|
| ▲ | oceanplexian 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The construction is temporary but what are the economic impacts of having a fully operational spaceport that launches 20,000% more tonnage to orbit than the Florida Space Coast? Probably a great deal of long term economic impact. |
| |
| ▲ | vel0city an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | One would think the same thing about having some of the biggest chemical manufacturing and refining industries around and yet the people of Louisiana are some of the poorest in the US. Tons of money flowing through the state. Just to a select few people who own the plants for the most part, not for the people working there day to day. I don't see why one would think that would change. | |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | Noaidi 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You mean the negative economic impacts? |
|
|
| ▲ | chasd00 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| yeah but that site is huge, that's a multi-decade construction project. |
|
| ▲ | protocolture an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >It's similar to but not quite as bad as datacenters where you get a very short term influx of skilled highly paid labor but those jobs don't stick around after the construction is over. The issue with Datacentres is that you cant model the advantage of lower colo costs on jobs in the area. The problem is that some people dont want to permit anything unless they can measure the benefits, when the market doesnt always work like that. |
|
| ▲ | consensus1 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| The whole "temporary jobs" line is completely irrelevant nonsense. Sure, it's correct, but who cares? The alternative is zero. It's not like there is only a limited amount of undeveloped land and a bunch of people bidding for it. And of course those jobs don't stick around after construction is over. They're construction workers. They move on to the the next construction job. |
