Slashdot Mirror
Going Off the Fiscal Cliff Could Mean Missing the Next Hurricane Sandy
Lasrick writes "Alex Knapp has an excellent article pointing out that NOAA satellites enabled NOAA to predict the 'left hook' of Hurricane Sandy into the Eastern Seaboard, which in turn enabled local governments to prepare. Those satellites are at risk and there will be a gap of about a year between 2017 and 2018, when the old ones fail and the new ones are scheduled to launch. There's no alternative to getting that data, and the so-called 'fiscal cliff' will drive an 8% cut to NOAA's satellite program, so that those replacement satellites may go up even later than 2018."
Just ask Kim YoungOne for some data from the North Korean satellites. They will clearly be ahead of NASA by then! :-)
Give us more money, or people die.
We have satellites from the 1970s that are STILL working ... and they had only a 3 year lifespan as designed.
So all this crap about the NOAA satellites being "scheduled" to fail is nothing but political fear mongering. The same crap used during the political campaigns. Nothing but FUD used to make people scare into approving expensive money wasting budgets.
The CrIS hyper spectral sounder is enabling much more precise forecasting. Proving once again that it's not the number of pixels, but the quality of them.
http://npp.gsfc.nasa.gov/cris.html
Sheldon
There will certainly be consequences to budget cuts of any kind. Whether this will be one of them is speculative, at best.
A better analogy.
Doesn't the USA military have any satellites capable of filling the temporary gap in NOAA ones?
This lines up well with the climate deniers who have sway over the current anti science GOP. The less the American people know, the more they can deregulate to allow big business to prosper.
This is part of the overall strategy, do a search for "GOP defunds NOAA" and you'll see it's a trend.
These are cuts in the rate of spending increases! Not budget cuts as we all know them.
This is such bullshit.
GOOD. Everything NEEDS to be cut immediately, if not sooner. I myself would prefer that we go off of not just one, but at least three "fiscal cliffs" post haste.
Give us more money.
No brain, no pain.
Did the government adjust the budget for the worsening weather conditions ? From what I can tell this storms aren't one off things and will repeats on both shores maybe even on a yearly basis.
If you know it's coming, shouldn't you put some money aside ? You know... for a rainy day...
Hurry up and make a bad decision. Don't think about it, just cut taxes to the rich and increase taxes on the poor. We don't want to drive off the "Fiscal Cliff" or hit the "Debt Ceiling" or run into a "Monetary Nightmare". It's all about using scary words so that people won't think too much about it.
The fiscal cliff is bullshit, an entirely politically-created problem, which is being used to spur rhetoric, trying to justify decimating social services and other important services.
There is no reason the restriction imposing cuts can't simply be repealed, with the US continuing with its current deficit spending; there is no 'magic limit' at which people stop buying US debt, they can expand it as much as they like.
The US doesn't even need to fund deficit spending through debt either, as a government in sovereign control over its own currency, is capable of funding itself through money creation, with the only limit being the potential for inflation.
The great taboo of macroeconomics today, which hyperinflation scaremongers are desperate to suppress: We are not in a gold standard anymore, and governments are capable of funding themselves with money creation, with the only limit being inflation management.
The dismal 'science' of economics, is still stuck in gold-standard-era thinking, and the only branch of economists to properly describe the role of fiat currency (Post-Keynesian MMT'ers), who are pushing the field closer towards an empirically-sound position, are marginalized due to politics both within the field of economics, and within corporate-captured government around the world.
Fiscal Cliff or not, the United States' inability to pay bills are finally coming to a head. Complain all you want, but it's going to get to a point where the only way to sort this out is to cut federal services. Will it hurt? Will it be uncomfortable? Will it cause problems? You bet. However, we can't create value from nothing (despite what lenders will tell you), and it's the irresponsible deficit spending (on Federal, State, and Personal levels) that has got us here. We have no choice but to halt excessive, even reasonable, spending in hopes of reducing debt and hopefully instilling a responsible budget doctrine.
In this case it sounds like NOAA is really just trying to keep money (be it an actual dollar figure, or projected budget increases) without considering the fact that the United States just doesn't have it. We don't have it, so we can't give it. What part of that is not understood by agencies and the general public?
The only reason NOAA even managed to predict the left-hook was because they integrate the so-called Euro Model predictions from the ECMWF. The Euro model predicted the left hook, while GFS, which is the NOAA's model, predicted Sandy to go NNE.
So for example, on Sailing Anarchy, there were people who were preparing for the Sandy left hook days before NOAA started warning about it, thanks to DryArmor reading the euro model data before NOAA did.
The Big Gray Ships headed out from Norfolk over a day before NOAA warned about the left hook too.
NOAA was a week late in predicting the left hook...the European model was more accurate earlier on
And our politicians are the crazy homeless person that will not hesitate to push us off if they can score a few votes. Eh, whatever, just move inland if you're worried about hurricanes. Or, you know, build a more robust, resistant infrastructure.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
If you have a better idea, please elaborate. For some reason completely oblivious to you, preparation against catastrophic events costs money.
... the best forecasting system for predicting Sandy was not American, rather it was the model of the European Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF) in Reading, England.
...nonsense...
The Sinister State of the American Economy
(An explanation even a Kardashian can understand!)
A little over twenty years ago, the Soviet Union dissolved.
The popular mythology holds that nothing occurred to the U.S. economy --- that even though David Rockefeller accompanied President Nixon and Henry Kissinger on their trips to Beijing and Moscow, where Rockefeller established banking operations in those two countries dating back to 1973, there was supposed to be absolutely no economic nor financial connections between American and the old Soviet Union.
Gorbachev was honest about the demise of the Soviet Union, but Wall Street was its usual duplicitous self and dissembled about the collapse of the American banking system around the same time.
With the 1990s came an explosion of credit derivatives, what's been referred to as "shadow banking" and created originally to alleviate the S&L meltdown losses --- even than a specious solution.
We'd have to wait until 1996 for Blythe Masters, at JP Morgan, to concoct that insurance fraud instrument, the credit default swap (another credit derivative), and a few more years until its epidemic spread across the globe.
Remember, the USA invaded Iraq when Saddam stopped selling oil in US dollars --- Petrodollars --- but switched to Euros?
Remember when the sanctions and drones and outright aggression began against Iran by America --- after Iran switched from US dollars to Euros for oil exchange?
To remain the world's reserve currency, countries must use American currency to buy and sell oil --- otherwise it loses its value, especially when enough countries begin to dump US dollars with the resultant collapse of the American economy.
That's the cause behind those American attempts on the life of President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and the American government's bellicosity against that country (backed by the corporate propaganda network, frequently referred to as "the media").
(America exporting democracy? Tell that to Honduras, Guatemala, Columbia, Ecuador, Bahrain and the Palestinians!)
Now imagine if a neighbor, or complete stranger, broke down your door and invaded your property because they didn't agree with the way you spent your money?
The super-rich varmints and vermin have been dismantling the American economy over the past thirty-some years, leaching as much value and wealth from it as possible; offshoring the manufacturing base, offshoring the jobs in all sectors, and ignoring the country's infrastructure --- or worse --- selling it off!
You really think a "consumer-only economy" can survive?
I've nothing personally against Robert Reich, he seems like a decent enough fellow, but did you really believe Bill Clinton would have appointed such a complete idiot?
A pseudo-economist who doesn't understand arithmetic or large data sets? The author of the pile of crap, The Work of Nations --- the temporary fantasy being pushed by Wall Street, the Peterson Institute and the super-rich while dismantling everything?
The other day Reich said that 70% of the GDP activity is consumption --- but that doesn't mean anything of and by itself --- the important number is the percentage composition of the consumer demographic which is doing the vast amount of consuming. (Answer: the top 15%, used to be the top 20%, but the super-concentration of wealth has accelerated --- and that ain't a consumer-based economy, that's a plutocracy!)
Are you beginning to get an idea of what's taking place?
Please understand, this is basic economics, not even Econ 101, but the pre-Econ 101 course, and the purpose of economics is to justify why that pirate over there has all the money, while you have little or nothing.
A farce based upon a farce.
Disclaimer: I worked on a sat program for a met office.
Weather forecasts are usually made by combining many sources of data from literally thousands of instruments. Ground sensors, weather balloons, satellites and such all contribute. If the current weather forecasting models depend on a certain type of information from certain satellites, it will take years to re-calibrate them to data from other satellites that are constructed differently. It may be that some types of data from CriS under certain circumstances are more accurate, but that doesn't mean that it will be compatible or adaptable to the current software being used to make the forecasts.
The second problem is that there is only one CriS that orbits the planet in 14 parts, only coming back to a location about once a day. The NOAA satellites are geostationary and there are two. Together, they can do 24/7 covering of the USA. For weather forecasts, especially for short term hurricane directions that matter for evacuation alerts and such, you can't have just once in 24 hour coverage, you want 15 minute updates.
CriS is certainly a nice instrument, but it's totally inadequate to replace the geostationary satellites NOAA has, since it's function and trajectory are totally not suitable for what the NOAA birds are for.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
but, as mentioned, it will be through the military satellite program and the civilians won't have access to the data. This will make it easier to continue to do their experiments with the HAARP stations and weather control.
It all adds up to less information for the citizens, more control for the government and programs to start culling the population in ways that won't lead directly back to a government agency wielded weapon such as a firing line or gas chambers.
Just because government offers a service does not mean it will no longer be offered if they stop ...
If there is true value being provided, then someone in private industry will step in and offer the same thing. News organizations make plenty of $$ off of severe weather.
Imagine if one of those organizations had an "Exclusive satellite system" and they were the "only news channel able to give up to the date accurate information"
Buy guns, they are durable goods that won't loose value if they are maintained or properly stored. Then you can either sell them to all the evil rich people left in their gated compounds or use the guns to lay siege to the rich bastards and just take all their stuff :-)
can you draw it out on the big board with a crayon for me?
you do have to be European to know, in advance, which way the wind blows.
weather channel is now part of nbc / comcast so they have the funds to launch a satellite.
Hell they still have the old weather star 4000's running off the old analog tv satellites
All of that "lack of production," is caused by income inequality. Production has doubled, but wages stayed the same instead of doubling.
There is little point in talking about the symptoms.
At this point, the cliff is needed. GOP doesn't want to support the DNC plan, and offer a worse plan than the cliff. I think that this cliff was the best thing the democrats were able to pull out of them. I do hope that political parties shoot themselves in the foot with this. The Tea Party wasn't enough of a shake-up.
I work for a well-known meteorologic institution & was in 2x/day met briefings for almost a week leading up to Sandy & my recollection is that the euro model certainly predicted the hook first but the other models eventually converged on what ended up happening...
that was some scary sh** listening to them talk about the projected flooding, etc. I know people think NOAA, news, etc hype up storms & cry wolf a lot but it was obvious at least 3 days out this was the real deal & was going to be big time bad...
Give us more money, or people die.
Exactly.
When local governments have a shortfall the first to go is police officers and school teachers and firemen.
Bureaucrats seem to hold on to their jobs some how. Rat hole money sponge projects seem to linger on forever.
When the federal government has a shortfall (don't they always), its more of the same, with each agency finding the biggest scaremongering headlines they can possibly put forward.
8% isn't that big, you can find that much fat in any departmental budget, and money can be siphoned off of other projects and moved to these satellites at a moment's notice. Worst case, take the money out of FEMA or the TSA and save everybody some suffering.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
What are you going to do, shoot at the hurricanes? I mean, sure they do have "eyes", but, well, you're going to be dissapointed. And wet.
Actually, I have zero problem with you dying. So it sounds good to me.
Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
Exactly on point
Give us more tax breaks or we will wreck the economy again.
FTFY.
"It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."
SO WHAT!?! Tough it out like we all used to "way back when"... Betting the odds beats a financial disaster for the masses. "Back in my day, we didn't HAVE satellites!
"Yes, I have a Disaster Recovery Plan. It's called my Resume"
If you have a better idea, please elaborate. For some reason completely oblivious to you, preparation against catastrophic events costs money.
The problem I have is that when times are good, governments spend the excess on crap, and then when it comes time to make cuts, they whine about how they'll have to cut essential services. We see it all the time with local governments as property taxes fluctuate. When revenues are down they say they have to cut police and fire departments and teachers, but there's never any talk about cutting what was _added_ during the fat years. We always had teachers and police and fire departments during the previous lean years, so what's the problem with going back to how it was?
We're seeing the same thing on the federal level, the difference being that there haven't been good times (ie: surplus) in over a decade. Replace "good times" with "when we're borrowing even more from China."
We had money to fund NOAA before the current people in charge borrowed more money than all previous administrations combined, why can't we go back to that? I think that's what the GP is getting at.
If you have a better idea, please elaborate. For some reason completely oblivious to you, preparation against catastrophic events costs money.
Preparation against catastrophic events?
So these satellites are able to turn back the storm, and prevent damage?
If they are so essential, why is there ALREADY a planned one year satellite gap?
Did they shut down the Hurricane Hunters as well?
Look, its obvious that this is a posturing scare tactic, but if you can't see that and are content to be whip-sawed by bureaucratic scare mongering, just call your congressman and tell him to knuckle under and tax you more.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
So you (the article) are accusing us/government of not using foresight with our budget cuts. If you had foresight then you would realize that if we don't make cuts now (and tax increases), our economy will be in the tank before the next big hurricane, cuts would be even worse. The reason we are in this debt mess to begin with is because everyone wants something and uses emotional appeal (fear, etc.) to pressure congress to give them what they want. If you want more money, trim the fat in your organization first. "You can't have your cake and eat it too" --A. Founding Father
No hurricane warning was issued in any of the states that were hit by Sandy... Not even when it was obvious that it was going to a hurricane when it hit ground.
With full functioning infrastructure, this fully funded agency failed.
AccuWeather was all over it...
8% isn't that big, you can find that much fat in any departmental budget, and money can be siphoned off of other projects and moved to these satellites at a moment's notice. Worst case, take the money out of FEMA or the TSA and save everybody some suffering.
If people's wages remain static, then it means 8% of adults (and some similar percentage of families) without an income. Sure, you might say those 8% were doing nothing important, but now they will be left with no money, empty stomachs and anger. This does have the potential to destabilize society.
Then to argue that only the fat of a budget will be cut is too idealistic. If those departments can't run themselves efficiently (as a result of corruption, which is partly why there is a problem in the first place), then how will they cut their budgets appropriately?
The real solution to the "fiscal" woes in the US (as it was for other empires) is for it to shake off all the free-loading interest groups and nation states that do not contribute to its welfare, and to return the control of money to the people through the restoration of democratic process, but the political will for this is non-existent.
Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
Preparation against catastrophic events? So these satellites are able to turn back the storm, and prevent damage?
Preparation in this case means 'early warning'
The idea is that if people are notified of the risk of a storm striking earlier, they will have more time to prepare, and therefore: their preparations will be more effective, and thus damage will be reduced.
It won't be true in all cases -- sometimes the 'early warning' may be ignored, because it hasn't shown to be reliable. Also, the NOAA makes predictions, and predictions that far in advance have some inherent uncertainty, due to technological limitations and limitations of the science, modelling, and statistical techniques used in weather prediction.
If people's wages remain static, then it means 8% of adults (and some similar percentage of families) without an income.
Well that only works if you believe that EVERYBODY works for the federal government.
A lot of people in this country took pay cuts over the last several years, I'm sure NOAA can as well.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
If they are so essential, why is there ALREADY a planned one year satellite gap?
You're operating under the flawed assumption that congress has the public's best interest in mind. There was no PLANNED one year satellite gap, you fucking fool.
Here, from June, 2012:
Congressional budget cutting will delay the launch of a key weather satellite and hinder tracking of killer hurricanes, tornadoes and other severe weather, officials warn.
...
...
...
The satellite, which had been scheduled to launch in 2016, will be postponed 18 months because of spending cuts and delays. The threat during that gap is that National Weather Service forecasts will become fuzzier, with the paths of hurricanes and tornadoes even less predictable.
With more budget cuts looming, further delays are possible — something President Obama alluded to last week.
"There will be a data gap. That data gap will have very serious consequences to our ability to do severe storm warnings, long-term weather forecasts, search and rescue and good weather forecasts," Jane Lubchenco, NOAA administrator, told members of a Senate Appropriations subcommittee in April.
Forecasters issued warnings five days ahead of tornadoes that struck Tuscaloosa, Ala., and five other states in April. A barrage of 312 tornadoes swept across the Southeast, killing 321 people. On storm day, forecasters gave warnings averaging 27 minutes before actual touchdowns.
Likewise, when a tornado struck Joplin, Mo., killing 151 on May 22, forecasters gave warnings averaging 24 minutes before strikes.
"The satellites are an important part of that early warning process," said Christopher Vaccaro, a spokesman for the service.
Lubchenco said without information from the polar satellite, forecasts for a massive storm nicknamed "snowmageddon," which hit Washington in February 2010, would have had the location wrong by 200 to 300 miles and would have underestimated the snowfall by 10 inches. Hurricane tracking would also suffer, she said.
"Our severe storm warnings will be seriously degraded," Lubchenco testified April 1 before the House Appropriations subcommittee governing the agency.
Lawmakers and scientists lauded the value of the program, which provides forecasts for military troop deployments, ocean search-and-rescue missions and farmers tending crops.
"It's important for public safety," said Christine McEntee, executive director of the American Geophysical Union. Cutting the funding "would be penny-wise and pound-foolish."
Lubchenco credited the satellites with helping save 295 people in 2010 by helping track rescue beacons aboard ships.
"That's saving lives, that's saving money," said Rep. Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House panel that oversees NOAA funding.
But reduced federal spending threatens all domestic programs. Congress cut spending $38.5 billion in the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30. House Republicans propose to cut another $30 billion next year.
So, there was never a planned gap. The damn funding got cut, and now it's getting cut some more. What's the point of having scientists advise on these issues if they get ignored? Fuck them, and fuck you. Can't prioritize anything or even look at the data and reason for yourselves. Go sleep in a tar-pit, you dickheads are hindering the herd.
If you have a better idea, please elaborate. For some reason completely oblivious to you, preparation against catastrophic events costs money.
Well, then. Let's see what we have here:
1) Reduce the number of aircraft carriers from 10 (+3 under construction) to 5
2) Spend less on military than the rest of the world combined. Reduce the amount by half.
3) Stop waging war in Afghanistan. Pull out of Afghanistan entirely and bring our people home.
4) Stop the war on drugs. Release everyone jailed for non-violent drug-related crime.
5) Stop the war on immigrants. Allow an easy and expensive path to citizenship. (Note: Our population is declining and we need more taxpayers.)
6) Stop the war on tourism. Disband homeland security, allow unencumbered and easy travel within the US. Redirect the TSA money away from worthless scanners and put it towards intelligence.
That's just off the top of my head. Search for "ways the federal government can save money" and get a zillion hits. Google is your friend.
(Ending Saturday delivery of mail would save an est. $1.7 - $3.1 billion alone. How much did you say those satellites cost?)
Considering that the majority of the Federal government today *IS* fat, I have no problem asking for cuts across the board.
But I go even further with "returning the control of money" to the people. The Fed needs to go away, for one thing.
Not so different from corporations in the end. No matter what it's all about power.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
That's a non sequitur in championship territory. There's simply no causal relation.
Measured how, and since when? Per capita? In terms of constant value, maybe in the last 50 years production per capita has doubled.
But this is pointless. If you're going to make silly, groundless claims, rational discussion can go nowhere.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
I have a better idea. Stop spending money on stupid shit, and spend it on this instead. We have troops in over 100 countries at the moment. Cut that down to 50 (still ridiculous) and we'd have plenty of money for this program. End farm subsidies. Stop borrowing money so 30cents of every dollar isn't spent on interest anymore. This is a very simple problem, but the governments of the world are so addicted to spending money in the least efficient way possible that they have to invent a crisis like this to try and extort even more money out of us. Going over the "Fiscal cliff" will likely be one of the best things that could happen to this country.
What do you consider this to be?
The local government has plans here (mainly for earthquake reasons, as we aren't in a hurricane area). I would rather the local government handle it and the feds only step in when a military relief effort is needed - airlifts and such, that the government is still able to do after the Bush poison pill expires. Let it go. It's not that big of a problem. Fall off the cliff. It's an artificial cliff anyway. There's no reason that if the programs affected are that important, they can't just be added back in next year's budget. We don't need to maintain unsustainably low taxes just to "prevent hurricaines".
Learn to love Alaska
On others, that is. The fiscal cliff thing is just idiotic: basically, it came about because congress would not agree to pay for the budget it had voted for and set itself an ultimatum so terrifying that it would have to get its collective act together.
It turns out that the amount of pain the Congress is ready to inflict on random individuals who were just unlucky is very, very large. And this thread is full of crazies thinking it is oh-so-brave to cut funding for weather (they leave far from the hurrican paths), to stop giving money to the unemployed (they themselves have a cushy job they think is entirely due to their hard work), to not give people health care (because cancer/car accidents are the product of bad lifestyle -- always. Also, they themselves have good insurance).
So maybe the US deserves to go over the cliff and have a good 3 point of GDP recession. After all, the economy is doing so well... Or maybe the American electorate needs to pull the plug on the Republicans and the Libertards. Then the Democracts can be split into a centre right and a centre left party.
They are going to wreck the economy again whenever they can do so for profit, so why give them more incentive to break the economy?
Learn to love Alaska
Why on Earth would it take 5+ years to build & launch a weather satellite? Seems like they could use the plans for the older sats (whilst using modern component equivalents). It shouldn't take multi-billions to build. Maybe we need an X-prize for weather satellites.
How is this Insightful? How about -1 Trite. Is it that hard to believe that government can and does provide useful services, especially those that have such a long time horizon and capital investment that the market will not provide them? Is it also that hard to understand that these valuable programs and the people who run them (at a huge discount relative to the private sector) suffer under the vagaries of political brinksmanship?
Listen, this is just more Republican B.S. We're not going to miss forecasting another Sandy-like hurricane
because the rich are finally told to carry their own weight in the U.S of A. and end their entitlement of standing
on the backs of the poor and middle class Americans because of the Bush charity-for-the-rich tax cuts. Just sayin'.
And milk will not suddenly become $20.00/gallon, either, or even $7.00 a gallon.
CAPTCHA = paranoia (weird!)
Give us more money, or people die.
8% isn't that big, you can find that much fat in any departmental budget
THIS.
Heads of government departments are all professional liars (anybody who says different has never worked on a government contract).
You can expect a lot more of this sort of doomsaying as the date approaches.
PS: Other countries have weather satellites, too. Maybe they could spend some time working on international relations...
No sig today...
Same old shilling from corporate scumfucks. "Lower our taxes, or jobs will be lost... bankers are too thick to jail... and now that you're in trouble, don't you fucking dare even look at us! It's the government! The only institution you at least have theoretical say in, the only way you can put us in our place, is to blame [for the things we lobbied it to do]!"
Really, post from an account or shut the fuck up. Or even better, die.
Drop the "fuck you" attitude until you come up with your own federal budget. It's hard; the money just isn't there to do all the things people want. What would you like to cut? Across-the-board cuts happen because they are much more politically palatable than targeted cuts.
> Give us more tax breaks or we will wreck the economy again.
Most people still don't understand the problems. Its not fixable.
It's unlikely that that will solve the problem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-KqeU8nzn4 (his proposed marxist solution at the end is not a good one, which he must know)
I see "Now Hiring" signs everywhere. I'm not saying it's the late 90's again, but the idea that people go from fed job to zero is ridiculous. You can always work retail.
Since the Government has failed accounting & budgeting, the people need to take it over.
A sequence of Twitter posts made some time ago, feel free to re-post them to twitter or elsewhere.
#taxes 1) The Declaration of independence recognized the peoples rights & duty to ... remove budgeting & accounting failed tasks from Gov't.
#taxes 2) for proper representation, given all the budgeting & accounting fails, &more, the people must direct where their taxes R 2 B used.
#taxes 3) For the people 2 voice where their taxes R 2 B used, forms R required to be created and made available by all Gov't tax collectors
#taxes 4) each taxpayers direction of where their taxes R 2 B used is with the constraint of generating teamwork benefits they can share in.
#taxes 5) for those who trust gov't, there is option of letting the government decide where their taxes, or some portion, R 2 B used.
#taxes 6) Address political/election faild promises R replaced w/taxpayer direction. Elected R hired to sum & implement taxpayer direction.
#taxes 7) For amount of taxes the taxpayers "trust" the government with, #voters not only help hire the elected but help direct these funds
#taxes 8) For people 2 know where their taxes are needed, Gov't must become transparent 2 inform the people of funding needs. People decide.
#taxes 9) Clarity, I decide on where the taxes I pay are used, you on yours, etc.. This is a republic where all voices are accounted for.
#taxes 10) We have plenty proof this tax directing change works. Open Source Software, Iceland's recovery, & many crowd sourced projects.
#taxes 11) either you trust the people 2 do the right thing, or you rig #elections 2 have some perceived unfair advantage over the people
#taxes 12) We shall NOT vote on this right & duty of the people to direct where their taxes are to be used. It has already been established
#taxes 13) The tax processor jobs are in position to allocate a taxpayer taxes according to that taxpayer's direction. And provide receipt.
#taxes 14) Should Gov't fail this job, the people can set it up through Credit unions & provide receipts/proof to tax processors of tax paid
#taxes 15) In event of going through Credit Unions, funding access will require proof of proper spending in accord with taxpayer directions.
#taxes 16) #1 priority directing taxes is 4 creation & availability of required forms giving taxpayers voice, allowing proper representation
#taxes 17) on the check you use to pay your taxes there is a what's it for line to fill in, use it to get the peoples voice forms produced.
Of course that excludes pretty much the entire east coast and south due to hurricanes. And just inland from there, they have tornadoes. Can't live there. California has earthquakes, mudslides and fires. Can't live there. The west and mid-west has been experiencing record dry conditions and fires, can't live there. That leaves... Canada. So there you go. Everyone move to Canada!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
"weather channel is now part of nbc / comcast so they have the funds to launch a satellite."
Not likely to happen until the company is forced to upgrade because they're losing customers. In the meantime the extra money will go for CEO and managerial bonuses.
http://www.rootstrikers.org/
If people's wages remain static, then it means 8% of adults (and some similar percentage of families) without an income. Sure, you might say those 8% were doing nothing important, but now they will be left with no money, empty stomachs and anger. This does have the potential to destabilize society.
Government cannot keep growing indefinitely (which is what it's doing at the moment).
At some point the system has to break down - when there's not enough people actually producing stuff to pay the government bills. Better to make a few functionaries miserable now than to make the entire population suffer through the meltdown (in 20, 30 years or whenever).
Then to argue that only the fat of a budget will be cut is too idealistic. If those departments can't run themselves efficiently (as a result of corruption, which is partly why there is a problem in the first place), then how will they cut their budgets appropriately?
There's no way to get past the layers of lies that have built up over the years to justify their existence so you just cut every department. Stuff like the military can probably take a 20-30% hit. A few less F22s and stealth bombers won't make any difference to anybody's security, that's a couple of trillion right there.
No sig today...
How much does one launch cost? How much does it cost to blow up innocent people (women and children included though I value them neither more nor less than males) by drone just about every day of the year.
I really don't know where my priorities are at -- what the fuck is wrong with me for valuing interesting scientific data over blowing up random people and making enemies of the survivors.
Yeah -- a big FUCK YOU to that. It's totally warranted and really, not even a tiny fraction of a fraction of a fraction of percent harsh enough for the total FUCKHEADS in WA DC.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Well, the most recent spending boom by the Federal Government was for two badly executed invasions and a bunch "Homeland Security" BS. I agree with you, let's cut out that BS and get back to the 90's.
The article is very misleading. While it is true that the budget cuts will hinder the satelites which will mean the predictions of storm tracks will not be as accurate, it does not mean there will not be storm tracks. In real terms, what it means is that the models will show a wider path a hurrican may take meaning more people may need to prepare, but not that the Eastern Seaboard will be caught by suprise.
In the case of Hurrican Sandy, it would have made no difference. New Jersey and New York would have been included in the general hurrican watch even without the satelite prediction, just as they were before the models predicted that Sandy would turn inward. If those states took precautions, as they normally would, they would still have had ample notice once Sandy turned inward.
The real question to be asking is why didn't NOAA plan for this? The Bush era tax cuts were already planned to expire. They were extended by the previous congress with the so called fiscal cliff added to ensure action was taken. Surely NOAA would have contigency plans for the fiscal cliff. It's not as if the possibily was remote, particularly given congress' performance with it's debt/bond rating.
If these satelites are as critical as the article is making them out to be, then NOAA should have no problem getting congress to allow them to cut other non-critical NOAA activities and re-direct the funds. Of course, they probably don't want to do that, and instead prefer to capitalize on the fears and anxieties of the public while Sandy is fresh in their minds.
Personally, I'd make congress lay off all of their staff and cut all of their expense accounts until they can pass a balanced budget. As long as they are exempt from the pressures of the fiscal cliff and they ignore their own entitlements, nothing will change. At least the country does benefit from NOAA.
You forgot the "resign all your rights" step...
Tomorrow is another day...
Took the US a little longer to predict the track anyway didnt it?
YMMD, You Made My Day!
Tomorrow is another day...
You don't know what it's like out there! I've worked in the private sector. They expect results!
How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean.
Cant your government strike a deal with Germany (or another nation) for some time share on a weather satellite like last time?
Tomorrow is another day...
... because the name "Sandy" has been officialy 'retired'.
Agreed overall, but mostly it's the wars and police state costing us money senselessly.
Anywho the science lobbiests were lobbying againat tyw fiscal cliff until NSF supported scientists started publishing articles saying "no we're fine with the 10% cut zo long as the millitary and police state lose it too and the Bush tax cuts go away for good." I'm sure the real NOAA scientists will chear the fiscal cliff for the same reason.
In fact we need a much deeper cut like say 30% for the millitary and law enforcment and 15% for all other discretionary spending for a couple years. If we're worried about the economy we can just give poor people some money for a while since thay'll spend it. And it fairly easy to take away money you give to the poor later since thay cannot afford lobbiests
]
Government cannot keep growing indefinitely (which is what it's doing at the moment).
Based on what metric?
Peak government employment? That was back in the 70s or 80s. Even now, government employment rolls are DOWN. That's right, lots of government employees have been laid off since the economy went sour. And Obama still has less people working for him than Reagan did.
http://www.opm.gov/feddata/historicaltables/totalgovernmentsince1962.asp
Per Capita spending? Adjusted for inflation, it's not actually significantly higher, unless you mindlessly include tax cuts as spending.
So please, tell us how you've concluded government is growing, and on what terms. Give us some sources.
Or just mindlessly claim something is happening, and don't make the effort to be sure your words are true.
Give us more, the hard way, or Zimbabwe Ben Bernanke and his magic printing press can do it Quantitatively Easy way.
As we own you in either case, your choice is pro forma.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
As the American people go over the "fiscal cliff", the CONgressMEN look down and say,"Whew, we almost lost it".
The mind conceives, the body achieves, the spirit manifests.
Q: Would it be cheaper for every local government to have a space-based hurricane prediction system, or for the federal government to have a single one?
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
I can't seem to part with my war budget.. my precious.. must kill all the non-existent terrorists and promote a perpetual war machine in order to disperse as much tax dollars to privately held corporations as possible.. my precious.. must put israel before america and not cut their aid at all.. my precious.. must keep 150+ military bases around the world running at all times .. my precious.. must fund hundreds of black projects that american's tax dollars pay for fully but have no right in knowing what these projects are.. my precious.. must fund 100's of F22's that will never see combat.. my precious... must create false flag attacks so the americans will give up their liberties for securities and in turn give the government and their corporate cohorts a blank check to fund whatever they want.
The fiscal cliff is a bunch of horse shit, and only an act of God of the universe (like a lightening bold incinerating the capital building) and america starting over with non polluted, no treasonous individuals will this endless cycle of SHIT end.
But .. but.. but.. it's all the president's fault! fucking dumb americans..
Of they can predict it fails in 2017, I'm sure they can avoid its final destination and make sure it sticks around for another year or so..
Hivemind harvest in progress..
> Production has doubled, but wages stayed the same instead of doubling.
> Measured how, and since when?
Doubling is the wrong concept. Production in the 20th century increased annually at 2% compounded. Get your data from BLS.gov (the Bureau of Labor Statistics).
Although not doubling, wages have not kept pace, which has resulted in a linear vs asymptotic (to the wage of the 70's) gap in inequality that widens at an exponential rate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhLh4g4EGVc
http://wh.gov/R7b5
There's a petition for that. If they only had a single day to make a budget they would do exactly the same thing as if they had an entire year or decade. They posture for political points, wait till the last second, blame the opposition & then pass flat tax increases and spending cuts. I wish it was only a single day process so that the stock market had less time to wring their hands.
Across the board cuts will accomplish nothing more than cutting 8% of the fat, along with 8% of the muscle, bones, organs, and brains.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Typo'ed my post. The path to citizenship should read inexpensive.
The NOAA satellites provide essential data for climate science, so naturally theymust be shut down.
And it fairly easy to take away money you give to the poor later since thay cannot afford lobbiests
That depends on how much money you gave them ;-)
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
We could make a few less bombs and instead make weather satellites...its a shocking and radical idea i know, have no worry though...we will still have a million times more bombs then any other nation.
also, check your facts...i believe they are incorrect; probably perpetuated by someone who wants you to listen to there 30 second commercials.
We had money to fund NOAA before the current people in charge borrowed more money than all previous administrations combined, why can't we go back to that?
We blew the largest part of our budget surplus on the Bush Tax Cuts, the second largest part on the two wars, and the third largest part on stimulus and all of this, including the stimulus, was spent before the current people in charge took office. Under Obama we did spend additional money on stimulus, but all of that stimulus spending together, including stimulus tax cuts, are still less than the Bush Tax Cuts. Even if you believe that the stimulus spending was ill advised (which seems to be at odds with the results) the answer to the issue you raise about why we had money for NOAA before but not now is clear: we didn't. We never had the money to spend on those tax cuts, and all of the budgetary pain that we're going through now is the result.
Our igloos melt every spring for some reason. Natural disaster every year. Stay away.
If you have a better idea, please elaborate. For some reason completely oblivious to you, preparation against catastrophic events costs money.
Preparation against catastrophic events?
So these satellites are able to turn back the storm, and prevent damage?
You seem to be confusing preparation with prevention. And part of preparation includes warning people before the storm strikes so they can protect their property and evacuate safely.
And part of preparation includes warning people before the storm strikes so they can protect their property and evacuate safely.
Which has been done for much longer than there were satellites. You remember airplanes? Hurricane Hunters?
If all that stands between us and destruction is 8% of NOAAs budget, then perhaps we would be able to find that much crurft laying around within the agency or some other agency.
Bear in mind there was (allegedly) going to be a one year satellite gap anyway. Now, maybe its two years.
If one year didn't constitute a major emergency, why does two years?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
How about -1 Trite. Is it that hard to believe that government can and does provide useful services, especially those that have such a long time horizon and capital investment that the market will not provide them?
What, like weather satellites? Isn't this article about how the government is failing to provide such useful services?
The government does provide useful services. They're still outweighed by unnecessary services, pork barrel project, and rewarding campaign contributors by at least 10:1
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
Homeland security, the world's most massive and expensive military, drones creating terrorists in other lands, off the books and off the charts spending on spying (foreign and domestic). Cut all that (save the *defence* force the USA actually needs) and you could easily balance the budget.
So what war did Obama take us into to produce the massive spike in spending in the last four years?
10 minutes working on a sig. What a waste.
For the past 60 years, America has voted to build a government it can't afford. The idea that the 99% can vote themselves benefits and then simply hand the bill to someone else could, in the not too distant future, will bring about the death of democracy. Its time for *every* American to suffer the consequences of their votes. People must feel the crushing burden of the debt we have built up before they will change their behavior. I say, "over the cliff we go".
Circular references to the same lie, do not make it true, they just repeat the same lie. The oft repeat exclusion of information in order to produced biased outcomes, give it up, bullshit is bullshit.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Do Tax Cuts Increase Revenues? No, Tax cuts do not Increase Revenue
This is the second result (was a bad link, but I found it with some digging):
Deficit Fraud Romney: Jobless Benefits Are Too Expensive, But The Bush Tax Cuts Increase Revenue
Quote from that second one:
When it comes to the Bush tax cuts, revenue surely did not increase. In total dollars, the government collected about $1 trillion in income tax receipts in 2001, according to the Office of Management and Budget. This fell below one trillion for the next five years following the Bush tax cuts, not climbing above that level again until 2006.
results of your search are very mixed. the saddest thing i found when going through the google results is that I could tell what the article was going to say based on the source, ie all seemed partisan. Do you have any economic papers or non mass media sources that back up your analysis? This seemed to be the best source (on page 4 of hte results). But it seems to say the bush tax cuts were unsuccessful in their goals.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/bush-tax-cuts/index.cfm
Hey, why don't you say fuck a couple more times? Or why don't you tell everyone else how to do things, since you seem to think you're smarter than they are? Take some of your own advice, and go fuck yourself.
So what war did Obama take us into to produce the massive spike in spending in the last four years?
The Wall Street class war.
Suggest a better word which encapsulates the loathing our Federal rulers deserve. As I mentioned, even that one is wholly insufficient. I'm all ears.
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR!!! I can't wait for the whiners saying; Oh! my poor house, if only NASA had found a way to put up those weather satellites!
My karma is bad. Don't get too close!!!
The first result I got was this:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/10/15/do-tax-cuts-increase-government-revenue/
It has a pretty clear graph.
If the first two results for you were those two (particularly the first one, obamaftw.com, seems like it's going to be a bit partisan), I might questioning the biases of your search engine.
Of course search engines are smart, maybe each engine is giving each of us what it thinks we'll personally like :)
Actually paying for the ones the previous administration put on credit cards. Seriously look at the tax plans he isn't Spending any more than Bush did. the problem is that the long term loans are starting to come due and The US government can't pay for it.
In Clintons last couple of lame duck years the republican controlled house and senate forced through some decent long term tax and social security plans the kind to prevent the situation we are in now. The thing is Bush wiped those plans out and cut the interest rate for 8 years down to nothing to stimulate the economy. Which worked for only the housing market but that was enough to cloud the issue up. It also led to numerous secondary issues like the housing bubble, and the lack of incoming taxes effectively hobbled the government which then had to take loans to cover short term debt. Those loans are what Obama is trying to cover up.
Personally I am just waiting for the other shoe to completely drop. either we stagnate just like we are for about 8-10 more years or the bottom completely falls out and all that money the 1% have been saving up becomes worthless as the value of the dollar collapses completely.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
"Across the board cuts will accomplish nothing more than cutting 8% of the fat, along with 8% of the muscle, bones, organs, and brains."
But whose fault is that? Not that of the citizens, but of government itself.
If the people mandate cuts, and the government cuts important stuff rather than the fat, the government has nobody to blame but themselves. And WE have nobody to blame but them. This is not one of those "it's the peoples' fault" scenarios.
They have to cut, sooner or later, and the sooner they do it, the less damage there will be. Just about everybody knows that. So why aren't you hounding your politicians about it?
I do.
Do you have any economic papers or non mass media sources that back up your analysis?
Unfortunately not anymore. I looked this stuff up several years ago, getting federal revenue and tax rates from different sources. "Original research" I suppose. I don't remember which sites those were at exactly. It took me about half an hour, iirc.
Sorry I can't give you any better than that.
The Forbes link:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2012/10/15/do-tax-cuts-increase-government-revenue/
has a very clear graph, showing the slope changing significantly (from negative to positive) when Bush changed the rate of the top bracket.
The first result from DuckDuckGo for me was this from Heritage Foundation:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/01/ten-myths-about-the-bush-tax-cuts
Interesting that it's giving us different results. I've never used DDG before on this computer.
problem is: they stopped teaching Das Blinkenlichten reading in schools.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Plus, both the President Bush and President Obama Tax cuts were supply side biased, and the Bank/Mortgage bailouts were 100% supply side* Togther these represent 4 really huge commitments to test the theory behind trickle down/supply side and they have failed disasterously every single time. So listening to the people who backed and continue to back supply side at all is like listening to a doctor who still advocates bleeding the patients, shaking rattles at them to drive off evil spirits, and treating Malaria with crocodile dung. Whatever will actually help the economy, it's NOT going to come from the Supply-siders.
* The tax cuts were biased about 2 to 1 for supply side - that is, economists on all sides of the issue agreed that the individual consumers were together driving about 69 to 70 % of all spending, and NOBODY who studied sales figures came up with another number, but both years tax cuts paid out about 35 % to individual consumers and 65 % to the supply side minority, in the form of accelerated business depreciation. The Mortgage bailouts were very close to 100% supply side - the only way they really could have been demand side was directly paying off bad loans to let people keep their houses. That's what supply side and demand side mean. You know all the right wing guys who are claiming these bailouts are socialist? That they are a bigger problem than the two off-the-books wars? They were also exactly what the right advocated, and got. When some idiots try something four times, for what they themselves have claimed were the four largest single expenditures ever by any nation, and then they themselves claim it made the economy worse in the end, why is anyone still listening to them?
Note: I'm not claiming here that Keynesians or the real Socialists or any other particular economic theorists are definitely right and have all the answers, but if they are all wrong, at least in part, the supply-siders and trickle-downers and so on are definitively so much more totally wrong, we need some whole new ideas in economics. Deciding, for example, the Keynesians are wrong, without first spending as much as just one of the bailouts or stimuli to test it, and then testing supply side four times without learning anything, is all the proof anyone half rational needs that some of our economists and politicians are quacks at best, brutal, child-destroying, war-mongering monsters at the worst still reasonable interpretation, and criminals by the same sort of standards we would not hesitate to apply to a profession such as engineering or medicine.
Who is John Cabal?
Very clearly that graph isn't real terms. Until inflation is factored out, it means nothing.
According to MSNBC's Chris Matthew, Obama can personally change the course of storms and other major disasters. That he has not so far is obviously someone else's fault.
For anyone who thinks domestic spending is the problem - please consider this:
It is possible to hide military and homeland security spending as black projects. Some of this is known to be hidden in civilian projects. (For example, it was recently revealed that a lot of National Endowment for the Arts spending, from the 50s through 80s or later, was hidden CIA funding for black projects to make the USSR look bad). There are many current examples, such as Dept. of Transportation roads that pass through stateside miltary bases and are heavily developed until the edge of those bases (or at least as far as the tank parking compounds and tank ranges), but are budgeted as being for special access to low income communities on the back sides of those bases (even though they are gravel from the base edge on). There is no evidence ever for a civilian agency being able to hide any funding in the military or security budgets.
If you look back at cases where people have admitted there exist black projects, there are many where the person has given the impression where the projects are hidden in other parts of the military budget but never has any government representitve openly stated that black projects are always confined to the military side, and there are known counterexamples. Some statements look carefully crafted to give the public the impression black projects aren't hidden in the civil side, without technically lying when testifying to congress.
It is literally impossible to prove that 'entitlement' or other civiilian side spending is responsible for the current economy, as the general public is not told what part of that entitlement spending is really black projects. It may be possible in theory to prove that even the open record military/security budget is driving the debt, since the real total must be greater, not less, but proving the reverse is impossible without having access to things the general public does not get to see. Anyone who advances the claim is either making it without enough real information to be sure, or has just violated an oath and revealed classified information.
Who is John Cabal?
He paid the credit card bill those two wars were put on.
It's not different results, I searched for "Bush Tax Cuts Increase Revenue" in quotes and it looks like you did it without the quotes. I also get the Heritage Foundation link when I do it that way.
For your other comment: Yes, my two links were definitely partisan, no question there. But Forbes is the same way - it's generally pro conservative, but *always* pro rich and pro concentration of wealth. None of these give a reliable analysis of this suggested phenomenon. I like cornjones' link, but then again it pretty well agrees with what I'm saying...
I'm not in a position to argue this topic from an informed standpoint, but I will say that the graph in the Forbes article you linked is not convincing - the only bit where the marginal tax rate and receipt curves seem to sync up is a little dip in 2002. Otherwise, the best case that it seems to be making is that the two are unrelated. The blue curve shows the smooth growth of the economy, the red curve shows the discontinuous passage of laws.
It's been well demonstrated that if we had a hurricane constantly in every school, there would be no shootings. More hurricanes!
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Since most of the resistance to taxing the wealthy (the major sticking point in achieving a fiscal compromise) is coming from the Red States and the Red States suffer disproportionally from tornadoes, we should have NOAA drop funding for those early waring systems first.
You will sacrifice your mobile home so that some banker can make bigger yacht payments.
Have gnu, will travel.
I remember a market crash that happened within weeks of Bush's first inauguration. I think somebody's bubble burst. Then some unfortunate event in September of 2001. By 04 collections were rising to 832B(billion), then 935B, 1024B, 1116B, a small drop to 1032B in 2008, than a huge drop to 866B in 2009. I know something bad happened in 2008 to cause that but I can't remember what. Figures provided by the Internal Revenue Service. I would like to know how much the Bush tax rate cuts cost us. Obama wants to keep the cuts on incomes below $250000. How much will that cost us? Yes, Bush spent too much, Obama is on track to spend even more. Is the only cure for overspending more overspending?
Homeland Security has a lot of functions, at least some of which are actually quite important. The Secret Service, Coast Guard, Customs, INS, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service... you can't get rid of those. The military is extraordinarily expensive and no doubt makes American presidents all too willing to use them in order to feel they are getting value for money. OTOH, I must say that I am persuaded by the argument that the US military is so blindingly far ahead of every other power on earth combined that it quells a lot of conflicts that would otherwise break out - which means more trade, which means we win. Is it worth what we pay? Maybe, maybe not. How much is it worth to be the undisputed master of the world's sea lanes?
Classic.
As usual the right wing is trying to obstruct and ruin any good work passed by the democrats. But Obama has an easy cure. For example states like Florida, Mississippi and Louisiana are trying to obstruct the new medical policies. There is an easy cure. We are asking the President to remove all military bases from states that fail to comply and halt funding of all projects in such states. When those states take the economic slap of all times and the public wrath that goes with it I think they will suddenly feel all warm and want to comply with Obama care and just about everything else the left wants. Imagine seniors who use the VA for their medical care having to relocate to other states to get their care. Imagine war widows being unable to shop at the PX until these states comply. NASA exists in Florida and Texas. So why not cut off all funding to these two right wing states?
Compromise? Hell no!! It is time for the left to stomp the right into the dirt.
Yes, much of it is inflation, but we didn't go from inflation to deflation then back to inflation again right as the Bush tax cuts were passed.
Like you, I would like to see that graph normalized for inflation. You're right that it's not comparing the right kinds of terms, but I disagree that it means nothing. Revenue was coming down, then tax cuts, then it went up.
As far as inflation goes, the way we measure it now is a joke. If oil, food, and housing don't count, I'm not sure what the point of the quantity even is. Of course that's a different debate for a different day.
Note: I'm not claiming here that Keynesians or the real Socialists or any other particular economic theorists are definitely right and have all the answers
The point is that all theories are right if the enjoy the right situation. And in the current situation, supply side policy is just going to make things worse.
Reid needs to get off his ass and hold hold votes on any number of the Bills passed by the House. If they are as bad as he says, they will be defeated. More llikely he's afraid they will pass.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Maybe you should invest in a dictionary. Preparation does not mean prevention, as every school kid who has ever prepared for en exam and then turned up and found that the exam was not prevented and occurred as scheduled has discovered.
> But it seems to say the bush tax cuts were
> unsuccessful in their goals.
not really, their main goal was always meant to be a give away to the 1% at the expense of the 99%. they didn't even bother to hide this much.
"weather channel is now part of nbc / comcast so they have the funds to launch a satellite."
Not likely to happen until the company is forced to upgrade because they're losing customers. In the meantime the extra money will go for CEO and managerial bonuses.
It's not likely to happen until government gets out. Right now ALL news orgs are freeloading on the taxpayer's dime. If the government gets out, and there is competition between the news orgs over who can produce accurate weather information, then everyone wins.
You do realize you have the freedom to not invest in any company that you feel they are mismanaging their finances. You also have the freedom to invest in a competitor of theirs.
If their financial mismanagement is so severe, then an investment in a competitor may make you a very rich man. You can then choose to spend your newfound wealth however you desire ( create a new foundation dedicated to helping those overlooked and shortchanged due to outrageous payouts to CEOs and managers, freely give it all back to the government to help pay down our national debt, etc. etc.)
What, no Libertarians? It's obviously cheaper for there to be 100 competing private space-based hurricane prediction systems, all selling the information to the local governments, as a "modest" profit.
Learn to love Alaska
How much does it cost to blow up innocent people (women and children included though I value them neither more nor less than males) by drone just about every day of the year.
I really don't know where my priorities are at -- what the fuck is wrong with me for valuing interesting scientific data over blowing up random people and making enemies of the survivors.
The vast majority of people being killed by drone strikes are members of terrorist groups (note that is terrorist, not "terrorist."), and not innocent people, nor are they random people. Any survivors are likely to already be our enemies.
Pakistani General: Actually, The Drones Are Awesome
I doubt very much that the cost of drone strikes will be anywhere near the cost of a satellite and space launch.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Terrifying: Increases in Real Per Capita Federal Spending Over The Past 35 Years
It appears the Federal government is hiring again under the Obama administration.
Historical Federal Workforce Tables - (In thousands)
Year.Civ.. Mil..L/J*.Total
2008 2,692 1,450 64 4,206
2009 2,774 1,591 66 4,430
*Legislative & Judicial
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
The government does provide useful services. They're still outweighed by unnecessary services, pork barrel project, and rewarding campaign contributors by at least 10:1
Considering the amount of cash and political support from 1 of the 2 parties required to get elected in the US for whatever position, whoever ends up winning is by definition corrupt.
Until such time as the electorate wakes the fuck up and changes the criteria based on which they vote, nothing will change and the downward spiral will continue.
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Back in the '70s they would have been low-wage 'typists'.
These days they're not. How much do they spend per government employee now compared to then? How many of today's workers are contractors who don't appear on the payroll?
No sig today...
i saw the forbes link but i was putting it down as partisan or at least vested interest. a couple places show that tax revenues go up every year (w/ some 6 exception years) which casts doubt on the forbes data. this seems to say that http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html. These guys have a really crappy site (so they must be academics) but they say "what evidence there is suggests there to be a correlation between lower taxes and LOWER revenues, not HIGHER revenues as suggested by supply-siders. There may well be valid arguments in favor of tax cuts. But higher tax revenues does not appear to be one of them." They also seem to show supporting data based on percentages rather than straight numbers for gdp which seems to be more valid, imho. http://www.econdataus.com/taxcuts.html
The problem isn't that these satellites cost money, its that none of the idiots in Congress want to see money taken away from THEIR (generally less important to the safety/security of the nation than these new weather satellites) "pork" projects to fund the satellites. Or to see a few billionaires pay a bit more in tax to cover the costs.
Now remove all the jobs in the 70's and 80's that were typists, filers and general paper shufflers where 99% of those jobs are now done by computers and see how well that compares. back in the 70's and 80's you needed 2 or 3 people for many jobs that take less than one persons full time nowadays.
Sure is easy to always hit the terrorists when "militant" is defined as a non-infant male killed by drone.
http://voices.yahoo.com/report-obama-redefines-militant-avoid-counting-11403806.html
Any other bullshit you want to shovel asshole? You have blood on your hands by virtue of your blind suckage of the lies. That makes you an accessory to evil and as such, you deserve loathing just as the people pulling the trigger on "dogs" (the childlike two legged variety) in drone attacks deserve.
http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2011/07/18/washingtons-untrue-claims-no-civilian-deaths-in-pakistan-drone-strikes/
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/pain-continues-after-war-for-american-drone-pilot-a-872726.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208307/Americas-deadly-double-tap-drone-attacks-killing-49-people-known-terrorist-Pakistan.html
What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
Where is the accountability? How many people have been fired? If one of my family is killed or injured because of the lack of coverage can I then sue the fuckwads who with $13B couldn't get a replacement up in time?
Notice what is missing - fired. Made redundant. How much do you want to bet those 'restructured' and 'streamlined' are still on the payrolls?
Really? All along? Like for the past four years? Why do you STILL have a job if it has taken you four years to get to this point? Oh wait.. the administration was just SOOOOOO concerned about weather that (from netgov.com)
The bottom line is that there is a) no responsibility in government and b) agencies will always ask for more money.
While it is a nice story about how the NOAA Satellites "predicted" Hurricane's Sandy's path, the truth is they had a 50-50 chance. In case you have missed it, no one is able to predict the weather any longer.
Predicting overnight temps is also broken. The other morning it was predicted to be 16F as the low, it was -5F, which broke the record set back in 1983. If you shuddered well so did I because I had to go relocate snow that was not predicted from the night before.
Look out a window to see what the weather is, many NOAA stations do not do this. Doppler Radar is a great tool except it does not cover my area so it really is a guessing game as to what will happen.
Agrisea Tsunami - Epyc Servers... https://agrisea.net/products
Point 1) Bush did 2 rounds of tax cuts. 2001 and 2003. The 2001 cut coincides with the point where the federal receipts starts to go steeper downhill.
Point 2) When the federal receipts does revert to going up, it only does so back to the long standing rise (inflation etc.)
Point 3) In reality, both of those falls were due to economic downturns. The first coincides with the tech stock bubble bursting. The second with the real estate bubble bursting.
Point 4) The second of those recoveries coincides with Obama becoming president. And the stimulus package. Not tax cuts.
Again, if we had a graph of real terms federal receipts, then we could maybe make some better conclusions. But as it is, we can't.
More significantly, the government continues to raise defense spending and refuses to cut it during lean times. These imbeciles would rather cut critical services like weather forecasting out if political expediency and short term cost-cutting than to cut pointlessly wasteful shit like the pentagram's largely wasted budget. It's pretty obvious that they're taking care of their bribers even though it will mean the nation's demise. The saddest part is that these people keep getting elected, so the idiocracy really has won already. It's now just a batter of time until our economy collapses and takes the rest of the world's down with it.
Yes Yes... everybody has their favorite program. Everybody's program saves the world and especially the children.
I think those that whine the loudest should endure the biggest cuts in spending.
Based on what metric?
Um, how about spending as a percent of GDP? Here is a link.
Experience has shown that people almost universally squander the change to prepare aforded to them through the early warnings; the media was constantly referring to Sandy as a huricane even though it wasn't, imagine what would have happened if it were the real Cat 3 huricane, that the area is over-due for!
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Um... the coming war with Iran is going to be Obamas War... along with the other 2 he's running right now.
In most countries and even States, spending by the Troops stationed there is an important part of the local economy. The Mi National Guard goes to the effort to pay all of the troops a $50.00 advance on their pay so they'd have pocket money to spend at the local establishments, one year they paid the advance with two dollar bills, so the source of the money would be more obvious.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
You might be unaware that the Senate rules prohibit filibustering the budget. The Senate budget committee has chosen not to send a budget to the floor for several years. I don't know Chairman Conrad's thinking on this, but I'd guess he's embarrassed to actually "budget" a trillion dollar deficit.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
It has a pretty clear graph.
But that graph is completely bogus when it completely ignores to compensate for population growth.
When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").