FUEGO
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2007
- Messages
- 7,746
Not talking about protectionism, but if the additional 6% ($400m/$6.3B) was spent in the US, there might have been some multiplier effect. No diss to the Chinese, but I'd rather my neighbor have a job...
I don't think we take into account the swelling unemployment rolls, need for "public" assistance, loss of vitality in neighborhoods, etc. caused by this race to the bottom.
You forget that the $400 million we as taxpayers saved on the construction of that bridge is $400 million more that we, as taxpayers, have to spend on either more bridge/road/infrastructure projects that we desperately need. Or if the savings are passed to taxpayers in the form of lower tolls/fuel taxes/other taxes, then that means $400,000,000 more we, as consumers, can spend on goods, services, real estate, and capital investments. Said spending would undoubtedly have multiplier effects correct? I'd rather have a less expensive bridge AND more goods/services/capital investments AND my neighbor have a job.
I don't really care if the already highly paid unionist boss has a job though. Nor do I care if the chinese have jobs. I just want a cheaper bridge that meets specs delivered 18 months quicker and to have $400,000,000 more for American consumers to spend as they see fit.