Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

John Kerry in Somerville: Stimulus funding means thousands of local jobs

By

Senator Kerry and Mayor Curtatone answered questions about the project at the end of the press conference (towards the end of the video above); afterwards, Senator Kerry spoke to reporters who asked him to give a capsule summary of the significance of the project (video clip below). He did a good job of spelling out why this is a big deal. I’d like to see more of our elected officials out there talking to people and explaining the significance of projects supported by federal money. It’s important so that people know where the tax money is going and so they know that our leaders really are taking concrete action to get things moving in the midst of this crisis.

(Videos hosted by http://www.jkmediasource.org and filmed by KvH, a.k.a. Noisy Democrat)

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Who’s going to fill this retail space?  Kay-B Toys, Linens’n’Things, Circuit City, and Steve & Barry’s?  Good for trying to create jobs, but this country is already drastically over-retailed…

    • and possibly the river side park. Your point is well taken as there is not a town that I’ve been to without empty retail buildings.  

        • I’ve been doing other stuff, but thought you brought up a good point about retail.  I see that Stoughton has an IKEA:

          <

          p>http://www.ikea.com/us/en/stor…

          <

          p>Now Somerville will get one.  

          <

          p>What is cool is the idea of having people take the T in, and be able to go shopping (well, you can’t haul furniture on a subway though) at least for smaller things and then go hang at the park.  I am a fan of IKEA, admittedly, but am wondering if the population in the Boston area is dense enough to support two IKEAs.  

          <

          p>The calculus also may be that the economy will be a lot better by the time the new shopping/park area opens (I can’t remember what they said now).  And I guess the question is IF we hadn’t had a financial crisis, would this new retail area have made sense given growth trends in the area?  That I don’t know the answer to.

          <

          p>I DO like the new Orange Line stop being put in, however.  That is the kind of infrastructure building that is needed.

    • But you know, retail is not retail is not retail.

      <

      p>Retail near mass transit both (a) brings choice to those without cars, (b) helps people choose to give up their car, and (c) tends to be smaller, more specialized, and locally owned businesses.  Furthermore, mixed use, pedestrian friendly development allows for first floor retail, second floor office, top floor housing situations which make better use of a smaller number of parking spaces, allow people to shop super-locally, etc.

      <

      p>All of this also reduces the demand for strip malls in the suburbs — the more urban folks who don’t need to drive to stripmallland to shop, the fewer strip malls will be built, thereby reducing the pressure for sprawl.

      <

      p>All of this, of course, is under the presumption that this project will be sufficiently close to the T and will be pedestrian friendly.

      <

      p>I agree, Americans buy way too much stuff, to fill our oversized homes.  Still, that problem isn’t going to change because we build more or less retail in smart growth locations.

      • Expecting Assembly Square to be filled with smaller, more specialized, locally-owned businesses is fantasy.  It renders the project economically infeasible.

        <

        p>The size and scope of this development will rely on big box stores to anchor the project, and those stores need plenty of parking, perhaps 4 cars per thousand square feet of rentable space.  Hence, Assembly Square will require thousands of spaces.

        <

        p>Some examples … the typical super-Shaw’s is between 80,000 and 90,000 sf and requires 350 parking spaces.  IKEAs are around 250,000 and require around 1,200 spaces.

        <

        p>The senator’s estimate of 18,000 construction jobs and 20,000 permanent jobs is also fantasy.  A 1 million square foot mall might provide enough construction work for a couple of thousand; perhaps Kerry meant 18,000 man-years of jobs, spread out over time.

        <

        p>20,000 permanent jobs?  That’s crazy.  That’s roughly the population of Winthrop.

  2. will help in creating jobs now and in the future. It is nice that this project includes both private enterprise and the government. Only this type of job creation can really turn the downward spiral around.

    <

    p>For each job created, there will be someone buying goods and services – that in aggregate may keep local small businesses afloat. While the project will have a positive impact, the public officials drawing attention to it is extremely important too.

    <

    p>People need to regain the trust in government and the economy that was shattered by abuses over the last decade. That trust will be hard to come by – and will not return due to a short appearance by any official, but, at a time when many people are in trouble, they need to know that their representatives care and are working hard to fix the problem and have not abandoned them.

    • This alone will increase the demand for housing in and around the new stop. Public transportation in the bedroom communities that feed Boston will be a benefit in the long run as the recovery takes hold.

      <

      p>We do need to do a better job of linking the Suburbs of 128/95 with Public Transportation if we really want to see economic growth in Eastern MA.

      <

      p>As Usual just my Opinion

  3. What happens to those jobs “created” by that money?  They cease, or taxes must be raised to continue them.  That’s always a bad idea for job creation, and especially suicidal in a recession.

    <

    p>This is why the stimulus, for the most part, isn’t “investment.”  It’s spending, and when you stop the spending the jobs cannot support themselves because the stimulus money was simply funding temporary work.  

    <

    p>Yes, there’s a bit of a trickle-around effect.  Yes, we need some immediate spending to jump start the economy.  But the majority of the stimulus is NOT investment which creates a return on equity year after year or keeps creating jobs jobs jobs.

    <

    p>If you want to see how to grow the economy out of a deep recession, see Ronald Reagan circa 1981.

    • First some of the stimulus money is investment. Even education is investment, but infrastructure certainly is.

      <

      p>Even if none of it is, the idea is that federal expansion pumps up demand. With more demand, more commerce. With more commerce, more other jobs. So when we have a federal contraction, the private sector can reabsorb workers again.

      <

      p>It’s like when you sauté mushrooms. First they shed moisture.  Then they absorb it.

      • Sorry, KBusch, but I have never–repeat never–seen the government create any real jobs in my lifetime.  Sure, we have the defense industry and farm subsidies which are a form of corporate welfare (and let’s include Raytheon while we’re at it)so we will have to wait and see what is really alive and producing jobs in a couple of years.  I think that the infrastructure part of it is great,too.  I wish I could believe that this is all going to come true, but….

        • The government runs elementary schools and high schools employing teachers, principals, janitors etc. The government runs some transportation systems – employing people. The government manages many parks. The government builds and maintains roads and bridges.The government employs police and fire men.

          <

          p>The fact is the government has provided loans and research grants to many promising tech businesses. Without the start up money they might not have existed. Many go on to being thriving companies afterward. This package has money for projects that can helpget to energy efficiency.

          • Sorry, I didn’t mean to infer that the services which you describe are not jobs.  Of course they are, and government probably does all those things better than the private sector ever could.  I do question, however, whether government can decide which grants, loans, start-ups, etc. are best for the economy.  Ultimately it will be the consumer who decides how to spend her/his money who will decide the winners and losers.

            • Per the official fairy tale from the left, federal expansion is only warranted when:

              • We are in a recession. Otherwise, as you say, we have non-market driven entities likely misallocating resources.
              • Monetary policy is close to the limit, i.e., interests rates cannot be pushed down any further.

              I think blue silver does a good job describing the intent lower down.

              <

              p>In a sense, no jobs in the private* sector are permanent. From the forties through the mid-eighties, many Americans seemed to have long-term jobs with pensions and stability. (Think of how big and stable Sears, IBM, and General Electric used to be.) Those days are behind us. So a job created as a result of the federal government’s temporary investment infrastructure or biotechnology or wind farms is not so different from other jobs.

              * The permanence of government jobs is a result of our civil service system. Our civil service system, in turn, arose from the disgust over patronage appointments. Fixing the problems with civil service without a return to patronage looks as difficult to do as it is important to do.

              • Yes.  We will have the chance to see who is right or wrong on this issue in the next few years.  For the sake of our country I hope that you are right and that I am wrong.

          • “The government runs elementary schools and high schools employing teachers, principals, janitors etc.”

            <

            p>They do this very poorly spending way too much money with few positive results.

            <

            p>”The government runs some transportation systems – employing people.”
            Since when did the T balance it’s budget.

            <

            p>”The government manages many parks.”
            OK they cut the grass

            <

            p>”The government builds and maintains roads and bridges.”
            Minneapolis, nuff said.

            <

            p>”The government employs police and fire men.”
            So that they can smoke or deal crack on the job.  Or don’t you read the newspapers?

            <

            p>Etc. etc.  Let’s not forget, the Government runs all these things by taking money out of the hands of individuals like you and me and then spending that money.  So the Government may run this stuff, but I pay for them to do a lousy job at it.  The last thing we need is for us taxpayers to finance more wasteful spending.  If you want stimulate the economy, let me determine how my money is spent.  

    • In a downturn, government spending insulates some of the populace from the worst consequences of the downturn. By stimulating demand – which happens most efficiently when you put money in the pockets of those who will spend ALL of it, NOW, instead of the pockets of those who might spend it if they feel like it – the government can shorten the recession and make it shallower. As people spend then businesses start cranking out more products and services which employ more people, thus starting the upswing of the business cycle. Then the jobs that were created can be supported by the economy without continued (major) subsidization by the government.

      <

      p>In theory, anyway. But it’s a theory that makes a lot more sense than supply side theory (aka the Laffer – or was that “laugher” – curve).

      <

      p>And of course there will always be government subsidies, such as for oil, roads, and agribusiness. I have no problem with an economic approach that peels away some of those fat cat subsidies and diverts the money to the less advantaged or to more forward-thinking technology.  

  5. This project has been stalled for a decade.  It’s gone through 3 different owners, and Federal has owned it for the past 3 or 4.

    <

    p>The Mystic View Task Force, a small group of environmental activists, have been blocking this project since 2000.

    <

    p>What did Kerry do to promote this redevelopment over the years?  Nada.  Why the change of heart?  Because NOW we need the jobs?  Grandstanding, opportunistic hypocrite.

    <

    p>We’ll see soon how the Task Force reacts.

    • when circumstances change, prescriptions can change too?  What a novel idea.  I knew the ‘tax cuts solve all problems in all circumstances’ people were missing something.

Archives