| Type | Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle | Source | Last Checked |  |
 |
Newsvine is msnbc.com's social-news community where you can discuss stories, publish your own column, and connect with other news lovers.
I've lived on a US Army Post that was built by Germans and worked on by Germans and the problems are many that have been done. Just to start because Germans don't usually work late Saturdays, have to be given off for every one of their holidays and they have alot plus many of the buildings they worked on aren't up to standard. They may pass inspection but just look at how long it took to make the Mall on Ramstien all because they used the locals to build it and they made lots of mistakes and had go to court there in Germany to get the contractor's to fix them. WASTE, so give the JOBS to US Workers.
#1 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 8:43 AM EDTIt doesn't matter which country you name, every country has its share of crappy contractors and builders, the US included. Having a crappy finished product is because someone didnt do their job in overseeing the project. Thats the person you blame, not the poor guy swinging the hammer.
There is a requirement in many countries the US has bases in, that require the US to use mainly the local labor pool for contruction. Its part of the Status of Forces Agreement thats drawn up when we begin staying there.
Why on earth are we spending on bases overseas at all? Riduculous. We have a huge deficit, aging infrastructure at home, and you want to build a high tech base in Guam?????
Steppenwolf was right - "we can't fight alone against the "Monster"... The military industrial complex owns us all....No one - especially not Republicans, but also Democrats - has the brass to say NO!!!! to the military.
Our economy has lost all other industries - all we do is produce for the military.
We need a base in the Pacific. The USA is being forced out of Japan - about time too.
I believe we have several - already existing. Our planes can cover the world now - we don't need a base every 1000 miles.
Over 700 US installations worldwide. What do you suggest we do to support all that AND our 50 states (oh yeah - the American people...)? Anyone want to pay taxes yet?????
These jobs should go to us citizens as much as possible. There will be some jobs that US citizens will not want. These jobs could go to foreign workers.. It seem to me that the Guamanian contractors just want to make a bigger profit at the expense of US workers..
#2 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 8:57 AM EDTThere's a time and a place for protectionism.
Take a look back in history and consider where our merchant marine fleet has disappeared to. At one point the USA had some of the largest fleets of ocean going cargo vessels. However, MARAD's protectionistic regulations for financing and loan guarantees required our shipowners to employ only American crewmembers and mandated construction at American shipyards. This double-whammy effectively put shipowners at a cost disadvantage when competing for carriage of goods. European and Far Eastern shipping lines gobbled up what we missed out on.
You may ask how this is relevant. Personally I wouldn't imagine that the $15B cost of this base is made up of mostly labor cost. I'd surmize a huge amount is comprised by materials and the expense of getting it there. Rather than simply focus on the labor disparity that would appear to exclude American workers from Hawaii, maybe they should take a closer look at the bidding process for the materials and the shipping requirements.
A better question to ask is, rather than spend stimulus dollars on unemployment, why doesn't the government start remodeling/updating our existing military bases and VA hospitals which require work? While we're at it, why don't we build additional VA hospitals around the nation? This would improve healthcare services for our vets and spend dollars, but create jobs which are enduring. In the end, it would also contribute to our infrastructure and create a need for jobs to operate those facilities.
People don't want handouts for being unemployed; they'd much rather have a job. To avoid corruption and bribes in these construction projects, workers should be hired as civilian employees, with full benefits. When project are completed, reassign them to another, relocating them to another state, if necessary. Corporate America does that with their employees all the time. People would have the option of continue to live where they have their roots or relocate with full employment stability and benefits. In most cases, I have to believe each state would have sufficient work to keep the vast majority of workers closer to their homes.
#3 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 10:20 AM EDTTo be honest, very little jobs are created by remodeling and updating facilities. They can help keep people employed who already work in that area though.
However I am all for building new VA facilities. As a Vet using those facilities myself, it sounds like a great idea. But there is one major caveat. There is a serious lack of doctors in the US, especially at the VA. Google "lack of doctors in US" to see the problem for yourself. Its why the wait times to see a specialist are increasing.
One solution is to throw enough money back into the medical field that people start to want to be doctors again. Odds are this wont happen anytime soon. Going this path is a long term solution (medical school, residency etc) with no quick payoffs like the taxpayers want to see.
It's disappointing, but there are many who would rather sit and get paid than have a job. Those who want a job historically have searched until successful, though sometimes, it takes a long time and the end result is disappointing. Under these circumstances, and with the status of forces agreements, we have to make due the best we can, not go on a vote buying boondoggle that our kids will pay for again. We also need to get out of the Habit of "the Government" bailing us out in one way or another and find fixes ourselves-think of the satisfaction rate we'd get out of it? Instead of handouts for perpetual Welfare Queens with thier "Plasma" TV's and "Pimped Escalades", we'd have people working, LIVING WITHIN THIER MEANS, and understanding why the REST of US get so Irritated with the Whining of "Help me, bail me out" types. If you don't make enough to buy a home, Don't Try! if you Do try, don't whine for a bailout for your mistake while the rest of us struggle to PAY for YOUR BAILOUT!!
Given that there are only 192 countries in the United Nations, 761 foreign US bases is a remarkable example of imperial overstretch—even more so considering that official military reports understate the actual size of the US footprint. (The official figures omit espionage bases, those located in war zones, including Iraq and Afghanistan, and miscellaneous facilities in places considered too sensitive to discuss or which the Pentagon for its own reasons chooses to exclude—e.g. in Israel, Kosovo, or Jordan.)
To garrison its empire, as of last December, the United States had 510,927 service personnel (including sailors afloat) deployed in 151 foreign countries. This includes some 196,600 fighting in Iraq and 25,700 in Afghanistan.
In fact, the purpose of our overseas bases is to maintain US dominance in the world, and to reinforce what military analyst Charles Maier calls our "empire of consumption." The United States possesses less than 5 percent of global population but consumes about one-quarter of all global resources, including petroleum. Our empire exists so we can exploit a much greater share of the world's wealth than we are entitled to, and to prevent other nations from combining against us to take their rightful share.
Oh yeah, the US needs more and bigger bases!
#4 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:04 AM EDTUsta-sounds like a real issue with entitlement you have going-maybe because the US has been fed up with being threatened, and has been helping other nations and has agreements With those nations for Years, while it's nice to have bases to stage from rather than lack the security of those bases in the event of future need-i could go on forever, but you wouldn't understand anyway, having "entitlement" problems-could it be YOU didn't "get Your Piece of the Pie?" even the name soulds like a gang mentality rather than reasoning and thoughtful. "BET" you're a fan of Michelle and Her "entitlement-Separationist" movement as well?
usta - finally someone points out the obvious. You are SO right. We need to CLOSE bases - maybe 100 or 200 of them. That would still leave over 500.
We say we can't afford to educate our kids, feed the poor, care for the elderly, or provide decent healthcare to all Americans - but we can pay for all these bases and weapons and buildings and mess halls and churches and bowling allies and golf courses and office complexes and ports and whatever overseas?????????? FOR WHAT????
We have enough missiles to blow up the world 50 times over. Bases mean only one thing - imperialism. Read "Sorrows of Empire" . Maintaining an imperial empire always ends in disaster. Spending our last $$ on weapons and missiles will leave our homeland bankrupt. Where are the libertarians???????
These bases provide jobs for US citizens. Spending money on weapons and missiles isn't what has bankrupted the USA. Though our military spending could use a good curtailing, I for one do not want to give up our position in this world. The top dog rarely gets bit.
Welfare for lazy people, illegals, and other nations is a waste of time and money. The WORKING American needs to take back this country and demand it be ran proplerly both financially and militarilly. Idiots vote officials into office based on the personality, looks, connections, and what the individual will get instead of the candidates political history. Ross Perot was ugly and weird. That's why he wasn't elected. He would have shaped the country the way it should be. Same goes for Ron Paul. Check out their backgrounds. No special interests there.
mmfine -
Oh Pleeeeeze - stop with the lazy unemployed illegal bum discussion. There are millions right now who want to work and have no jobs. People who were fully employed for decades - American citizens. Bases in Guam or Diego Garcia or Korea do not provide jobs for regular folks here. Really. Not enough.
Militarily - we have more weapons and ships and bases and soldiers than we have a use for - it is just OVERHEAD. It will be super to have the stongest military in the world protecting a bankrupt, uneducated, illiterate, crumbling democracy with high unemployement and few good jobs at home.
Oh I also forgot, and when the Chinese decide they don't want to financially cover our miltary excesses any more, who do you suggest pay for it? Are you willing to pay the taxes it takes to keep a global imperial military?
Ron Paul YOU mentioned. He is absolutely in favor of removing US forces from many places overseas. He is at least fiscally responsible. If you don't want to pay taxes then don't spend the money on a military project that benefits no one.
HALF of the budget is for military spending. HALF. I pay taxes so I can live in clean places with good police and well built infrastructure, educate my children in good public schools, have affordable healthcare, and a peaceful retirement. Not so I can be the biggest bully on the planet.
I work very hard - always have. My money should go towards what I need - not what huge military contractors want me to spend. Ron Paul knows this. That is why he was shouted down during the last election. Howard Dean wanted to change this. That is why he was demonized in the 2004 election. The established powers have a major stake in keeping things as they are. They don't want anyone to change this gravy train. This project is just more of the same....
Lets see we give billions to a bunch of crooked bankers and Wall Street gamblers
Then we try and give billions to a bunch of people who are not US citzens, but if some
guy in Washington/Hawaii wants to put Americans to work. it's a bad thing.
Sounds about right to me NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
#5 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:08 AM EDTWell let's look at where those high American labor rates got us with the auto industry. Worked out well for "profitability" didn't it?
And it is presumptuous to assume that one could even find that many American workers willing to spend lengthy periods at a time separated from their family. People talk big but the number who are willing to work away from home for months at a time are few and far between. If there were so many willing to do this there wouldn't be scads of openings in the oilfield on the North Slope.
I would hazard a guess when a report comes out about government waste in military spending with $20K coffee machines and $10 screws that you would be one of the first to demand that the military exercise some kind of cost control. If Americans want to go work there fine, they can have first dibs at the labor rate that others can build it for. But in the realm of things 20,000 TEMPORARY jobs is nothing when you have 7.2Million who have lost their jobs. This is just as inane as CBS news the other night proclaiming people were hiring and using AT&T as an example who had the grand total of 100 (yes one hundred) positions open.
Oh yeah Usta your a fool!!!
#6 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:09 AM EDTUsta has the facts right. It is depressing, so I can understand your denial....
Let's see...15 million Americans unemployed and our government wants to outsource construction jobs on US territory? How stupid have we become? Can it get any worse? How do we fix it?
#7 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:12 AM EDTNo ideas on how to fix, but how logical is it to use a $36/hour Hawaiian labor rate when there are states with higher unemployment numbers where carpenters routinely earn $18-$24/hour in construction? What dictates that we have to use the Hawaiian based income rate? Why not let workers from other depressed states consider whether they want to go there for close to what they're used to making.
You presume too much when you say that you couldn't get enough U.S. workers to come to work in Guam. Look at how many American males are teaching English overseas, and most of them wouldn't be there except that they can't get jobs in the U.S. Of course, if the Government continues to displace male workers with female workers, you have not solved many problems at all. Unemployed males will cause unsolvable problems because males make terrible mothers and their natural senses motivate them to work at something. And whether that something is productive or destructive is up to social policy, which for the last 50 years has been destructive. You give men productive work, and you cut your crime rates and your antisocial behaviors.
#8 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:39 AM EDTYou're an Idiot! You have a Major "Blathering Idiot" problem!
If America keeps giving all the jobs to everyone else it will become a 2nd rate country soon.
#9 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:39 AM EDTLet's worry about how the Japanese feel about this. But wait, aren't they the ones who are kicking us out of our bases there? Isn't that why we're having to spend this money in the first place? By the way, who is it that our troops in the western Pacific are defending?
#10 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:40 AM EDTThe poll is not a simple yes or no response. There has to be a new think compromise that will attract construction workers with wages between the $30.00+ and 11.00+ marks. Unequivecably though the answer should be to make job opportunities available to US citizens rather than spending US tax dollars on foreign workers. Don't we (US Tax payers) fund the greater part of the world (including dictators, assorted political crooks, and others) Look at the recent news related to Billions of funding provided to Pakistan that is intended for the war on terrorism but goes to everything but that purpose!
#12 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:48 AM EDTThere is absolutely no way that 20,000 jobs are going to be produced at that Guam base. No way in hell. Has anyone. anywhere, seen 20,000 people at any construction site? The St. Pete Times ran an article this past week pointing out the flaw in the method used to calculate the number of jobs created in these contracts. It is a real old formula. For starters most construction is highly mechanized. The labor needed to complete a contract is greatly reduced since the formula was developed. Second. If the project takes more than one year, every job is added twice: three years...three times and so on. Google the St. Petersburg Times Archives, Tampa Florida, this past week and you can read the article.
#13 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 11:59 AM EDTIf you cant afford to pay for the project using American Citizen workers, trash the project. I am so tired of work being farmed overseas because it is cheaper. Lets just make all the workers in the US accept minimum wage and then see how high industrial inventories rise because Americans are not making enough money to buy.
#14 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:19 PM EDTYes, these jobs should go to residents of Guam and U.S. Citizens.
#15 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:26 PM EDTHaving had the pleasure of spending a lot of time on the island of Guam, I just don't see a lot of mainland Americans packing up and going there. And for those of you who seem to have forgetten, the Guamanian workers are US citizens as well. Just because some out of touch member of the house of representatives wants to force US taxpayers to spend nearly three times the labor costs doesn't mean its a good idea. Actually, its sort of a stupid and typical union backed idea. And besides, a large percentage of jobs in this country are held by non-American workers and that same liberal fool representing Hawaii is doing his best to support his party in protecting those jobs for the depressed hispanics. Makes sense doesn't it.
#16 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:34 PM EDTGuam is a terrible choice. We should go back to the Philippines...Subic Bay. Guam is ravaged every year by super typhoons and the 15 billion would be one huge waste of American taxdollars.
#17 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:40 PM EDTAll 100% should go the u.s. workers.
#18 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:42 PM EDTThough I applaud Abercrombie's philosophy of trying to create jobs for Americans, I think he's picked the wrong battle to steak his claim upon. How about he fight for some jobs stateside. What about all of the low wage illegals in the states? Some anti-illegal backing from a Dem would be plush, but Abercrombie would rather take aim at documented alien workers on the other side of the world. Fight your battle back home rather than in the middle of Pacific.
#19 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:45 PM EDTMost Americans probably don't know that Guam is part of the United States. Would you import a huge number of foreign workers to construct military facilities/military housing in California or Texas? Many construction firms would love to do that in order to maximize their own profits.
I am a "statesider" who lived in Guam with a federal civilian job from JUL 1995 through MAR 2002. I saw firsthand how mostly foreign labor, particularly from the People's Republic of China and Korea, constructed the new terminal at the Guam Int Airport, which opened for business in 1996. It was appalling to see so few American construction workers involved in this project. The immigration status of some of these foreign workers was unknown. Had they been properly admitted into the U.S. (remember, Guam is part of the U.S.; the Immigration and Nationality Act applies to Guam just like it applies to the U.S. mainland, Hawaii and Puerto Rico) with the correct work-type visas?
Also, there are construction companies in Guam that are owned and operated by immigrants who really have more ties to their home countries than bona fide ties to the United States. These firms in particular are adept at importing foreign labor from their home countries to work in construction projects on Guam. The goals of the majority of these immigrant-owned and operated construction firms on Guam are to maximize profits for themselves, and, they appear to believe, if the U.S. government continually authorizes the temporary importation of this foreign labor, then so be it!
In a country of 300 million, and at a time when the official govt unemployment rate is almost ten percent, why is it necessary to continue to import foreign labor for constuction projects on Guam USA?
#20 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 12:49 PM EDTAt the same time, we have 2 other issues-filling a need, and improving good will-there's always going to be people with inimical intent trying to "put one over" on us, but by and large, we get more goodwill from things like this than we do by belittling others. We're saving money from the defense budget, getting help from the Japanese, who Our Service Members offended by Comitting Crimes We'd have no problems incarcerating for here in the US when we couldn't control them, while improving a US Territory Base that we're going to have need of during the coming years. Typhoons or not, that's been accounted for, and it's accomodation, not loss of face we're dealing with here Unless we throw a monkey wrench in by playing Boondoggle-then we offend all, throw money away, and create a situation that's going to bite us when we can least afford it. Think and reason, don't jump into the fire. Workers Should be cleared for security reasons no matter what though-No More 9-11!!!
Absolutely not, I don’t support anymore federal bailouts/welfare payments to help workers. Let open competition determine who will provide the best service and most cost effective use of my tax dollars. If US companies want to match the lowest bid more power to them, if not they are out of luck.
#21 - Mon Oct 5, 2009 1:02 PM EDTAre you buying all Chinese made products, Dave? They're cheaper. Of course, there is lead based paint on the kiddie toys, and the other stuff may fall apart soon, and grandpa was forced into early retirment due to NAFTA...but what the heck, you saved a buck by not buying American. :)
If its our tax dollars paying for this to be built it should go to American workers. Why should we keep giving our jobs up to people who will do it cheaper? We need to get Americans back to work so our over all economy will grow and we can get passed this awful reccession.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Log In | Register
The real issue is the Davis Bacon wage rate. It should not be raised to the Hawaii level but it should also increase from the Guam Level.