should the Davis-Bacon Act be suspended for gulf oil clean-up work?

@dyslexia,

Quote:

The idea that employment and wages will return to previous highs seems a bit silly to me.

If you lower wages you further depress the local economy, why do that?

@panzade,

panzade wrote:

Quote:
The idea that employment and wages will return to previous highs seems a bit silly to me.

If you lower wages you further depress the local economy, why do that?

well, I certainly don't desire to depress the local economy but I do desire to dis-inflate fantasy expectations, for some decades now what we call the middle class has been living and spending within a fantasy economic bubble of expectations. bubbles burst due to being over-inflated. measurable qualities such as housing sq feet, entertainment spending, 5 ft flat-screen t.v.s, secondary housing, BMWs vs Chevy Novas etc etc etc have served to enlarge the relative deprivation index beyond extreme. The middle class has spend itself into bizarre expectations, lower class now means not having HBO on their cable line-up. Quality of life has been passed over by quantity of life. But I digress.

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

Quote:

But I digress.

Your point is well taken.
However, for the purpose of negating the impact of loss of income from tourism for example, in the bayou and Gulf coast areas, it is imperative that the money spent on clean up be circulated there. And that local workers who are unemployed aren't shorted by being paid "blackmail" lower wages.

0 Replies

@panzade,

No. It assures that labor will be paid for at the local prevailing union wage. It's intent is to force your employers into accepting union contracts because the labor cost is the same, and paperwork is much simpler.

I mentioned a corrosponding NM law relating to companies working under state contracts, as opposed to federal. It requires payment at union scale, and I am reasonably certain the federal Davis-Bacon Act is the same in that respect. In fact, I believe NM just paraphrased the federal law. Notice that I make a distinction between what I know and what I am pretty certain of.

The net effect is to make union labor competive with the free mark labor supply. Incidentally, it makes almost every federal and New Mexico construction project cost more.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

panzade wrote:

Davis Bacon assures that prevailing local wages will be paid, why should it be suspended?
http://www.gpo.gov/davisbacon/LA.html

I'm thinking that labor is a commodity, say like housing. in many areas housing has dropped in value significantly, should I pay for a house at what it was valued at or what it is currently valued at? The idea that employment and wages will return to previous highs seems a bit silly to me.

... but there's no shortage of money to pay the prevailing wages. So why not pay them?

Cycloptichorn

The states, including LA are just burstings at the seams with unspend money and lack of debt. Yeah, right!

1 Reply

@roger,

roger wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

panzade wrote:

Davis Bacon assures that prevailing local wages will be paid, why should it be suspended?
http://www.gpo.gov/davisbacon/LA.html

I'm thinking that labor is a commodity, say like housing. in many areas housing has dropped in value significantly, should I pay for a house at what it was valued at or what it is currently valued at? The idea that employment and wages will return to previous highs seems a bit silly to me.

... but there's no shortage of money to pay the prevailing wages. So why not pay them?

Cycloptichorn

The states, including LA are just burstings at the seams with unspend money and lack of debt. Yeah, right!

Who said anything about the State? BP and their affiliates made the mess, they can pay to clean up the mess.

How exactly is this difficult to figure out, Roger?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

And just how would Davis Bacon, which applies to federal contracts, and federal contracts only, apply to work performed by BP?

1 Reply

@roger,

roger wrote:

And just how would Davis Bacon, which applies to federal contracts, and federal contracts only, apply to work performed by BP?

BP is eventually going to have to reimburse the Feds for a lot of the work which is currently being done. That's what 'responsible for clean-up costs' means. Perhaps you missed that detail.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

Any excuse to lower the living standards of the working class that does the dirty work of society it would seem.

Trying to reduce the cost of the clean up for BP a foreign company at the expense of those doing the unpleasant and perhap dangerous work made zero sense in any way or in any manner.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Any excuse to lower the living standards of the working class that does the dirty work of society it would seem

boy, you got me there, guilty as charged, I hate the working class.

1 Reply

@roger,

Union wage for Laborers in Louisiana
Common......................$ 8.20
Minimum wage in Louisiana -$7.50

How about they pay .70 cents more an hour and are assured a safe workplace/fair over time etc?

Whattya think?

0 Replies

@dyslexia,

Hell I hear there are a lot of drug running/border running Mexican we could import to do the dirty work and then sent them home to be sick in Mexico.

0 Replies

there was a time I thought it was possible to have reasoned discourse on this forum, I obviously am a slow learner.

2 Replies

@dyslexia,

dyslexia wrote:

there was a time I thought it was possible to have reasoned discourse on this forum, I obviously am a slow learner.

Do you not think that Panzade made an excellent point, that you are talking about a 70 cent an hour difference?

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I think panzade made a great point. I also think panzade offers reasoned commentary and since I offered this thread as a question panzade responded in kind. do you (Cyc) have any reason to think otherwise? or, could it be cyc that you are just seeking confrontation where there is none?

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

If it one cent or 10 dollars an hour why would we try to save money for BP and at the same time short change the people doing this dirty job and from all reports a very unhealthy job?

We are already going in the direction of not having a middle class but only a poor working class and a very small and very weathly upper class.

Such societies are always unstable and in the best interests of no one.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I think panzade made a great point. I also think panzade offers reasoned commentary and since I offered this thread as a question panzade responded in kind. do you (Cyc) have any reason to think otherwise? or, could it be cyc that you are just seeking confrontation where there is none?

I'm not seeking any specific confrontation, other than to answer that I don't think it's reasonable to get rid of the Davis-Bacon act for the Gulf cleanup. I don't believe it will lead to anyone new getting hired at all, just a cost savings for who is already there - which is going to end up being paid by BP as it is.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

You keep changing the subject. Your saving grace is that you are probably unaware that you are doing so.

1 Reply

@roger,

roger wrote:

You keep changing the subject. Your saving grace is that you are probably unaware that you are doing so.

What change of subject? Please be specific when making accusations, Roger.

It's all the same subject. BP is paying for the cleanup costs in the end, whether or not the Feds are fronting the money right now - you can bet on that.

I note that every time a disaster like this happens, you Republicans start calling for the repeal of the Davis-Bacon act - it's just an excuse for you, not an actual caring about the situation. Though I do applaud the fact that you had the honesty to point that out in your initial post.

Cycloptichorn

3 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Just as I thought!

1 Reply

should the Davis-Bacon Act be suspended for gulf oil clean-up work?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know