Here We Go

Yesterday I wrote a story about Andy Stern's big new idea about creating 12 million jobs. An idea based on the lie, that it would cost taxpayers zero dollars.

Today on the lawn of the West Wing Obama made a second appeal for infrastructure spending. This plan is one of the elements of Stern's mendastic machination.

Obama's Infrastructure Plan-second announcement:

"This plan will be fully paid for,it will not add to our deficit over time and we are going to work with Congress to see to that.


It will establish an infrastructure bank to leverage federal dollars and focus on the smartest investments. "

As Obama ended his remarks a reporter could be heard in the background asking "How much money Sir, are we taking about? "

Obama didn't stop to answer.

I will, that answer can be found in two places- $180 Billion. In Obama's first announcement about a month ago he mentioned spending $150 Billion on new infrastructure projects as a "mini" stimulus plan. The mere mention of "stimulus plan" had the dems trying to get re-elected howling like mad dogs.

Today was a re enactment of that last failed attempt to get more money into the hands of the unions one of Obama's last remaining base support groups that don't have matching skin tone. Political nepotism aside, this so called plan is still a lie.

Andy Stern is peddling this as a no cost plan, but then says he wants a special  tax on US Corporations to the tune of $30 Billion on past, not present, but past foreign earnings. Then Stern wants to set up a "Green Bank" (as in ecological or moolaw?-you be the judge) to leverage this $30 Billion by a factor of 6, then issue contracts to union construction companies.  Think of the dues payments, think of the political contributions to Obama. Forget about the over price labor rates and union inefficiency, shop rules , short work days, limited productivity.

Don't forget this $150 Billion in "leveraging" is going to have to be paid back somehow.

Here's an anecdotal story for you about union workers.

A few years ago I put my construction skills to practice and built my own house. I did hire some outside labor for a few aspects of the work. One was a brick mason.

One afternoon the brick mason was there laying  some of the 15,000 bricks going on my house. I took  a water break and went over and started talking about his trade. He mentioned he had worked both in the north and in the south.(we were in the south). I asked him which he preferred-" the South". Why?" because of the lack of union interference." 

I was paying the mason a flat price for the job- so I asked him how many bricks he could lay in a day- "about 5000 in 12 hours, I can be finished with this job in three days and on to the next house". How about up north. where it's cold?  "Cold wasn't really that big a factor, the union regs were. They limited me to 200 bricks a day, that was considered a full days work. When I did my 200 bricks I was done."  At full pay? "At full union pay" So my house  would take 75 man days instead of 3 man days if I was in the north.." Yep or 25 union workers working 3 days "

Obama and his union deal making infrastructure plan is going to cost a lot and we are going to get a little for the money if it gets passed.

Steve