Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by PSGator66, Jul 31, 2013.
And how many of Obama's proposed construciton infrastructure jobs are "permanent"? Unemployed construction workers will probably be happy to have a real job building a pipeline for a couple of years. The hotels, restaurants, grocery stores and other businesses that service the "temporary" construction workers will also probably not complain about the new customers with cash in the pockets. The only jobs Obama sees as "permanent" are government jobs for people to tally the unemployed or counsel people on how to sign up for Obamacare subsidies.
Obama is either an idiot or is trying to destroy the American economy. My vote is Obama trying to destroy the economy.
Construction jobs are all temporary unless your are building the pyramids. But added together construction jobs create a lot of permanent workers.
So, let's see what we've got: Obama said that the pipeline would produce about 50 permanent jobs. Breitbart called him a liar and said it's 20,000 jobs.
Of course, the studies say 50 jobs.
So, you guys all join in "Yep, he's a liar, all right!"
I was referring to crude from SA, Venezuela, Nigeria but we do import refined product from Europe. Two major refineries in the NE were going to close until they got waivers from the EPA after 0 realized how many jobs were going to be lost and how high gas would go right before the election.
Increased Canadian production is mainly oil sands but they are beginning to get some production from shale but most is liquid gas.
Educate us, what kind of pressure would the line run at? 125 PSI, 800 PSI, 1,600 PSI?
FYI, more viscous materials would only require more frequent booster pumps inline, not necessarily crazy pressures. :ninja:
I see 50 new jobs as opposed to Obama's 0 jobs. Shovel-ready jobs are by definition, temporary. They are meant to ramp up employment numbers.
As I said, the ramifications to our economy, trade balance of payments, foreign policy, is really going to be a game-changer.
Canadian oil WILL be transported to refineries in the midwest and south whether by pipeline or by rail and truck. There will be job growth whether in pipeline construction or increased rail and road traffic. The country is already crisscrossed by hundreds of oil and gas pipelines. Using Obama's logic we should be plagued with pipeline spills. We are not. Refusing to add one more pipeline is nothing more than an Obama sop to his environmental and Hollywood friends. As usual Obama's political calculations take precedence over the country's economic and strategic well being.
"And"... Obama has no power to stop peoples from extracting it from their own ground like he's doing on public/federal land.
I don't know how many 'permanent" jobs it will create. 50 sounds stupidly low, however. The point is we should have done it years ago, and benefited from it now.
Yet, he makes a big deal over borrowing money for a "stimulus" to build roads and bridges. How many people have you seen working "on a bridge" after it is completed? What about a road?
Obama is a tool. If the idiot had worked in the private sector he would realize that 20,000 workers working on anything for 2-3 years create lots of ancillary jobs. Restaurants, bars, hotels, grocery stores, gas stations all benefit. Those workers buy new tools and trucks. Companies that make components for the pipeline, roads and bridges hire workers or keep existing workers busy.
Obama's idea of a permanent job is some cat sitting in a government office checking his facebook account on our nickel.
I think the Breitbart column refers to the # of construction jobs to build it + those in ancillary businesses added to support the construction. And of course the refinery jobs on the gulf coast would need to be added in and those who work on the ships that transport and at the port and those businesses that cater to the port.
And who cares what Obama says...he's lying his ass off and no one is listening.
In Obama's world a "permanent job" is a Union Government worker behind a keyboard who works 2 hours a day checking his/her facebook/twitter/instagram accounts hourly and blogging for the regime the rest of the day at our expense.
please post source(s) in which Obama claims infrastructure jobs to be permanent
Cons,GOP, etc have been trying to deceive people that Keystone would provide thousands of permanent jobs.
Keystone---a one time construction job with many temp jobs and few permanent jobs
take a look at the infrastructure jobs on Obama's agenda...many are like Keystone(many temp jobs, few permanent jobs). However, there are times that large scale infrastructure projects create a ton of temp jobs but also create a ton of permanent jobs(Hoover Dam during FDR admin is a solid example as are other projects that bolster local economies for years to come with the jobs that brings)
Secondly...aside from the temp jobs---what are the benefits for the U.S. that would result from Keystone?
I would be all for the Keystone project if the agreement included the U.S. govt receiving large amount of the fuel that goes thru the pipeline to be turned over to the U.S. at discount price with fuel to go to strategic reserve, military, fed, state,local fuel supplies(govt vehicles, fire trucks, public school buses, police cars, etc)
The temp jobs related to Keystone would be a local boon to some communities along the Keystone pipeline route. But remember, as soon as pipeline within a hundred miles or so of a community is completed---the jobs disappear. So though the pipeline would take years to build the temp jobs for individual communities would likely be far less in duration.
answer if Cons/GOP to get Dem votes in Congress and Obama's sig would be to include provisions in the legislation that are related to the pipeline that would help economy in rest of the country(mainly those where the jobless rate is more severe). Also include in the bill a provision that pipeline would have to turn a large quantity of fuel over to the U.S.(strategic reserve, military, etc) at a discounted rate. Include such provisions and Keystone legislation would likely get thru congress and a POTUS signature.
If the legislation only benefits Texas and some low population states---don't expect rest of the country to really care whether pipeline is built or not---other states would not benefit.
This is an example of where compromise and mutual benefit would get the legislation passed.
If the addition of the Keystone project was the reason just one refinery was added, or current refineries enlarged, it would account for thousands of jobs.
You must not live in Texas. Refineries are highly automated, but there are many folks working at each one. And that does not include the thousands of support jobs for every refinery.....
why should canadian oil producers be forced to pay the US gubmnt by selling their oil at a discount? The hubris of some have no limits. Canada will build a pipeline to Kitimat and contract to sell to Chinese and the US will lose out on a secure source of oil that will be invaluable if/when the ME blows up. They will not continue to be held hostage by the US and this will hurt relations with Canada
I'm not sure we need to worry about offending Canada.....considering they're laying a pipeline down to the gulf through our heartland putting at risk thousands of U.S. ranchers and farmers livelihoods and land values. Their acquisition of Texas ranch land by eminent domain from those who have balked at the risks involved doesn't exactly endear landowners to Canada.
There are apprx. 2 1/2 million miles of pipelines in the USA .
The Keystone project will be of the latest technology. Even with recent leaks in some aging pipelines, the safety of pipelines is still safer than transporting oil, which carries only a small amount of the petroleum products.