Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

American Jobs Plan


Recommended Posts

(Some good charts at the link)

Joe Biden wants to spend $2 trillion on infrastructure and jobs. These 4 charts show where the money would go.

The plan includes everything from road repairs and electric vehicle stations, to public school upgrades and training for the clean-energy workforce.

Javier Zarracina, Joey Garrison and George Petras, USA TODAY

Published 7:31 AM EDT Apr. 1, 2021 Updated 3:41 PM EDT Apr. 1, 2021

WASHINGTON — President Joe Biden on Wednesday introduced a sweeping $2 trillion infrastructure and jobs package that looks to reshape the American economy and make the most significant domestic U.S. investments in generations.

His far-reaching American Jobs Plan includes spending to repair aging roads and bridges, jump-start transit projects and rebuild school buildings and hospitals. It would also expand electric vehicles, replace all lead pipes and overhaul the nation’s water systems. 

But the plan goes far beyond infrastructure.

It’s as much a jobs program – one that looks to build the nation’s clean energy workforce, expand manufacturing and boost caregiving as a profession to serve the elderly and disabled.

"Put simply, these are investments we have to make," Biden said. "Put another way, we can't afford not to."

What is in Biden's plan?

The plan, the centerpiece of Biden’s economic agenda, will next need to pass Congress, where Republicans are already lining up against it.

According to White House, the plan is divided across four main areas. Here is how the money would be spent:

1. Transportation infrastructure: $621 billion

The plan would make a massive investment in America's roadways, railways and bridges with a focus on clean energy. 

It would spend $174 billion, or about 28% of the transportation portion, on electric vehicles. That includes a network of 500,000 electric vehicle stations, using electric vehicles in bus fleets, and replacing the federal government's fleet of diesel transit vehicles with electric vehicles. It would also offer tax incentives and rebates for electric cars.

About $115 billion would pay for fixing roads and bridges, chosen by those in most need of repair. That includes 20,000 miles of highways and roads, the 10 most "economically significant" bridges in the U.S. as well as 10,000 smaller bridges. 

Another $85 billion is set aside for modernizing transit systems and $80 billion for a growing backlog of Amtrak repairs as well as improvements and route expansion. Airports, ports and waterways would also receive improvements.

2. Quality of life at home: $650 billion

The largest part of the plan focuses on American homes, school buildings, underground water infrastructure and broadband expansion.

The plan would spend $213 billion to build, preserve and retrofit more than 2 million affordable homes and commercial buildings. This includes the construction or rehabilitation of 500,000 homes for low- and middle-income owners. An additional $111 billion would go toward clean drinking water, including replacement of all lead pipes and service lines.

The plan sets aside $100 billion for constructing or modernizing public schools, while another $100 billion would be used to build high-speed broadband networks throughout the country. The goal would be for broadband to become universal for all Americans and to drive down the costs for internet.

The plan also calls for $40 billion to improve public housing, $18 million for Veterans Affairs hospitals and clinics, $12 billion for community college infrastructure and $16 million to plug oil and gas wells and reclaim abandoned mines.

3. Caregivers for elderly and people with disabilities

Biden wants to pump $400 billion to improve access to quality, affordable home or community-based care for the elderly and people with disabilities. It would expand a Medicaid program to make more services available and eliminate a backlog that prevents thousands from getting care.

It would also boost pay for care workers, who are disproportionately women of color and typically earn about $12 an hour.

"For too long, caregiver have been unseen, underpaid and undervalued," Biden said. 

4. Research, development and manufacturing

About $300 billion in the plan would be invested in manufacturing, including support for domestic production of technologies and critical goods. Around $50 billion would go toward semiconductor manufacturing and research.

The plan would spend $180 billion on new research and development with an emphasis on clean energy, fewer emissions and climate change research. That total includes $100 billion for worker training and an increase of worker protection systems.

"We've fallen back," Biden said of U.S. investment in research and technology. "The rest of the world is closing in and closing in fast. We can't allow this to continue."

How it will be paid for

Biden wants to raise the corporate tax rate to 28% to pay for the plan – a percentage that the White House noted is still below what corporations paid before President Donald Trump's tax cuts in 2017. Biden also wants to increase the minimum tax on U.S. multinational corporations to 21%.

The tax overhaul, dubbed the Made in America Tax Plan, seeks to incentivize job creation and investment in the U.S., end profit-shifting to tax havens and ensure large corporations pay "their fair share," according to the White House. 

The plan would eliminate a rule that allows U.S. companies to pay no taxes on the first 10% of returns when they locate investments in other countries.

Under the tax hikes and other reforms – eliminating tax loopholes for intellectual property and denying companies deductions for offshoring jobs, for example – the White House projects the spending would be fully paid in 15 years and reduce deficits in the following years.

SOURCE USA TODAY reporting and research; whitehouse.gov

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lot of good paying jobs in there. All those projects won't build themselves. As someone who worked in the trades my always first thought is where is the labor force going to come from. Everyone I know in the trades are busy as is.

Edited by Mile High
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see about 1.05T being actual infrastructure.  The rest is pork.

If Mile High is right they'll never get all this as payscales will escalate substantially for skilled trade labor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mile High said:

Lot of good paying jobs in there. All those projects won't build themselves. As someone who worked in the trades my always first thought is where is the labor force going to come from. Everyone I know in the trades are busy as is.

I wondered about this also.  It really hurts when many schools dropped skilled trades classes because of budget cuts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

I wondered about this also.  It really hurts when many schools dropped skilled trades classes because of budget cuts.  

Yeah. It sounds great on paper but alot/most? of these jobs need people on site doing it. Some of that work will undoubtedly be out in the middle of bum #### nowhere. I don't know many of my friends in the trades that will be that interested when there's plenty of work where they live. 

Edited by Mile High
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mile High said:

Yeah. It sounds great on paper but alot/most? of these jobs need people on site doing it. Some of that work will undoubtedly be out in the middle of bum #### nowhere. I don't know may if my friends in the trades that will be that interested when there's plenty of work where they live. 

I guess that is where the (basically) open border come in to play.  

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

I guess that is where the (basically) open border come in to play.  

I guess. Just crossing the border doesn't turn anyone into skilled labor. But there will also be plenty of unskilled labor positions on lots of those projects. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Mile High said:

I guess. Just crossing the border doesn't turn anyone into skilled labor. But there will also be plenty of unskilled labor positions on lots of those projects. 

The whole $400B for caregivers is the provision I know the least about, but one would imagine that is a job a lot of immigrants could fill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Desert_Power said:

I'm all for more rail, but Amtrak needs about  trillion or two just to fix the crumbling bridges on the north east corridor so I'm not so sure about how this math works.  Hope it does, but seems unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea let’s put more money in a business that loses money every year since 1971 With more people going to work from home we can expect them to lose even more.. We should build more post offices too.  That would create some jobs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Let’s look at recent history for what we got from the 2009 $800 billion infrastructure stimulus package.  Nothing...

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/02/17/the-five-biggest-failures-from-president-obamas-stimulus-law

This is an article from 2012 written by Reince Priebus. It states "opinion" right there in the URL. 

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Let’s look at recent history for what we got from the 2009 $800 billion infrastructure stimulus package.  Nothing...

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/02/17/the-five-biggest-failures-from-president-obamas-stimulus-law

There was not a $800 billion infrastructure package in 2009!  But you are correct that Obama went too small in 2009 and it cost him in 2010.  Biden is not repeating that mistake.  Whether Biden is making other mistakes would be a fair thing to debate.  Thinking this is similar to 2009 is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Bottomfeeder Sports said:

I'm all for more rail, but Amtrak needs about  trillion or two just to fix the crumbling bridges on the north east corridor so I'm not so sure about how this math works.  Hope it does, but seems unlikely.

You have a link to support this? I couldn't find anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Desert_Power said:

You have a link to support this? I couldn't find anything.

I guess I'm wrong.  Spent most of my life within walking distance of the old Penn Line but moved away a few years ago  (Reagan gave my community an award for a terrible Sunday in '87).  I know that the rhetoric was a trillion to fix it, but maybe that was just local hyperbole.   The closest I could find is the master plan from 2010 which is $52 billion over twenty years.  I assume that inaction and a bit of inflation has raised that total a bit, but hopefully a decade of doing some things also have some of that already spent.  But no matter what tweaks are made to $52 billion it is not getting to a trillion so I am wrong.   Glad to be in this case. 

Edited by Bottomfeeder Sports
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

By Reince Priebus

🤔

See above from yahoo, npr  etc etc 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, stlrams said:

See above from yahoo, npr  etc etc 

Per the first link you posted:

 

The Claim: "There was a very large infrastructure bill that was approved during the Obama administration, $1 trillion, and nobody ever saw anything being built. To this day I haven't heard of anything that's been built. They took this money and used it on social programs."

Short Answer: He's mostly wrong here. It wasn't an "infrastructure bill," and plenty was built. However, some money was spent on social programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stlrams said:

By 2010 Obama already regretted the "shovel ready" comment. It took months/years to materialize not days. But to say it was ineffective is partisan, uninformed, or trolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, thriftyrocker said:

By 2010 Obama already regretted the "shovel ready" comment. It took months/years to materialize not days. But to say it was ineffective is partisan, uninformed, or trolling.

So according to you, I’m not entitled to my opinion...   what does that say about you?...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stlrams said:

So according to you, I’m not entitled to my opinion...   what does that say about you?...

You're free to believe it didn't help the right people, didn't help enough, or had too much towards social program. But to make a blanket negative statement without any nuance is disingenuous. You said we got "nothing" and one of the links you provided very clearly contradicts that. You are not entitled to your own set of facts where we got "nothing."

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, thriftyrocker said:

You're free to believe it didn't help the right people, didn't help enough, or had too much towards social program. But to make a blanket negative statement without any nuance is disingenuous. You said we got "nothing" and one of the links you provided very clearly contradicts that. You are not entitled to your own set of facts where we got "nothing."

Ok. Let me revise my original statement.  It’s a massive waste of money.  We got very little to show for the 800 billion.  The same will be true of this bill if passed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Ok. Let me revise my original statement.  It’s a massive waste of money.  We got very little to show for the 800 billion.  The same will be true of this bill if passed.  

How do you know that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Ok. Let me revise my original statement.  It’s a massive waste of money.  We got very little to show for the 800 billion.  The same will be true of this bill if passed.  

I feel the economy was very precarious in 2009 and to not do anything significant would have been a big mistake. Economists tend to agree it reduced unemployment and the benefits exceeded the costs.  

https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/economic-stimulus-revisited/

Even as a Liberal, I lament when the gov't does something that doesn't impact me directly. My small business failed in part due to the Bush crisis (and our own bad management) and benefited 0 from any gov't program even as we struggled. But I believe Obama was an effective president who is partly responsible for the post-Bush recovery, and this is part of that legacy.

Edited by thriftyrocker
typo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sand said:

I see about 1.05T being actual infrastructure.  The rest is pork.

If Mile High is right they'll never get all this as payscales will escalate substantially for skilled trade labor.

I’d say a little less than that but the wheels of government require a little grease. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rubiobot said:

How do you know that?

History tells us, our federal government wastes money and is incredibly inefficient..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, thriftyrocker said:

I feel the economy was very precarious in 2009 and to not do anything significant would have been a big mistake. Economists tend to agree it reduced unemployment and the benefits exceeded the costs.  

https://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/economic-stimulus-revisited/

Even as a Liberal, I lament when the gov't does something that doesn't impact me directly. My small business failed in part due to the Bush crisis (and our own bad management) and benefited 0 from any gov't program even as we struggled. But I believe Obama was an effective president who is partly responsible for the post-Bush recovery, and this is part of that legacy.

I agree Obama mostly effective but that $800 billion bill didn’t have the intended impact.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thriftyrocker said:

You're free to believe it didn't help the right people, didn't help enough, or had too much towards social program. But to make a blanket negative statement without any nuance is disingenuous. You said we got "nothing" and one of the links you provided very clearly contradicts that. You are not entitled to your own set of facts where we got "nothing."

Where were you from 2016-2020?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, stlrams said:

History tells us, our federal government wastes money and is incredibly inefficient..

I agree, but ignoring it like the last admin isn't the answer either. I'll take inefficiencies over nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

I agree, but ignoring it like the last admin isn't the answer either. I'll take inefficiencies over nothing. 

Last time I checked, there were 2 stimulus packages and promise on more.  How much money did you receive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Last time I checked, there were 2 stimulus packages and promise on more.  How much money did you receive?

My 5 year old is supposed to be picking up the basement. He's telling me he's a great frog jumper.

I commented on infrastructure. You're asking me how much stimulus money I received.

These things are related.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

My 5 year old is supposed to be picking up the basement. He's telling me he's a great frog jumper.

I commented on infrastructure. You're asking me how much stimulus money I received.

These things are related.

You commented on stimulus packages and now you move to infrastructure move the goalposts..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, The General said:

The Acela from NYC to DC is the way to make that trip. Love it.

It would be great if Amtrak becomes a more feasible option for intercity travel. Virginia is also making strides around expanding rail

Edited by Desert_Power
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, joffer said:

I wish it wasn’t true, but govt spending is almost always good.

So why not just unlimited spending then..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bottomfeeder Sports said:

I'm all for more rail, but Amtrak needs about  trillion or two just to fix the crumbling bridges on the north east corridor so I'm not so sure about how this math works.  Hope it does, but seems unlikely.

We spend about .5-2B per year just to keep Amtrack going.  With this new expanded service that bill will go to, what, 4B?  Complete ####### insanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Sand said:

We spend about .5-2B per year just to keep Amtrack going.  With this new expanded service that bill will go to, what, 4B?  Complete ####### insanity.

I agree we should be spending much more than that to get cars off the road.  We should fix all of the reasons that the train needs to slow down on the north east corridor,  Heading the other way down I95 we should have subsidies making the auto part of the Auto Train free.   And then we should have more of a spider web network of routes to cover the rest of the nation where we have both the routes and subsidies to make driving for vacations economically stupid for families.  And if this loses tens of billions each year we will as a nation still come out way ahead.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Bottomfeeder Sports said:

I agree we should be spending much more than that to get cars off the road.  We should fix all of the reasons that the train needs to slow down on the north east corridor,  Heading the other way down I95 we should have subsidies making the auto part of the Auto Train free.   And then we should have more of a spider web network of routes to cover the rest of the nation where we have both the routes and subsidies to make driving for vacations economically stupid for families.  And if this loses tens of billions each year we will as a nation still come out way ahead.

This is the only place Amtrak makes sense.  As far as thinking rail is going to displace vehicles to any significant extent...  Well, hopefully recreational drugs are legal in your state (not in mine!).  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, The General said:

Are there any elected Republicans that have any plans? 

I listened the NYT's The Daily podcast about this bill and they claimed that Mitt Romney had proposed a Carbon Tax instead of the Corporate Taxes that are mentioned in the root link from Biden's plan. I couldn't find any real evidence for that beyond him supporting a Carbon Tax in the abstract.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Desert_Power said:

I listened the NYT's The Daily podcast about this bill and they claimed that Mitt Romney had proposed a Carbon Tax instead of the Corporate Taxes that are mentioned in the root link from Biden's plan. I couldn't find any real evidence for that beyond him supporting a Carbon Tax in the abstract.

Hopefully the GOP gets more Miitt’s and less Cruz’s moving forward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...