unfortunately, only the start of what NOAA and the EPA will pull back from in the next 4 years, all with significant impacts to our air and water quality. Elections have consequences.
Trump Administration Seeks Steep Cuts From Noaa Budget
Some bad news for NOAA...
The proposed cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would also eliminate funding for a variety of smaller programs including external research, coastal management, estuary reserves and "coastal resilience," which seeks to bolster the ability of coastal areas to withstand major storms and rising seas.
http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2017/03/climate_science_budget_cuts_pr.html
The proposed cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would also eliminate funding for a variety of smaller programs including external research, coastal management, estuary reserves and "coastal resilience," which seeks to bolster the ability of coastal areas to withstand major storms and rising seas.
http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2017/03/climate_science_budget_cuts_pr.html
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
Indeed every branch of the gov will face huge cuts to accommodate the military increase. It sucks to me but hey go there you go. The votes been cast and now there's the dogma. I wish I had loads of spare $$ to invest in companies that supply the hardware that will gain so I can too but I don't.unfortunately, only the start of what NOAA and the EPA will pull back from in the next 4 years, all with significant impacts to our air and water quality. Elections have consequences.
An immediacy of atrophy in every agency that protects me and my family/community/state is the future. For all of the general care for America, none of it really is for us in terms of our environment.
To me it's quite mental to pay a fortune to maybe protect us beyond our borders by letting a few of our own (and lots of other foreign investors) folks massively shit in our own wells to enable this.
The next budget is going to be a belter and the writing is on the wall for all agencies that protect us other than the military.
Still if Trump is the tough guy he tries to be maybe he'll Tweet up the various nations netting the shit out of the N Pacific, that'll stop em or maybe he'll send one of our new carrier fleets. I'd admire him more if he sold sell coal washed spring water in his hotels. Extra phenol, make your rye taste like Talisker...
Sorry to rant
Dave
Trump has promised jobs which will never materialize because they no longer exist, due to the rapidly increasing replacement of human workers with robotic technology. This little discussed reality is going to have a profound impact on jobs worldwide, and will permanently change society economics.
As the US jobs do not materialize in the next few years, and overall infrastructure conditions and social safety nets diminish due to the massive tilt towards defense industry, banking and hedge fund interests, the core electorate that elected Trump will mostly likely understand they were conned, and that will provide an opportunity for yet another change election in 2020.
Sadly missing at this time, however, are centrist leaders who understand that social programs are a safety net, not entitlements, that the rights of corporations are secondary not primary over the rights of citizens, and that true conservatism protects the environment for current and future generations.
If only...
As the US jobs do not materialize in the next few years, and overall infrastructure conditions and social safety nets diminish due to the massive tilt towards defense industry, banking and hedge fund interests, the core electorate that elected Trump will mostly likely understand they were conned, and that will provide an opportunity for yet another change election in 2020.
Sadly missing at this time, however, are centrist leaders who understand that social programs are a safety net, not entitlements, that the rights of corporations are secondary not primary over the rights of citizens, and that true conservatism protects the environment for current and future generations.
If only...
Overall I agree with your statement, except for the first sentence.
50,000 factories in the last 20yrs did not close because of automation.Trump has promised jobs which will never materialize because they no longer exist, due to the rapidly increasing replacement of human workers with robotic technology.
no, those jobs were lost due to idiotic tax regulations that rewarded US companies off shoring for increased profits. A major shift that while great for company profits and terrible for US workers, flipped the economics of the countries that up to now benefited from those in-migration jobs.
But demand creates competition which drives up wages - India software engineers now making equivalent of US techies,skilled China production workers now only making 15% less then their US counterparts, wages in Vietnam, Malaysia, etc, rising rapidly as well.
The corporations played the shell game for years - move production and reap profits until the wages in that country rose, then time to relocate to a cheaper country. That shell game is now coming to a close.
There is currently billions of $ being invested in robotic production in the US, and it is just the tip of the iceberg. Many US companies with operations still offshore are in planning to relocate production back to automated plants in the US - once labor costs are nil, then savings come from adjacency to primary materials and transportation to sales.
Same will happen in the countries mentioned above, and the ramifications in China will be particularly severe. Not only will they lose millions of jobs from US companies as they transfer to automated plants in the US, their own core manufacturing base is making this change. The province of Guangdong alone has vowed to invest $8bn between 2015 and 2017 on automation. Their loss in production jobs will be staggering, and it will happen in a very short decade.
William Freidman, one of the best forward thinkers in our country, forecast this ten years ago, and it is now spooling up. In recognition of this new reality, Bill Gates has produced a white paper rationalizing why corporations should be taxed for every robotic machine that takes a workers job, to offset the continuing loss in payroll taxes, with those taxes dedicated to retraining workers for what will most likely be service jobs. Or more likely, paying extended unemployment benefits.
I'll get off my soapbox, and apologies for the long winded, this just happens to be a personal issue for me. I ran facilities and construction for a US tech company that went global, and I got real tired of building new facilities in other countries just so we could lay off US tech workers and offshore their jobs to increase corporate profits. So I walked away from the best paydays I'd ever had, and it was the best decision I ever made.
But demand creates competition which drives up wages - India software engineers now making equivalent of US techies,skilled China production workers now only making 15% less then their US counterparts, wages in Vietnam, Malaysia, etc, rising rapidly as well.
The corporations played the shell game for years - move production and reap profits until the wages in that country rose, then time to relocate to a cheaper country. That shell game is now coming to a close.
There is currently billions of $ being invested in robotic production in the US, and it is just the tip of the iceberg. Many US companies with operations still offshore are in planning to relocate production back to automated plants in the US - once labor costs are nil, then savings come from adjacency to primary materials and transportation to sales.
Same will happen in the countries mentioned above, and the ramifications in China will be particularly severe. Not only will they lose millions of jobs from US companies as they transfer to automated plants in the US, their own core manufacturing base is making this change. The province of Guangdong alone has vowed to invest $8bn between 2015 and 2017 on automation. Their loss in production jobs will be staggering, and it will happen in a very short decade.
William Freidman, one of the best forward thinkers in our country, forecast this ten years ago, and it is now spooling up. In recognition of this new reality, Bill Gates has produced a white paper rationalizing why corporations should be taxed for every robotic machine that takes a workers job, to offset the continuing loss in payroll taxes, with those taxes dedicated to retraining workers for what will most likely be service jobs. Or more likely, paying extended unemployment benefits.
I'll get off my soapbox, and apologies for the long winded, this just happens to be a personal issue for me. I ran facilities and construction for a US tech company that went global, and I got real tired of building new facilities in other countries just so we could lay off US tech workers and offshore their jobs to increase corporate profits. So I walked away from the best paydays I'd ever had, and it was the best decision I ever made.
There is truth to this.50,000 factories in the last 20yrs did not close because of automation.
However, there is also truth to the fact that the jobs aren't coming BACK because of automation. Even if the factories themselves move here once again. Factories that needed 200 people 20 years ago need 20 now.
I don't believe the effects of automation are that great ( it's a convenient excuse to placate the masses), if it was that's still a million jobs.There is truth to this.
However, there is also truth to the fact that the jobs aren't coming BACK because of automation. Even if the factories themselves move here once again. Factories that needed 200 people 20 years ago need 20 now.
no, those jobs were lost due to idiotic tax regulations that rewarded US companies off shoring for increased profits. A major shift that while great for company profits and terrible for US workers, flipped the economics of the countries that up to now benefited from those in-migration jobs.
Very well put. If tax policies made sense the business would stay here. I work in an international arena - dealing with high tech (chemical) manufacturing. Nobody wants to keep their profits out of the US. But, you have an obligation to your shareholders to get them the best return - that means saving 20% in taxes if you can.
And the bit about 15% savings for offshoring is correct in some areas but not others. In fine chemical manufacturing the savings by going to India was 50-75% 20 years ago. But, your material might make it to the dock - or it might not. It might be what you ordered - or it might not. Etc. We helped them build infrastructure and QA/QC departments and ask them not to expose their workers to hazardous materials - oh, and quit dumping shit into your rivers. Now it's a 15% savings.
But, for programmers etc - it still makes sense to offshore.
But, back to the original quote above - I know the companies I work with would love to keep their manufacturing here - but it's the tax policy that makes them work to move. I'm sure we could include Apple, Pfizer, etc, into this category.
PS: wake up WV - coal mining and the steel industry isn't coming back - and honestly we mostly don't want it back...
Yeah, but think of all those jobs that will be available once the undocumented workers are exported back south of the border. Surely there will be plenty of fruit picking and day labor to make up for the lost manufacturing jobs...
Yeah, I'm not sure. Could be exaggerated. But automation is also a big thing in manufacturing. I suspect we'd be surprised at how little human interaction a modern factory takes.I don't believe the effects of automation are that great ( it's a convenient excuse to placate the masses), if it was that's still a million jobs.
As is true with most things, the answer is probably in the middle somewhere.
Regardless of your political orientation, every outdoorsman and woman should see this election as a slap in the face.
I betcha that those jobs that open up from the undocumented immigrants being deported will not be so readily picked up by "Americans", whatever that word means anymore.
Seeing the conditions they work in? Crop dusters dumping chemicals all over them, under-equipped and given tools that exaggerate physical strain, not to mention the poor pay.
And I bet if all of this does unfold, we will actually make changes to the industry because we have "Americans" working there rather than immigrants, as if the undocumented are less of people. Oh wait, much of America does view them as such already.
Regardless, sorry for that rant.
Overall point being, the reduction in funding for environmental organizations across the board has a lot of consequences, including many that we probably haven't thought of. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a marked reduction in public lands, more takeover by private timber corps, etc. More environmental strain, and less access for the recreationist.
My .02
I betcha that those jobs that open up from the undocumented immigrants being deported will not be so readily picked up by "Americans", whatever that word means anymore.
Seeing the conditions they work in? Crop dusters dumping chemicals all over them, under-equipped and given tools that exaggerate physical strain, not to mention the poor pay.
And I bet if all of this does unfold, we will actually make changes to the industry because we have "Americans" working there rather than immigrants, as if the undocumented are less of people. Oh wait, much of America does view them as such already.
Regardless, sorry for that rant.
Overall point being, the reduction in funding for environmental organizations across the board has a lot of consequences, including many that we probably haven't thought of. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a marked reduction in public lands, more takeover by private timber corps, etc. More environmental strain, and less access for the recreationist.
My .02
Proposed EPA budget cuts include reduction in funding for Puget Sound clean up and restoration projects from $28 million to $2 million. That's a lot o' fish...Regardless of your political orientation, every outdoorsman and woman should see this election as a slap in the face.
Overall point being, the reduction in funding for environmental organizations across the board has a lot of consequences, including many that we probably haven't thought of. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a marked reduction in public lands, more takeover by private timber corps, etc. More environmental strain, and less access for the recreationist.
My .02
Time for non-government agencies to really step up their own restoration projects. And us, as individuals, to do as much as we can to personally reduce our environmental footprint and clean up the footprints of others.Proposed EPA budget cuts include reduction in funding for Puget Sound clean up and restoration projects from $28 million to $2 million. That's a lot o' fish...
Here is a link, if you feel like doing a little reading.Yeah, I'm not sure. Could be exaggerated. But automation is also a big thing in manufacturing. I suspect we'd be surprised at how little human interaction a modern factory takes.
As is true with most things, the answer is probably in the middle somewhere.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5851973ce4b0a464fad3e5c9
How many millions of gallons of raw sewage has "green" Seattle and Bainbridge dumped into the sound in the last several years?Proposed EPA budget cuts include reduction in funding for Puget Sound clean up and restoration projects from $28 million to $2 million. That's a lot o' fish...
IMO (& I'll probably get flamed for this) NOAA Fisheries has failed at fisheries management and protection already. It seems to me they pay far more attention to political winds and funding than the science. No backbone. However, we will pay a huge price for many other proposed cuts to environmental issues.
There are 73 sewage treatment overflows in Puget Sound, I don't believe they have political agendas. There are also 4,500+ man made outfalls identified in tidal P.S., many more up river.How many millions of gallons of raw sewage has "green" Seattle and Bainbridge dumped into the sound in the last several years?
So just how big do we let agencies like NOAA and the EPA get? It's not like their going out of business. And, when they have been allowed to become bludgeons for advancing certain political interests, all the worse. The military is no one's favorite until it's needed. Under O'Blameless, the military has been shat on long enough. Time to adjust the knobs on the big control console a wee bit.
How did Obama crap on the military? I've used a milder term but would love to know the heinous deeds he did. The Reps demanded fiscal cutbacks across the board that f'ed up a lot of the gov agencies. Not looking for an argument but seems a bit dramatic.So just how big do we let agencies like NOAA and the EPA get? It's not like their going out of business. And, when they have been allowed to become bludgeons for advancing certain political interests, all the worse. The military is no one's favorite until it's needed. Under O'Blameless, the military has been shat on long enough. Time to adjust the knobs on the big control console a wee bit.
Dave
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Washington Fly Fishing Forum
A forum community dedicated to fishers, anglers and enthusiasts in the Washington area. Come join the discussion about safety, gear, boats, tackle, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Recommended Communities
