One of the most interesting things I learned in Dominic Gates’ story today in the Seattle Times is that the most number of jobs Boeing is promising prospective 777X sites is about 8,500 direct jobs.
Also, the factories for the new airliner and its advanced wing will require an investment of $10 billion (assuming, I assume, they don’t use Everett, where many facilities and much infrastructure already exists). And from the states that want this prize, Boeing wants…a lot to lower its costs.
Machinists here refused the company’s hurry-up-and-say-yes proposal. Yet Washington has approved $8.7 billion in tax breaks. Would Boeing come back with another offer for the union, or is it done — even though the Puget Sound region offers the best place to build the plane?
My question for you: Based on the information we have now…
Read on for some of the best business stories of the week and the Econ Haiku.
This Week’s Links:
• November jobs report: Labor-force participation still a problem | Jared Bernstein
• The social science behind Obama’s economic-mobility speech | The Atlantic
• Another batch of Wall Street villains freed on a technicality | Matt Taibbi
• Ultra-low interest rates: Who wins, who loses? | Tim Taylor
• The aging of Americans’ things | Reuters
• Large companies prepared to pay the price on carbon | NY Times
• Do lower corporate tax rates create jobs? A new study says no | Naked Capitalism
Today’s Econ Haiku:
Supersize that wage?
Right now it’s just a kid’s meal
Middle class gets fried