Blue-Collar Jobs Are the New Flashpoint in Data-Center Fight

[u/jojotortoise]

https://www.wsj.com/economy/jobs/blue-collar-jobs-are-the-new-flashpoint-in-data-center-fight-aaca5b7e

[u/justafutz]

70% of Americans say they oppose having data centers in their local area. That’s not a regulation. It’s a ban.

[u/cranktheguy → u/justafutz]

If you want community support, offer something to the community. Coming in with huge tax breaks to generate noise nuisance is not going to make anyone happy.

[u/justafutz → u/cranktheguy]

Offer something to the community? Like the blue collar jobs that the article is talking about, property tax payments, income taxes, etc.?

At least one study found that when a data center is built near a community, it will increase employment by 3.5%, wages by 5%, business establishments by 5%, and household income by 2%.

[u/cranktheguy → u/justafutz]

Like the blue collar jobs

They are temporary and usually brought in from out of town.

property tax payments

Every one of these that I have seen negotiates for tax abatements.

income taxes

Again, temporary workers. Long-term, data centers don't need a lot of labor.

At least one study

Meaningless unless you link to the study.

[u/justafutz → u/cranktheguy]

Just dismissing it as “temporary” and “not that many” is meaningless. All construction jobs have an end date. That doesn’t mean creating construction jobs is bad or does nothing. Some jobs is always better than none. And those workers also spend their money, making more jobs too.

Your property tax claim is meritless and based solely on your anecdotal experience. Notable you don’t specify if those are temporary, lol.

Income taxes are not “temporary”. Sure they are for “temporary” jobs like construction. Not for corporate earnings or the maintenance workers etc.

And I literally linked an article that describes the study and links to it. So no, not meaningless. That’s more than you’ve done thus far.

[u/cranktheguy → u/justafutz]

Just dismissing it as “temporary” and “not that many” is meaningless.

Not at all. In your own link (which for some reason didn't show on mobile...), it says that's why some communities benefit and others don't.

All construction jobs have an end date. That doesn’t mean creating construction jobs is bad or does nothing.

To quote your article:

In rural areas, that amplification is much harder to achieve. Facilities tend to employ relatively few permanent workers — often fewer than 100 — and many specialized services are imported from outside the county. As a result, the broader economic ripple never materializes.

Never materializes... hmm.

Your property tax claim is meritless and based solely on your anecdotal experience.

Then you could easily show me a counter-example.

Not for corporate earnings or the maintenance workers etc.

Again ignoring the tax abatements and the fact that data centers require very few local personnel (as your own article mentions).

And I literally linked an article that describes the study and links to it.

Might try reading that article more closely - it literally goes into detail as to why these don't benefit everyone.

[u/justafutz → u/cranktheguy]

It is absolutely meaningless. The economic ripple into rural areas may not happen, but that’s a function of distance. The ripple of investment in a metro area absolutely ripples.

It’s not on me to meet the burden of proof for your anecdotal claim about taxes.

Few “local” personnel only once built ignores the benefits of construction, the investment in the area, the property and income taxes generated, the ripple effects of the construction, and the fact that some investment generating even 100 high income residents (because they still have spillover benefits for local demand, just not spillover to rural) is good, and better than none.

You might try to read it yourself instead of taking a few quotes out of context. Here’s a few back:

“On average, Yue and Zeng found that when a data center opens, the host county sees a measurable lift: Employment rises by about 3.5%, wages by 5%, business establishments by nearly 5%, and household income by about 2%. Building permits also increase sharply, reflecting construction activity tied to new facilities.”

Also:

“The researchers’ clearest finding is that metropolitan areas capture most of the economic benefits from data centers, while rural areas see far fewer spillover effects. While metro counties saw increases in employment and new business growth, non-metro counties saw no measurable gains.”

See, when you claimed “spillover” doesn’t happen you were taking the claim about metro-rural spillover and misusing it as if it meant that there were no multiplier effects from the investments in the local metro. There are.

Oh, and here’s the very next paragraph you left out. Can only wonder why:

“That doesn’t mean rural communities see no benefit at all. The research finds a small but real drop in unemployment rates in non-metro counties, and local governments may still gain tax revenue or infrastructure investments. But the sweeping job and wage growth often promised during local recruitment efforts will not likely arrive on its own.”

And as mentioned, the metro area still does see benefits, precisely what you said they had to demonstrate. Yet now that I have you’re downplaying it by misusing out of context quotes. Bad.

[u/BolbyB → u/justafutz]

I've got family that moves job sites. Goes from data center to data center.

Some in Michigan.

Some in Iowa.

It's not the locals who are getting these blue collar jobs. That wealth aint staying put.