linkedarticle wrote: HOLLAND, Mich. -- President Barack Obama said Thursday that a large new automotive battery plant under construction here, with help from a $151.4 million federal grant, demonstrates a manufacturing comeback in the United States.
151,400,000 / 300 = $504,666The new Compact Power plant is expected eventually to employ at least 300 people.
So that's half a million of our tax dollars spent per job created? Seriously?!?
Why couldn't we just you know HIRE PEOPLE at say 50 grand a year? Call me a commie, but funding such positions for a 5-year plan would only be a quarter million per job. Even allowing for taxes insurance, overhead and the now inevitable corruption here, that's only another 50% or so for $375,000 per job to give folks decent pay for long enough to get out of the Great Recession.
Seriously, why not?
Oh, here's why:
My paychecks from the Census Bureau and the NIH funded studies at the Unversity beg to differ there, chief, but go on:The president said while government cannot create jobs,
Uh, if this is "private sector" then why is it costing the taxpayer half a mil in public money per job created?it can lay the foundation for businesses to build and expand, and for families to receive training for those new manufacturing jobs. "Our goal has never been to create a government program, but to unleash private-sector growth,"
Oh. Call me a protectionist, but apparently it's costing that much just so that our public money can subsidize large foreign conglomerates who are already highly profitable with large capital surplusesCompact Power is a subsidiary of Korean-owned LG Chem, based in Troy, Mich.
Sure, maybe this plant will create jobs that last for longer than 5 years - but given the trends in manufacturing that's a gamble, compared to the guarantee of job creation that HIRING PEOPLE is.
Furthermore the weasel language in the article "is expected eventually to employ" leads me to think that it may not even employ the 300 advertised.
At least to me, it seems that the guarantee of job creation now at a lower cost is worth the risk of those jobs being temporary when compared to a higher cost for a chance of job creation that might result in less-temporary jobs.
And at least to me, it seems that if we are going to be using our public money to subsidize large privately-held companies, it would be more effective stimulus to subsidize companies who are both domestic and not already sitting on large capital surpluses.