Skip to main content

View Diary: What's in the American Jobs Act? (148 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  To Get the Money by Cut our Military Expansionism (5+ / 0-)
    Close some far flung bases, we no longer need, built during the cold war.  Stop building weapons to fight the Soviets.  There's a couple TRILLION without cutting ANY services for us here in America!

    "The Internet is the Public Square of the 21st Century"- Sen. Al Franken

    by Kdoug on Fri Sep 09, 2011 at 11:44:24 AM PDT

    •  Yes, it will save trillions... (0+ / 0-)

      but it will also put possibly 90 000 tp 150 000, if not more, people out of work.  What then?

      "My presences is a present, now kiss my ass..." - Kanye West

      by lcj98 on Fri Sep 09, 2011 at 12:08:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The saved trillions can then be spent elsewhere (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kdoug, Johnny Q

        In the long run, I don't believe it's useful to spend money paying people to build something that nobody needs and will never be used.  You might as well just give direct handouts to these folks for doing nothing, save the capital costs, and be ahead of the game!

        We can pay the same people to do something useful like green infrastructure that may even be cheaper than these weapons, and, unlike another missile, will actually improve our security by reducing our co2 emissions, and hence will be a legacy for our grandchildren in a way that a missile won't be.

        •  I work in the defense industry... (0+ / 0-)

          It's not the building of new weapons that cost he most money, it's the upgrading and maintenance of older weapons that is the problem.  

          I hope this doesn't sound condensending but a lot of people don't realise that there's a huge contractor industry dependent on the defense industry.  Several state economies are intertwined with that contractor industry.  Making huge sweeping changes in the defense industry will affect the economy the same way when the auto industry almost collapsed.  So it's not a simple "pay them to do something useful" because they already have the skills to to that.  However, it would be "is there enough postions for those people to do something useful?"

          "My presences is a present, now kiss my ass..." - Kanye West

          by lcj98 on Fri Sep 09, 2011 at 01:21:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm still confused (0+ / 0-)

            If the new weapons don't cost that much money, then why does the DoD keep asking for large appropriations for them?

            And I don't think that engineers and other high-tech contractors are so inflexible that the contractors couldn't be reassigned to new jobs.  It's not like this is some guy who only knows how to mount carburetors and hasn't done anything else for 30 years and now he has to do something else he's not trained for.

            Please clarify.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site