http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=from_mass_transit_to_new_manufacturing

But. Bombardier is a major player in rail transit worldwide, has experience in high speed rail, is based in Montreal, and has no qualms about setting up plants wherever it makes sense to do so. Although it is a Canadian company, it has a larger presence in the US than Canada. It is also one of the world’s most competitive aerospace firms, with a huge presence in business jets. It has the skill and ability to be a major player. GM, GE and the other American firms may not be up to the task - let ‘em go, and hire those who are! Remember that GM was sued by Nader and found guilty of bribing local, state, provincial and both Canadian and American federal officials in a bid to get rid of light rapid transit rail and replace it with diesel buses and automobiles in the post-war era. And we expect them to reverse direction and become champions of rail??? Well, yes, we do. If they are cagey about making $$ they would too, and give us the cars that the market wants as well. Hopefully they will; I suspect not.

Meanwhile, a combination of aerospace/rail/computer $$ may prove to be a more useful and flexible model of corporations willing and able to take on the challenge of improved rail across North America… The really exciting new cars are not coming from Detroit, but from California…

Info on Bombardier in the States:

http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/about-transportation/worldwide-presence#

The “foreigners” are at the gates. It might be a good idea to learn from “them!” Canadians know this all too well; Americans seem not to: our two countries are the world’s largest trading partners…

Cheers.

Who is “we”? Why are “we” more entitled than “them”? Anyway, the reason “we” don’t get these jobs is because “we” are not as efficient at doing those jobs as “they” are.”

“We” are the people paying the bills and thus should be striving to get the maximum return on our investment, taking into account both the products received and the economic stimulus.

And I don’t agree that we are not as efficient. We have labor and environmental standards. Unfortunately our trade rules are written to allow corporations to evade the costs of cleaning up after themselves by moving it to poorly regulated jurisdictions.

American auto companies are providing good quality these days. Ford is world class, GM is decent, and Chrysler is no worse than the lower end Japanese companies.

If every transit agency could agree on a standard unit, then it would be more like auto production. As it is, I have no doubt Charlotte would want motor A with axle B and brake C, while Denver would want motor D with axle E and brake F, and Portland would want yet another combination.

The production model that would be most like what’s required for transit would be over-the-road trucks (think Kenworth/Peterbilt) or airliner manufacturing (Boeing), and I would expect any of these manufacturers to be competent.

But why shouldn’t we be getting a chunk of these jobs if we’re going to be spending this money?

Who is “we”? Why are “we” more entitled than “them”? Anyway, the reason “we” don’t get these jobs is because “we” are not as efficient at doing those jobs as “they” are.

I mean, if you can make a bus, why not a streetcar?

The US auto manufacturers are pretty incapable of building buses, just as they are unable to build a decent automobile. There is no reason to believe that their quality control would extend to streetcars.

I used to ask, “Why aren’t there 200 people working on these road jobs? What is this six people stuff?”

Why do a job with six people when 200 could do the same job? Why not 2000 people doing the job of six? When public works project consume resources (like labor), then there is less to go around for other things. Ideally, the road jobs would be done entirely by robots.

But for reasons I don’t quite understand. Kenmore Square in Boston still under construction five years after it began. It should be about a six month job.

Perhaps the contractors are guaranteed a “chunk of the money”, are using bloated workforces, and are working for unaccountable bureaucracies that even ex-governors do not understand?

It’s not complicated.

No, it’s enormously complicated to identify worthy construction projects and to do them correctly, on time, while not fleecing the taxpayers. It only seems easy when you make decisions with other people’s money — as politicians always, always, always do.