacy on the part of our delegation, Jacksonville will be able to benefit from this plan, creating both necessary infrastructure improvements and jobs.

full article: http://www.jacksonville.com/news/metro/2008-12-07/peyton_adjust_to_new_realities

The $100 Million Peyton is seeking for infrastructure improvement, is this possibly coming from the Obama plan to improve national infrastructure, transportation, highways, etc.? Or is Peyton planning on increasing the bed tax, or sales taxes in Duval County?

"Heights"

This is something the country desperately needs right now. I have faith our elected officials will fight hard to secure funds for Northeast Florida. We're a gateway to one of the most important States in the Union, and a strategic military center. We stand to benefit from this.

Quote
We won’t just throw money at the problem,” he said. “We’ll measure progress by the reforms we make and the results we achieve -- by the jobs we create, by the energy we save, by whether America is more competitive in the world.”

I'm sorry, but I fail to see how this is anything other than throwing money at a problem.

A broadband expansion is nothing more than a vanity project. We don't NEED broadband usage rates that compare to countries with 2% of our total land area. This is more along the lines of an emotional, feel-good policy, rather than any kind of useful economic engine.

I don't think I need to remind people - on this forum of all places - why additional investment in our bloated interstate highway system is an awful idea.

Making public buildings energy efficient and repairing old bridges sounds like a nice idea. But it could be done well, or it could be done poorly. Only time will tell which happens. It would indeed be "throwing money at the problem" if we start replacing our old bridges with over-engineered monstrosities that cost 5x what they should - all in the pursuit of enhanced traffic flow.

Think of all the new jobs Obama will create installing compact fluorescent light bulb in public buildings.   ::)

That is very weak.

Public buildings already have fluorescent bulbs.

Not compact, energy-efficient ones.

Are you joking?

I just don't care.

Quote from: Lunican on December 09, 2008, 10:46:20 AM
Public buildings already have fluorescent bulbs.

It was a joke.  The point is "greening" public buildings will have no tangible positive effect on the economy.  Anyone who believes this might also believe that you can run cars on dandelions.  It is really a concept worthy of ridicule.

So is it safe to assume that you won't be investing in double flush toilets any time soon?

Quote from: thelakelander on December 09, 2008, 03:40:26 PM
So is it safe to assume that you won't be investing in double flush toilets any time soon?

I already flush my toilets twice for the heck of it.   :P

The long-term benefit of making government buildings more energy efficienct isn't just to reduce environmental impact, it is to REDUCE ongoing, government expenditures. In theory, long term annual savings could be achieved, thus allowing the savings to go back to taxpayers or at least into something else such as parks, schools, etc.

What exactly makes that a bad idea?  The fact that Sarah Palin didn't think of it?

Typical liberal quip at the end there, vic. Oh wait, you're an independent.

Nevermind...one in the same.

How often do we have to explain this? The long term savings with these ideas are a drop in the bucket compared to what should be done. But the perception has been created, and you and others have bought into it.

Quote from: Charleston native on December 09, 2008, 03:59:55 PM
Typical liberal quip at the end there, vic. Oh wait, you're an independent.

Nevermind...one in the same.

How often do we have to explain this? The long term savings with these ideas are a drop in the bucket compared to what should be done. But the perception has been created, and you and others have bought into it.

I just want to know what so called conservatives hate about creating savings in government.     

What would you have him do instead?  What would provide short-term stimulus, which everyone acknowledges is needed in some form, but would also provide a long-term benefit independent of any short-term stimulus?  Let's hear your alternatives.

QuoteIt will be interesting to see what type of projects our peer cities end up pushing for.

Bumpier ride ahead for Charlotte mass transit
Will money from half-cent sales tax be enough?

By Steve Harrison
sharrison@charlotteobserver.com

Posted: Friday, Dec. 05, 2008


Charlotte transit officials have long said the half-cent sales tax could build a network across all corners of Mecklenburg: A commuter rail line to Lake Norman. A busway down Independence Boulevard. A Lynx Blue Line extension to University City. A streetcar from the airport to Eastland Mall.

But a year after voters decided to keep the transit tax, and after light rail debuted, the Charlotte Area Transit System is unsure that it can build the rapid transit system it promised.

CATS is grappling with short-term problems such as this summer's spike in gas prices, which hurt the transit system's fuel budget, and the weak economy, which is depressing sales tax revenue. The N.C. Department of Transportation has said it will slash its transit funding to CATS by as much as 12 percent.

Former CATS chief executive Ron Tober, who created the long-range transportation plan in 2006, said his plan is now too ambitious, given the economy and this decade's sharp rise in the cost of materials.

“The big question is now: Will the half-cent sales tax make it? How much money can you count on from the feds and the state?” Tober said. “Given the current economic situation, the previous assumptions need to be revisited. 2006 is an eternity ago.”

In the meantime, CATS is still moving forward with the light-rail extension, commuter train and streetcar. This spring, when more engineering work is finished, CATS officials will have a better idea of what can be built.

Before the bottom fell out of the economy in September, there were discussions inside CATS and among elected officials about whether to ask voters for more money. The idea was to build the entire system as quickly as possible, because rapid inflation in construction prices was threatening to make some projects too costly and unbuildable.

CATS chief executive Keith Parker has discussed seeking more money as a possibility, but he hasn't actively promoted it yet. It's unlikely any new tax would be approved in the next year while the economy is in turmoil.

But Charlotte City Council member Anthony Foxx said more money will eventually be needed.

“Presumably we will pull out of this ditch we are in,” said Foxx, a Democrat who has said he will for mayor in 2009. “And we will still be a growing state, and a growing city. We can't afford to stay still.”

Foxx said the success of the Lynx â€" averaging more than 16,000 weekday trips â€" has shown that Charlotteans will use rail transit.

“There is a high demand for fixed-rail transit in this community,” Foxx said. “When you look at the economic development possibilities, the mobility it brings. It's very important for us to do everything we can to accelerate it.”

Funding for transit

Transit skeptics have acknowledged the Lynx's success, exceeding its first-year ridership projection of 9,100.

But they believe CATS will eventually have to ask for more money â€" something they said would happen, when the transit tax was being debated.

“The train, you can argue, has worked out well,” said former county commissioner Jim Puckett, who led an effort to repeal the tax. “But the financing was never a good idea. As a county commissioner, I used to ask Ron Tober: ‘Is the sales tax sufficient?' And he always said it would be.”

The transit sales tax was projected to grow at a rate of 5.75 percent annually. Atlanta's transit tax grew at a similar rate over the past 30 years, which included the deep recession in the early 1980s.

CATS projected the local transit tax would generate $75million this year. It's possible it could produce only $70million â€" giving CATS less money to spend on capital projects. CATS is worried the sales tax may fall short of projections for several years.

The entire transit plan was projected in 2006 to cost $9 billion to build and operate over 30 years.

Parker, who succeeded Tober last December, hasn't created a new transit plan because he's waiting until engineers give him a better idea of how much the commuter train and Lynx extension will cost. But Parker has repeatedly warned members of the Metropolitan Transit Commission that some bad news might be coming.

While there are a number of variables that could hinder CATS' expansion plans, the transit agency does face another prospect.

The Obama administration is planning a massive infrastructure stimulus package, which will likely include money for transit. Others believe that, as president, Barack Obama will make a long-term commitment to transit, increasing the amount of money available for new rail projects through the Federal Transit Administration's New Starts program.

CATS believes the success of the Lynx Blue Line will help its case for more federal money.

And the massive increases in the cost of materials, such as steel and concrete, have stopped with the slowing economy. The cost of buying land isn't expected to increase in the near future either.

“In the long term, there is good and bad,” Parker said. “If the sales tax stays in its current state for a prolonged period, it will cost us tens of millions of dollars for the next 10 years. On the optimistic side, we have been hearing very favorable things from Washington.”

Rail projects in the works

Unsure of what it will build next â€" and what the federal government will fund â€" CATS is working on building three new rail projects.

The northeast extension of the Lynx to the University City area is the most expensive â€" and the one completely dependent on help from the federal government.

CATS believes the 11-mile line will cost about $900 million, and it's hoping the Federal Transit Administration will pay 50 percent of the costs, with Raleigh paying 25 percent. CATS started engineering work on the extension in March and plans to reassess in the spring whether the project is still feasible.

The federal government currently has about $1.6 billion annually for the New Starts program, which funds rapid transit projects. Even if the Obama administration increases that by 50 percent or 100 percent, Charlotte will still have competition for the money.

If federal funding falls through for the Lynx extension, the chances of building the entire 11-mile segment are nil. CATS could build a small part of the line, to NoDa or Sugar Creek.

The commuter train to the Lake Norman area isn't eligible for federal funding, though it's possible the Obama administration could make it easier for commuter trains to qualify for federal money.

CATS has completed six months of engineering work on the train and hasn't found any significant design changes. The train is expected to cost between $250 million and $300 million, and could open in 2013.

If the Lynx extension hits a snag, the north corridor could be built within CATS' current budget. It's unlikely CATS can build the extension and the commuter train at the same time.

Parker said Monday that he thinks the commuter train could qualify for federal stimulus money. Some of the work on the line â€" such as improved grade crossings â€" could start immediately.

The commuter train would still need some financial help from the Lake Norman towns. Cornelius and Davidson have supported the train, but some members of the Huntersville Town Board are skeptical.

The city of Charlotte has taken the lead on building a streetcar through central Charlotte. It has been discussing a number of ways to pay for the train, including an assessment on property owners who would benefit from the streetcar.

The federal government doesn't fund streetcars, but some CATS officials are hopeful the Obama administration will make them eligible for federal grants. But that might not help CATS, either: There are dozens of streetcar projects throughout the country. Each would want a slice of pie.

If CATS were to seek additional funds, it would have a number of options.

The General Assembly last year gave counties the right to levy a quarter-cent sales tax for any purpose. With voter approval, that money could be funneled to CATS, or split between CATS and roads, or a number of other possibilities, such as parks.

The city or county could ask voters to approve bonds, which would help build train lines â€" but wouldn't provide long-term funding to operate them.

Quote from: vicupstate on December 09, 2008, 04:23:05 PM

Quote from: Charleston native on December 09, 2008, 03:59:55 PM
Typical liberal quip at the end there, vic. Oh wait, you're an independent.

Nevermind...one in the same.

How often do we have to explain this? The long term savings with these ideas are a drop in the bucket compared to what should be done. But the perception has been created, and you and others have bought into it.

I just want to know what so called conservatives hate about creating savings in government.     

What would you have him do instead?  What would provide short-term stimulus, which everyone acknowledges is needed in some form, but would also provide a long-term benefit independent of any short-term stimulus?  Let's hear your alternatives.

No one is opposed to saving money for the taxpayers.  However, this was billed as a set of initiatives to help the economy.  That wont happen with this.

Alternatives to stimulate the economy?  Here are a few which would actually work:
1)  Reduce corporate tax rate to 10%
2)  Eliminate capital gains tax for 2 years
3)  Give $5,000 tax credit for purchase of American car
4)  Eliminate mark to market accounting rule
5)  Continue efforts to increase liquidity in the financial markets by having Fed keep purchasing mortgage backed securities on secondary markets.

Of course, across the board income tax cuts would greatly help also but that might be too much to hope for. 

River...some of those tactics (or things like it) were tried over the last 8 years....and how did that work out?

The fact is nobody is going to buy an American car with a $5,000 tax credit if they don't have enough $ to pay for the rest of the car....the economic stimulus needs to get people working so they can buy things....and infrastructure investement (including modernizing federal buildings) does just that.

But don't worry....we're not talking about all new jobs being givernment jobs....most will be private consultants and contractors....I can tell you for a fact that the companies in my industry are paying very close attention!

Vic, I figured a few of our peers would take advantage of the new administration's view towards mass transit.  I fear Jax won't despite decades long cries of not enough funding to pay for mass transit enhancements.  Here is our chance to make a change instead of focusing only on more road construction.

remembert that the issue in the short-term is projects that are "ready to go"....like most cities, Jacksonville doesn't have many transit projects that fit this requirement.

In the long-term, we'll have to see what the regional long-range plan reveals....that is where any philosophical change will show up.

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 09, 2008, 04:57:58 PM
River...some of those tactics (or things like it) were tried over the last 8 years....and how did that work out?

None of those solutions have been tried. 

My postscript, income tax cuts, was tried though and it help set off a multi-year economic expansion.

Meanwhile, existing infrastructure spending doesnt seem to be stimulating anything:

QuoteInfrastructure Spending Is No Cure-All   [Larry Kudlow]

A lot of people on Wall Street are praising Obama’s infrastructure plan for roads, highways, tunnels, schools, green tech, and other build-outs. But they don’t know that in 2008 alone the U.S. spent $114 billion on infrastructure, following $102 billion in 2007. Didn’t do much for growth did it?

Over the past five years infrastructure spending domestically for non-defense comes to nearly $500 billion, with another $500 billion spent on defense-related infrastructure. But an academic study from the University of Chicago argues that government spending does not stimulate jobs and growth, and in fact crowds out private investment. Infrastructure spending also doesn’t create permanent new businesses, jobs, or incomes.

What Wall Street may be missing is that only a permanent change in tax-rate incentives â€" such as slashing the corporate tax â€" will reignite investment and job creation. Governments don’t create new technologies or new risk-taking. For that matter they also don’t create the new profits that are so essential to private enterprise. In the short-run, infrastructure building appears to create jobs. But these are not permanent.

The Obama package is unbalanced by relying on this infrastructure business without any real permanent reductions in tax rates or business cash-expensing for investment. That’s why the Obama plan needs to be changed.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDg4N2IwMWI5NGVmNDBkZTBhZjFlOWRkZjkxNDU3MDk=

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 09, 2008, 07:15:42 PM
remembert that the issue in the short-term is projects that are "ready to go"....like most cities, Jacksonville doesn't have many transit projects that fit this requirement.

In the long-term, we'll have to see what the regional long-range plan reveals....that is where any philosophical change will show up.

I'd encourage the city to think outside the box to get bigger bang for the buck.  Projects worth pursuing include the Jax Transportation Center, an Amtrak Corridor Service, Courthouse funding, Convention Center improvements/relocation, BRT phase one improvements, one way/two way street conversions, "town center" streetscape projects across various neighborhoods, Hogans Creek environmental cleanup/park restoration, etc.  Investment made in these areas will stimulate the local economy more than many of the unfunded BJP projects.  Its depressing to see that outside of the courthouse, ever other thing on the city's list appears to revolve around roads.

On TV last night, they showed what looked like a paper copy of an Infrastructure Stimulus list, has anyone seen the list?  A quick look at the Mayor's page at COJ.NET and I didn't see it - just his December 1st announcement.

River...

Tax cuts blew a hole in the deficit and led to a rising national debt....and that problem is a large part of the current crisis....people saw the U.S. government spending more than they brought in, and thought "why not me".

If you need proof of how this relates, check out the growth in the economy and stock market that occured in the late 1990's as we erased the deficit created during the Reagan/Bush years.

As for your assertion that infrastructure spending will not stimulate the economy, how about this statement...

"Although our national economic woes continue, there seems to be some very positive news for our industry. We’ve all heard the media reports about an economic stimulus package. Now our industry sources are confirming that President-elect Obama’s stimulus package will include a large component for infrastructure. Although it will be early 2009 before we know the details, we are confident it will positively impact virtually every part of our business."

It comes from our company's President!

You have implied that the tax cuts of 2001 may have prevented the collapse from happening sooner (not that I agree with that)...but perhaps the same could be said for infrastructure spending over the last 5 years.

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 09, 2008, 07:15:42 PM
remembert that the issue in the short-term is projects that are "ready to go"....like most cities, Jacksonville doesn't have many transit projects that fit this requirement.

In the long-term, we'll have to see what the regional long-range plan reveals....that is where any philosophical change will show up.

Thats going to be a major problem with this stimulas package.  By the time the design gets done, all the environmental objections and requirements are met, and contracts actually let it will be at best a year before this gets started.  Who knows what the economy may be like then, the whole package may not be required.  And don't even get me started on his stupid computer on every classroom proposal.

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 10, 2008, 08:07:20 AM
River...

Tax cuts blew a hole in the deficit and led to a rising national debt....and that problem is a large part of the current crisis....people saw the U.S. government spending more than they brought in, and thought "why not me".

It was spending increases, not tax cuts, which caused the deficit.  Federal tax receipts increased in the years following the Bush tax cuts.  This is a fact.

QuoteIf you need proof of how this relates, check out the growth in the economy and stock market that occured in the late 1990's as we erased the deficit created during the Reagan/Bush years.

I agree that setting the stage for economic growth is the best way to increase federal tax receipts and this should then lower the deficit if spending is held in check (as with the Republican Congresses of the late 1990s).  The point is that Obama's proposals will not do this.  His proposals are for more spending which will not increase economic activity in a meaningful way but which will increase the deficit.

why won't Obama's ideas stimulate economic activity?

Charlie Crist is requesting $7 billion in transportation/infrastructure funding....and he says that will create around 200,000 new jobs!

Such a deal...

1.  Crist (from St. Pete) + FDOT = Massive road building projects
2.  Peyton + JTA = Massive road building projects
3.  Diaz + Miami = Streetcar - Commuter Rail - DPM - Heavy Rail - BRT - Road Improvements

Q - Which one is from a world class city?

OCKLAWAHA

Does anyone have a link to the State's list?  I'm finding bits and pieces from certain cities, but no major list.  Its interesting to see what different places have as their priorities.  For example, Lakeland wants to spend $124 million to build energy-efficient schools along with 52 hybrid and 52 low-emission liquid propane buses.  I wonder what's the State's priorities for Florida's major metropolitan areas?

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 10, 2008, 06:43:39 PM
why won't Obama's ideas stimulate economic activity?

Charlie Crist is requesting $7 billion in transportation/infrastructure funding....and he says that will create around 200,000 new jobs!

He is wrong too.  This just goes to show that Crist is not a conservative.

BTW, this "solution" has been tried before in Japan.  It did not work there to stimulate the economy either.  Note that I am not saying that reasonable infrastructure spending is not bad, just that it is not effective at stimulating the economy and that other methods are far more effective although not consistent with Democrat Party dogma.  Read more here about Japan's experience:

QuoteThe Perils of a Cement Tsunami
   
By Amity Shlaes
Wednesday, December 10, 2008; Page A25

President-elect Barack Obama put forward a plan this week for the largest government infrastructure project in a half-century. The idea is to revive the economy and create jobs for America's unemployed. But huge public works projects often fail to revive national economies. Consider the example of Japan in the 1990s.

The situation in Japan then was similar in some ways to that in the United States today. A dramatic market crash and a plunge in real estate prices shook what had been a confident nation. Japan turned inward; economists talked earnestly about paradigm shifts. The obsession with exporting no longer seemed to be serving the country well. Leaders cast aside their previous concerns about budget deficits. The then-Ministry of International Trade and Industry sorrowfully let it be known that there were "areas in which Japan lags behind major developed nations."

One such area was infrastructure -- even though Japan is so often rocked by earthquakes that it tends to operate in Katrina mode: always fortifying for a meteorological or geological crisis. The central and local governments began spending billions of yen on construction. In short, Japan traded its export complex for an edifice complex.

The projects were similar to some infrastructure plans under discussion here today. Bridges? Japan put up the longest suspension bridge in the world. Airports? Kansai International, yes, on an artificial island, but also local fields such as Ibaraki Airport near Mito. Roads? Japan built new streets and highways, including the famous New Tomei Expressway. For biotech and telecommunications, Japan poured out the subsidies.

When one plan proved insufficient, another was begun. In 1999, Japan announced a scheme to create 700,000 jobs, much as Obama recently announced a plan to create or save 2.5 million jobs. As with the U.S. example, politicians were precise about the number of new jobs . . . and less precise about their cost. Between 1992 and 2000, the Japanese launched 10 stimulus packages that included public works. The Land of the Rising Sun became the Construction State. Other worthy issues, such as consistent tax reform, lagged. In fact, fiscal reform overall was postponed. After the 1995 Kobe earthquake claimed thousands of lives, the focus on infrastructure was reinforced.

Some of these projects were valuable, some risible. As Bloomberg News recently reported, Japan Airlines Corp. and All Nippon Airways, which run nearly all flights within Japan, don't even expect to fly to the Ibaraki Airport. With the Japanese turning to trains, the New Tomei Expressway seemed a waste.

The spending yielded painfully little for the rest of the economy. The Nikkei stayed down. The country's standard of living failed to keep pace with the rest of the world's. The average Japanese's purchasing power had been moving closer to that of the average American, Ronald Utt of the Heritage Foundation has noted. But in the 1990s the Japanese saw few advances. The gap between America and Japan widened again.

"The construction state is in some respects akin to the military-industrial complex in cold-war America (or the Soviet Union), sucking in the country's wealth, consuming it inefficiently, growing like a cancer and bequeathing both fiscal crisis and environmental devastation," commented Gavan McCormack, a professor at the Australian National University. The stimulus plans had the opposite effect of what was expected. Appalled at the country's new deficits, Japanese consumers closed their wallets.

Worst, though, was the failure on jobs. Unemployment fell in many nations in the 1990s. In Japan, the '90s were a lost decade: The unemployment rate more than doubled and surpassed the U.S. rate -- an unthinkable occurrence just a few years earlier.

Even today, Japan is having trouble climbing out of its cement pit. At its high, in the mid-1990s, infrastructure spending accounted for 6 percent of its gross domestic product, double what the United States allocated for infrastructure in the '90s and still higher than what politicians are considering spending today. In estimates of national debt, the world's second-largest national economy is near the top of the list, perched between Lebanon and Jamaica. Last year, Japan's public debt was far greater than the size of its economy, a burden that makes its demographic challenges more difficult to address.

What lessons should the United States take away? It is wrong to assume that construction will guarantee a two-fer for the economy -- shining structures and redemptive growth. The private sector is often better than politicians at guessing what the market needs. And infrastructure projects demand so much political energy that there's too little energy left over for everything else. Congress might want to remember all this as it debates infrastructure funding in the coming months. An edifice complex seems more likely to petrify a country than to move it forward.

Amity Shlaes, a senior fellow in economic history at the Council on Foreign Relations, is the author of "The Forgotten Man," a history of the 1930s.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/09/AR2008120902785.html

Quote from: Ocklawaha on December 10, 2008, 08:12:05 PM
Such a deal...

1.  Crist (from St. Pete) + FDOT = Massive road building projects
2.  Peyton + JTA = Massive road building projects
3.  Diaz + Miami = Streetcar - Commuter Rail - DPM - Heavy Rail - BRT - Road Improvements

Q - Which one is from a world class city?

OCKLAWAHA

really...none of the above!

The $7 billion referenced by Crist is from AASHTO...here is the press release

http://news.transportation.org/press_release.aspx?Action=ViewNews&NewsID=202 (http://news.transportation.org/press_release.aspx?Action=ViewNews&NewsID=202)

their website might have the survey detail itself.

BTW....take note of the footnote at the bottom that says every $1.25 billion in spending creates 35,000 jobs....that's from FHWA...so extrapolated for Florida, that would be 196,000 jobs.

Sorry River...But I trust FHWA and AASHTO a lot more than you on the relationship between transportation construction and jobs!

Thanks for the link.  The only rail project for Florida is $26 million for Miami's Intermodal Center.  I wonder why JTA's Transportation Center is not on the list?  have we already secured all the funding needed?

The states requesting the most rail money are:

$327,000,000  Illinois
$312,200,000  California (includes 10,000,000 for Amtrak's capital Corridor)
$220,750,000  North Carolina
$137,485,000  Wisconsin
$121,700,000  Washington
$110,000,000  Louisiana (a rail line between Baton Rouge and New Orleans)

http://www.s4prc.org/inthenews/2008news/stimulus_2.pdf

Quote
Thats going to be a major problem with this stimulas package.  By the time the design gets done, all the environmental objections and requirements are met, and contracts actually let it will be at best a year before this gets started.  Who knows what the economy may be like then, the whole package may not be required.

From what I have read, the emphasis will be on shovel-ready projects (ie only the funding is lacking, not the design, or approvals).  Also, states that don't spend the money within a period of time will lose it.  Of course, all of that can be easier said than done. 

From an article I read on the # of ready-to-go projects for the stimulus....this has been presented by the Governors to Obama last week, and does include Florida.

"Transit officials have identified 736 ready-to-go projects nationwide, valued at $12.2 billion, that would create more than 40,000 jobs if federal money is made available"

The question....Is there anything on the list from JTA?

I think Ock posted them here...

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,4042.msg60561.html#msg60561

JTA is listed under
BRT - Waste of tax payer dollars
Ridership - Reference the average JTA ridership projection/.25= actual riders
Transit Oriented Development- Hotel by transit funded parking garage
Current Mass Transit -  Mostly empty buses that cause more traffic congestion by stopping every two blocks than they relieve by transporting people that don't have cars.

I'm amazed that so much of the MSM seems to regard this plan as a panacaea. I would remind readers that the Japanese spent the better part of the 1990's paving their island to the point there is scarcely a blade of grass remaining. All they have to show for their efforts are a lot proverbial bridges to nowhere and a crippling public debt (around 140% of GDP, or roughly twice as large as US public debt). I'm not opposed to well-thought out infrastructure projects...I just think expectations are way too high.

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 11, 2008, 11:15:02 AM
BTW....take note of the footnote at the bottom that says every $1.25 billion in spending creates 35,000 jobs....that's from FHWA...so extrapolated for Florida, that would be 196,000 jobs.

Sorry River...But I trust FHWA and  a lot more than you on the relationship between transportation construction and jobs!

I did not say that spending massive sums of money we do not have on make work projects would not produce some jobs.  What I said was that these would be created at the expense of other private sector jobs which would be lost or never created as a consequence.  So, there is no net benefit from this and there are plenty of net losses in terms of lost opportunity for the private sector, lost tax revenue from the missing economic activity and more government debt.  Did you read the article I posted above?  One needs only to look at Japan in the 1990s for a recent case study in how this tactic does not work to revive the economy.

BTW, for those who dont know, the FHWA is the Federal Highway Administration and the AASHTO is the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.  These are nothing more than government bureaucrats and their hanger ons.  Might their data be a bit skewed and self-serving?  Are you really so naive as to take their word for it?

QuoteGovernment Spending Makes Recessions Worse
by Dom Armentano

         
The National Bureau of Economic Research has officially confirmed what everyone already knew: The U.S. economy has been in recession for many months. The question now is whether anything constructive can be done about it.

Historically there have been two very different public policy responses to a serious economic slowdown. The first â€" laissez-faire â€" is to simply allow market prices to adjust to the new economic reality. Since most economic slumps are caused by a decline in demand associated with the bursting of a credit/money bubble, prices tend to adjust downward fairly rapidly. We have seen some of this in the current crisis with real estate, stock and commodity prices (especially crude oil) falling dramatically. This falling price process tends to "clear out" the malinvestments of the credit boom and eventually sets the stage for a sustainable economic recovery.

This price adjustment process, though efficient, is painful. And the larger the initial credit bubble the larger and more painful the collapse. Many thousands of homes go into foreclosure, banks and hedge funds fail, capital goods industries are especially hard hit, and the recession normally lasts between 11 and 14 months. Lower interest rates and modest unemployment benefits tend to ease the economic hardships somewhat. We have had 10 recessions since 1948 and managed to survive them all.

An alternative policy approach, which is being tried this time, is to treat the recession with almost unprecedented doses of government intervention. In this scenario, the Treasury and the Federal Reserve engage in policies aimed at "reflating" the bursting credit bubble. The Fed lowers interest rates dramatically and inflates the money supply by purchasing government and even commercial debt. And the Treasury gets the legal authority to spend upwards of $700 billion to bail out Fannie and Freddie, commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, and any other private firms too big to fail.

So far, at least, the results of this approach are not promising.

The final public policy shoe to fall early next year will probably be massive public works programs (infrastructure spending) to create "jobs." The President-elect Obama economic team and economist Paul Krugman have already gone on record as favoring such a proposal. They also seem to support another, bigger, round of so-called "stimulus" spending by consumers funded by tax rebates.

But will any of this shorten the recession? A decent argument can be made that all of these public policy responses will only make things worse and prolong the slump.

The longest recession in modern times is the one that began in 1929. It lasted a full 43 months and was quickly followed by the 1937 recession that lasted another 13 months. Almost one half of the months between 1929 and 1939 were recessionary. And between 1929 and 1939, the average yearly unemployment rate in the U.S. was a staggering 16.9%.

Though Presidents Hoover and FDR unbalanced the federal budget, created the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (to bail out banks and businesses), enacted the National Industrial Recovery Act, engaged in massive public works projects (WPA), and inflated the money supply sharply after 1934, nothing really worked. After 10 years of political and economic unrest and uncertainty, the unemployment rate was still 17.2% on the eve of our entry into WW2.

Laissez-faire economic ideas (deregulation, tax cuts) are currently out of favor but the fact remains that the Krugman and Keynesian policies of bailouts, deficit financing, and public works have never really worked. They didn't work in the U. S. in the 1930's; they didn't work in the 1990's in Japan.

They don't work because they prop up unsustainable investments in the private sector rather than clear the way for new entrepreneurship. And they don't work because government central planning is hopelessly naïve (they even have trouble mailing out rebate checks). Sometimes in economics (as in medicine) doing "nothing" (allowing the system to heal itself) works better than drugs with nasty side effects or bureaucratic attempts at reconstructive surgery.

This originally appeared in the Vero Beach Press Journal.


December 18, 2008

Dom Armentano [send him mail] is Professor Emeritus at the University of Hartford (CT) and the author of Antitrust and Monopoly (Independent Institute, 1998) and Antitrust: The Case for Repeal (Mises Institute, 1999). He has published articles, op/eds and reviews in The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, London Financial Times, Financial Post, Hartford Courant, National Review, Antitrust Bulletin and many other journals.

Copyright © 2008 Dom Armentano

Deregulation of the financial markets is what created this mess.  Government spending on WW2 is what lead to 0% unemployment during the war.

QuoteRiley helps Obama pitch stimulus plan

By Ron Menchaca
The Post and Courier
Friday, January 9, 2009

Two of South Carolina's mayors, including Charleston's Joe Riley, traveled to Virginia Thursday to help President-elect Barack Obama pitch his plan for reviving the nation's faltering economy.

Riley and Columbia Mayor Bob Coble were among about a dozen mayors from around the country joining Obama at George Mason University in Fairfax for a speech on his proposed economic stimulus package.

Charleston is among hundreds of cities and towns that responded to a recent series of surveys by the U.S. Conference of Mayors aimed at identifying infrastructure projects that could quickly get under way and generate jobs with an infusion of federal cash.

Congressional leaders disagree whether and how money should flow to cities. And some of the "shovel-ready" projects have come under fire from politicians and pundits, including Gov. Mark Sanford, who say Washington shouldn't pay for parks and other local projects that don't relate to federal infrastructure.

Riley said such criticisms are unfounded because cities would still be accountable to local taxpayers for which projects are selected.

The unprecedented nature of the country's financial crisis demands swift action that only local governments can muster, Riley said.

Mayors backing Obama's plan want at least some federal money to go directly to cities through existing federal programs because they believe that's the fastest way to get public-works projects under way.

Riley said he expressed those feelings to Obama on Thursday and that the president-elect agreed that the nimbleness of America's cities and towns is key to lifting the nation out of its economic hole.

"I reiterated to him the great importance that mayors feel about direct funding," Riley said. "The president-elect agreed and said, 'Cities get things done.' "

Reach Ron Menchaca at rmenchaca@postandcourier.com or 937-5724

I'm sure Obama didn't have Jacksonville in mind when he said that, but I'm glad he feels that way.  It this money goes to the states, I think highways would receive a bigger chunk of the money, as opposed to mass transit.

http://www.charleston.net/news/2009/jan/09/riley_helps_obama_pitch_stimulus_plan67838/