www.ditl.org

Tsukiyumi wrote:I agree with the possibility of substandard product. Hopefully, they'll monitor quality closely.

Part of that is looking around and seeing which product best fits your requirement, regardless of where it comes from, or where the raw materials that went into it came from. If this "American only" nonsense had been this severe before, the US armed forces wouldn't have their standard issue pistol, standard issue section support weapon, best GPMG, or it's new standard towed artillery piece.

And, our materials may be more expensive, but like I said, it's a cornerstone industry that needs to be revitalized one way or another. I'd rather see them work for it than see another multi-billion dollar bailout.

Or accept that the industry as it currently exists has had it, and concentrate on retraining the workforce as much as possible. See Reliant's comparison to the UK coal industry.

Finally, it creates a lot of jobs; besides the guys in the mills themselves, there'll be new management and accounting positions needed, new transportation jobs, services in the areas around the mills will have increased business, etc.

And how many jobs will be lost because the companies that buy the raw materials simply can't afford US prices?

GrahamKennedy wrote:If they aren't more expensive now, I can't imagine anything that would be more likely to drive the price up in future than eliminating the competition.

But, again, this is one set of government projects. Large in scope, yes, but if tomorrow some company decides to build a new skyscraper, they're under no such restrictions. Car companies aren't restricted; even another government building being built wouldn't be under these restrictions. We're cutting out the competition for this only.

Also, this rule has been around since 1933; this is one of the only times we've ever used it.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:I agree with the possibility of substandard product. Hopefully, they'll monitor quality closely.

Part of that is looking around and seeing which product best fits your requirement, regardless of where it comes from, or where the raw materials that went into it came from. If this "American only" nonsense had been this severe before, the US armed forces wouldn't have their standard issue pistol, standard issue section support weapon, best GPMG, or it's new standard towed artillery piece.

And, our materials may be more expensive, but like I said, it's a cornerstone industry that needs to be revitalized one way or another. I'd rather see them work for it than see another multi-billion dollar bailout.

Or accept that the industry as it currently exists has had it, and concentrate on retraining the workforce as much as possible. See Reliant's comparison to the UK coal industry.

Finally, it creates a lot of jobs; besides the guys in the mills themselves, there'll be new management and accounting positions needed, new transportation jobs, services in the areas around the mills will have increased business, etc.

And how many jobs will be lost because the companies that buy the raw materials simply can't afford US prices?

Again, one set of projects. We aren't eliminating all competition in the entire country.

Tsukiyumi wrote:
Again, one set of projects. We aren't eliminating all competition in the entire country.

It's one project, yes but US infrastructure upgrades have been projected to run up to a trillion dollars. That is equal to the total Canadian economy!

Cpl Kendall wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:
Again, one set of projects. We aren't eliminating all competition in the entire country.

It's one project, yes but US infrastructure upgrades have been projected to run up to a trillion dollars. That is equal to the total Canadian economy!

Like I said, it's a really big project, yes, but there are plenty of others. I'm not even sure this covers upgrading the power grid; even if it does, it's only the steel (one component) that will have to be American. I don't buy that "equipment also" part. That won't pass.

Tsukiyumi wrote:Like I said, it's a really big project, yes, but there are plenty of others. I'm not even sure this covers upgrading the power grid; even if it does, it's only the steel (one component) that will have to be American. I don't buy that "equipment also" part. That won't pass.

Oh aye? Given that this is the most protectionist Congress the US has had in quite a while, I'm not nearly as confident. This is only the beginning.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:Like I said, it's a really big project, yes, but there are plenty of others. I'm not even sure this covers upgrading the power grid; even if it does, it's only the steel (one component) that will have to be American. I don't buy that "equipment also" part. That won't pass.

Oh aye? Given that this is the most protectionist Congress the US has had in quite a while, I'm not nearly as confident. This is only the beginning.

Hopefully you're wrong. I see no need to become super-sheltered; I just think our steel industry needs some help, and this is the best way to do it.

Oh, and the comparison to coal doesn't fly in practice. We need the steel for all sorts of things, and always will. Everyone is already moving away from coal power.

Tsukiyumi wrote:
Like I said, it's a really big project, yes, but there are plenty of others. I'm not even sure this covers upgrading the power grid; even if it does, it's only the steel (one component) that will have to be American. I don't buy that "equipment also" part. That won't pass.

I'll wait and see, even with Obama in I don't much trust the US government. So you'll have to forgive my pessimism.

Oh, and the comparison to coal doesn't fly in practice. We need the steel for all sorts of things, and always will. Everyone is already moving away from coal power.

You may find that we need it before long, coal has uses other than burning it in a power plant. Fuel for locomotives in a slurry for example. That whole oil deal is going to require us to explore alternate uses of things for power and fuel.

Cpl Kendall wrote:I'll wait and see, even with Obama in I don't much trust the US government. So you'll have to forgive my pessimism.

Obama's part of the problem - he's instinctively protectionist (remember the nause over NAFTA during the election?), so he's more likely to back this sort of bill than oppose it.

Oh, and the comparison to coal doesn't fly in practice. We need the steel for all sorts of things, and always will. Everyone is already moving away from coal power.

You may find that we need it before long, coal has uses other than burning it in a power plant. Fuel for locomotives in a slurry for example. That whole oil deal is going to require us to explore alternate uses of things for power and fuel.

Even were that not the case, the state of the US steel industry remains similar to that of the British coal industry in the early 80s. Just because industry needs a given raw material does not mean that a given country is capable of supplying that need.

Cpl Kendall wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:You may find that we need it before long, coal has uses other than burning it in a power plant. Fuel for locomotives in a slurry for example. That whole oil deal is going to require us to explore alternate uses of things for power and fuel.

We got a little breathing room on that front recently.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=58682

It's only 5 to 8 billion barrels, and Brazil owns it, but that should buy another decade before oil up and runs out. Personally, I think we should be using oil mostly to make plastics, not power our cars and power plants, but hey, people are dumb.

And, I totally understand your pessimism, Kendall. I'm suspicious of every government in the world.

Seafort - we've got plenty of steel to mine. The problem is that the industry is flagging - once we get it running again, we'll have our own production again, in case of emergency.

Tsukiyumi wrote:Seafort - we've got plenty of steel to mine.

No you haven't. I guarantee that. You might have plenty of iron ore though.

The problem is that the industry is flagging - once we get it running again, we'll have our own production again, in case of emergency.

It's the same over here - we've still got coal, and we're still mining it, but it's barely a fraction of what it once was. However, it simply wasn't economical to continue on the same scale as had been the case.

heres a comparison that i pinched from tv. Some point in the 1800's there were 52 coal mines in a small area. a hundred years later, there are 6. We still have the coal, the coal veins are still intact and quite extensive. We have simply stopped mining them.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Tsukiyumi wrote:Seafort - we've got plenty of steel to mine.

No you haven't. I guarantee that. You might have plenty of iron ore though.

Semantic bastard.

You know what I mean.

Captain Seafort wrote:It's the same over here - we've still got coal, and we're still mining it, but it's barely a fraction of what it once was. However, it simply wasn't economical to continue on the same scale as had been the case.

Over here, the only thing we're short on is production; some plants are only running three days a week now. All they need is a project, and they're back to 24/7. Once they're back up, they'll be more competitive, and can hopefully stay that way.

Captain Seafort wrote:
And how many jobs will be lost because the companies that buy the raw materials simply can't afford US prices?

You do understand don't you that the government is the boss and paying for this. A company that couldn't afford it wouldn't get the bid. You do understand that right?


This thread is moving super fast so I'll just try to hit some highlights then I'll probably have to post right afterwards with what I missed.

Graham hit it square on the head. What idiot would use foreign goods over domestic goods for a domestic revitalization project? How much sense does that make? The project is designed to make the US run better. Why the hell would we want to use other country's materials?

Does it suck for those other countries? Maybe but they aren't losing business. They just aren't gaining it. So once again, QQ.

Far as NAFTA and the claim that people in the United States likes it. You obviously have no clue what happened in the United States during the election. Which is scary considering how much news it got around the world. I invite you to read one of the thousands and thousands of articles online as your evidence:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Cl ... h&aq=f&oq=
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=No ... tnG=Search
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/busin ... nafta.html
http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/bu ... nment/1090
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_o ... 1383b4975c
http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/i ... efs_ib119/
http://www.citizen.org/trade/nafta/

So seriously even asking for evidence that people in the United States dislike NAFTA or that its bad for our economy shows a tidal wave of ignorance unparalleled to anything I've witnessed on this forum outdoing that bigoted Renegade and all the Chakats combined.

Its a United States project designed to boost the economy. Of course they're going to buy US whenever possible.
And as for getting US military things made in the United States I'm all for that too. Its embarrassing the best military bar none imports anything.

No one that I know supported NAFTA, or likes it now. If it had been between just us and Canada, it would be a different story.