← Back to context

Comment by beastman82

5 hours ago

I'm guessing the population of Lewiston would welcome an employer of 30 jobs

So maybe someone can open a new sandwich shop and accomplish the same thing without screwing everybody else in the process. Not only that, Lewiston probably doesn’t have a glut of data center talent seeking employment —I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that not a single person living in Lewiston when a project like that was approved would be employed there.

Not if it drives up energy prices and makes other businesses that employ more people less competitive. Not saying that is the case but it’s certainly not a given

Are you saying that those thirty job will go to people currently living in Lewiston?

If so, thirty jobs are on the plus side. What's on the minus side?

  • that would translate to three townees for janitors the rest would be durn furiners from away *

    * further down east than Lewiston but, there was a time I was the damm foreigner from the big city.

imagine how many other 30-job employers could fit on the same land that the datacenter would take up.

a mcdonalds is probably 1% of the land and employs more than 30 people.

(the # of jobs angle is not the right approach if you are a proponent of new datacenters. there are much stronger arguments to be made)

  • > a mcdonalds is probably 1% of the land and employs more than 30 people.

    Fast food chains are damaging to human health.

    • neat!

      replace "mcdonalds" with "specialty health foods" or "flower shop" or "independent book store" or whatever and my points remains unchanged: job numbers arent an argument in favor of datacenters, they are an argument against them.