Jump to content


Photo

The Trump Economy


  • Please log in to reply
388 replies to this topic

#281 nkreed

nkreed

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 192 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 08:37 PM

Not just that, but we could stand to learn if the function is duplicated elsewhere in government.  
 
Doesn't sound like it, in the case of the CSB.  But there is a lot of unnecessary duplication in government, and without jumping to conclusions I would suspect there's some programs being cut that should be, for being unnecessarily redundant.


I can agree with the sentiment of your statement. All large organizations, whether they are government or a corporation, have redundancies that can be weeded out.

But I don't believe that this list is a list of redundant agencies providing duplicate services. It is more political than that. The CPB is the most obvious one. Cut the CPB and you get rid of NPR. Awesome for conservatives, right? But cut CPB and great shows that can be used to promote STEM to children is gone (Bill Nye the Science Guy on PBS in the 90s, Nova science, current). There won't be enough donation funding to keep PBS afloat in all cities.

Read through that list and you can see that these are politically motivated, many providing services for low income citizens.

#282 joesixpack

joesixpack

    Hell Bent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 36,562 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 08:41 PM

I can agree with the sentiment of your statement. All large organizations, whether they are government or a corporation, have redundancies that can be weeded out.

But I don't believe that this list is a list of redundant agencies providing duplicate services. It is more political than that. The CPB is the most obvious one. Cut the CPB and you get rid of NPR. Awesome for conservatives, right? But cut CPB and great shows that can be used to promote STEM to children is gone (Bill Nye the Science Guy on PBS in the 90s, Nova science, current). There won't be enough donation funding to keep PBS afloat in all cities.

Read through that list and you can see that these are politically motivated, many providing services for low income citizens.


Good. The CPB has pushed a left wing agenda forever. My tax dollars shouldn't support it.

#283 nkreed

nkreed

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 192 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 08:42 PM

So our country kills people at work?

  

You know what the statement meant, but continue to ignore that about 13 people die a day at work in the United States.

It's a cost-saving measure.  If we only wounded them, it would make health care too expensive.

Ha!🍻

#284 KD in CA

KD in CA

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,219 posts

Posted 18 March 2017 - 11:04 PM

The 19 federal agencies Trump wants to eliminate

The Hill ^ | 3/16/2017 | Sylvan Lane 

 

President Trump’s budget blueprint proposes eliminating 19 federal agencies.

Here’s a run-down of the agencies and what they do, from supporting arts and public television to building infrastructure and studying international relations.

 

  1. The African Development Foundation, which funds African agriculture, infrastructure and community development projects with grants.

  2. The Appalachian Regional Commission, which funds projects meant to bolster businesses, education, culture and economic development in Appalachia.

  3. The Chemical Safety Board, which investigates accidents in the chemical industry and makes safety recommendations.

  4. The Corporation for National and Community Service, which houses several public service organizations, including AmeriCorps.

  5. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds public television and radio stations including PBS and NPR.

  6. The Delta Regional Authority, which funds businesses and infrastructure in the Mississippi River Delta region.

  7. The Denali Commission, which supports utilities and infrastructure in Alaska.

  8. The Institute of Museum and Library Services, which funds U.S. museums and libraries with grants.

  9. The Inter-American Foundation, which provides financial aid to Latin America and the Caribbean.

  10. The U.S. Trade and Development Agency, which provides U.S. goods and services for foreign development projects.

  11. The Legal Services Corporation, which provides civil legal aid for low-income Americans.

  12. The National Endowment for the Arts, which funds American artists and projects through grants.

  13. The National Endowment for the Humanities, which funds American scholarship through grants.

  14. The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, which funds community development project throughout the U.S.

  15. The Northern Border Regional Commission, which supports economic development in poor areas near the Canadian border.

  16. The Overseas Private Investment Corporation, which helps provide private U.S. capital to foreign development projects.

  17. The United States Institute of Peace, which aims to promote world peace through conflict resolution, training programs and scholarship.

  18. The United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, which coordinates efforts to fight homelessness among nearly 20 federal agencies.

  19. The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a prominent think tank studying international affairs and foreign policy.

 

 

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...

 

 

Man this **** is way overdue.  And it's exactly what I wanted to see from Trump.  Other than maybe the Chemical Safety Board, every single one of those is either a useless sop or something that belongs in the private charity or at a local level.   Honestly, can anyone defends any of these??


Edited by KD in CA, 18 March 2017 - 11:04 PM.


#285 Boyst62

Boyst62

    Hall of Farmer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,731 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 12:16 AM

The Chem safety board can be done on a state level. NTSB, federal highway programs handle interstate chemical issues.

I can understand why that is being cut. A loT of changes are happening in dept of labors at a local level to be proactive with businesses rather than slap the **** out of them. Ncdol's cherry berry is a leading pioneer here. Several states are doing so with the realization that safety responsibility cuts costs dramatically.

A federal oversight of chemical nonsense is hysterics

#286 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,369 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 12:32 AM

 

Man this **** is way overdue.  And it's exactly what I wanted to see from Trump.  Other than maybe the Chemical Safety Board, every single one of those is either a useless sop or something that belongs in the private charity or at a local level.   Honestly, can anyone defends any of these??

 

Given that the Mississippi delta is inter-state, the Delta Regional Authority would be a useful vehicle for coordinating development across state lines.

 

Of course, if you actually look at how the DRA defines the "Mississippi Delta," it begins at St. Louis, and includes non-contiguous counties in eastern Alabama that have nothing to do with the delta.  So I'm calling bull ****.



#287 KD in CA

KD in CA

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,219 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 01:02 AM

 

Given that the Mississippi delta is inter-state, the Delta Regional Authority would be a useful vehicle for coordinating development across state lines.

 

Of course, if you actually look at how the DRA defines the "Mississippi Delta," it begins at St. Louis, and includes non-contiguous counties in eastern Alabama that have nothing to do with the delta.  So I'm calling bull ****.

 

I assume any regional economic development (there are about 5 on that list) is nothing more than old political payoffs that have been institutionalized.



#288 Azalin

Azalin

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,292 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 02:00 AM

Working in the chemical industry, I'm upset at the proposed gutting of the Chemical Safety Board (CSB). This organization has done nothing but investigate fatal accidents and incidents within the chemical industry for over 20 years and provide detailed analysis of the incidents and how to prevent them. The CSB also provides best practices that prevent deaths in the industry.

When a significant event happens in the chemical industry, I have always looked forward to their investigations and findings to see if there is any takeaways that I can use at work. The best example I have is the from Dupont welding incident in Tonawanda. Our life critical permits changed as a result of that incident, and if we changed them others did too. This seemingly inconsequential change will undoubtedly save lives.

Not working in the industry, I can see why people would think it's a waste of money. Considering the amount of people our country kills a year at work (Private industry: 4379 in 2015), I think could stand to learn what each organization does before cutting it.

 

Wouldn't all this fall under the auspices of OSHA? Do we really need a sub-level just for the chemical industry? Why not fold one into the other and at least streamline the regulatory agency?



#289 nkreed

nkreed

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 192 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 09:06 AM

The Chem safety board can be done on a state level. NTSB, federal highway programs handle interstate chemical issues.

I can understand why that is being cut. A loT of changes are happening in dept of labors at a local level to be proactive with businesses rather than slap the **** out of them. Ncdol's cherry berry is a leading pioneer here. Several states are doing so with the realization that safety responsibility cuts costs dramatically.

A federal oversight of chemical nonsense is hysterics

Many different organizations handle chemical issues, depending on where they are.  The CSB has never been able to enforce anything, they have provided recommendations to the chemical industry.  The CSB was created in 1990, operational in 1998, following the design of the two programs you mention: NTSB and federal DOT.

 

 

Wouldn't all this fall under the auspices of OSHA? Do we really need a sub-level just for the chemical industry? Why not fold one into the other and at least streamline the regulatory agency?

 

Enforcement of the laws fall under OSHA and the EPA.  

 

Have you heard of these major industrial incidents:

http://www.csb.gov/w...sion-and-fire-/

http://www.csb.gov/c...-refinery-fire/

http://www.csb.gov/t...osion-and-fire/

http://www.csb.gov/n...site-fatality-/

http://www.csb.gov/e...work-explosion/ (Tonawanda Explosion)

http://www.csb.gov/k...-gas-explosion/

http://www.csb.gov/c...lease-and-fire/ (You probably don't know this one, but watch the security video of the Hydrofluoric Acid release, scary stuff)

http://www.csb.gov/i...osion-and-fire/

http://www.csb.gov/b...nery-explosion/

http://www.csb.gov/m...-and-explosion/ (Deepwater Horizon)

 

Now I didn't just list a ton of incidents.  I listed a lot of FATAL incidents (minus the HF one) that happen in out country.  This is only a small percentage of the investigations they have completed.  Do you really think OSHA would do as much in-depth investigation as these?  A lot of safety recommendations and practice best practices can be learned from these investigations.  The Chemical industry poses a significant hazard to workers on site, but also civilians around these sites.  Bophal anyone? https://www.britanni...Bhopal-disaster

 

Folding into OSHA, for instance, will decrease funding and decrease the effectiveness of the CSB.  It wouldn't be too long before some bureaucratic person came along said, "CSB, what does it do? Cut it," just like is happening here.  Well meaning people think that consolidating resources is a good idea, but in reality consolidation usually just saves money and decreases output.



#290 B-Man

B-Man

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,469 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 09:36 AM

 

Man this **** is way overdue.  And it's exactly what I wanted to see from Trump.  Other than maybe the Chemical Safety Board, every single one of those is either a useless sop or something that belongs in the private charity or at a local level.   Honestly, can anyone defends any of these??

 

 

MEGAN MCARDLE: Trump’s Budget Asks The Right Questions For Conservatives.

 

 

Conservatives are often accused of “hating government”.  Still, there is a coherent and compelling center-right analysis that doesn’t simply blindly oppose federal spending, but asks of it a few questions:

 

Can the government actually make this problem better?

 

If so, must this problem be solved at the Federal level, or could it be done as easily or better by the states?

 

Even if the government might help solve this problem, would the associated costs in terms of loss of freedom, deadweight losses from regulation or taxation, and the declining accountability and manageability of government as it grows, actually be worth the benefit?

 

Many government programs currently in existence pass this test. Many on the list of programs and agencies scheduled for cuts do not.

 

I mean, I like the arts. I adore NPR and PBS. But why should some carpenter in Akron who prefers “Duck Dynasty” to “Downton Abbey” be paying taxes so I can enjoy these things? In other cases, I would be willing to bet that the net long-term effect on the welfare of anyone other than those receiving government-funded paychecks was probably close to zero. Then there are the programs which might make sense in some form, but are indefensible as they currently exist. You can make an argument for community development block grants, in terms of developing poor parts of the country that need extra help. But it cannot possibly make sense to offer these grants in every state, even those that are net contributors to the federal budget. Yes, I understand the political arguments for such things — easier to get New York and California legislators to vote for it. As a policy matter, this is nonsensical.

 

While America’s libertarian streak is often wildly exaggerated, this much is not: most people don’t like the idea of a government that runs a zillion programs they have never heard of, to help some special interest they’ll never meet, and which have little accountability for actually generating results. This structure is a recipe for a lot of such programs.

 

And by cutting so broadly, the Trump administration may, ironically, have more hope than most of actually getting rid of the things that federal government should not be doing.

 

 


Edited by B-Man, 19 March 2017 - 09:36 AM.


#291 Boyst62

Boyst62

    Hall of Farmer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,731 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 09:53 AM

Many different organizations handle chemical issues, depending on where they are.  The CSB has never been able to enforce anything, they have provided recommendations to the chemical industry.  The CSB was created in 1990, operational in 1998, following the design of the two programs you mention: NTSB and federal DOT.

 

 

Enforcement of the laws fall under OSHA and the EPA.  

 

Have you heard of these major industrial incidents:

http://www.csb.gov/w...sion-and-fire-/

http://www.csb.gov/c...-refinery-fire/

http://www.csb.gov/t...osion-and-fire/

http://www.csb.gov/n...site-fatality-/

http://www.csb.gov/e...work-explosion/ (Tonawanda Explosion)

http://www.csb.gov/k...-gas-explosion/

http://www.csb.gov/c...lease-and-fire/ (You probably don't know this one, but watch the security video of the Hydrofluoric Acid release, scary stuff)

http://www.csb.gov/i...osion-and-fire/

http://www.csb.gov/b...nery-explosion/

http://www.csb.gov/m...-and-explosion/ (Deepwater Horizon)

 

Now I didn't just list a ton of incidents.  I listed a lot of FATAL incidents (minus the HF one) that happen in out country.  This is only a small percentage of the investigations they have completed.  Do you really think OSHA would do as much in-depth investigation as these?  A lot of safety recommendations and practice best practices can be learned from these investigations.  The Chemical industry poses a significant hazard to workers on site, but also civilians around these sites.  Bophal anyone? https://www.britanni...Bhopal-disaster

 

Folding into OSHA, for instance, will decrease funding and decrease the effectiveness of the CSB.  It wouldn't be too long before some bureaucratic person came along said, "CSB, what does it do? Cut it," just like is happening here.  Well meaning people think that consolidating resources is a good idea, but in reality consolidation usually just saves money and decreases output.

here in nc we have the nc star program which creates a privatized group through the public channel which recommend and oversee programs wishing to join.  some major companies are involved, GE for example, and they go to sites and tour to offer recomendations with how to address safety.  

http://www.nclabor.c...a/star/star.htm

 

what i am seeing that drives me nuts is over regulation due to someone messing up.  the texas fertilizer explosion that now more or less banned the use of ammonium nitrate which was one of the best fertilizers ever.  now you have to use ammonium sulfate and lower your pH when you need to raise it?  that's retarded.

 

 

i know what happens with investigation i know what happens with safety training.  but...it comes down to a lack of training and the archaic managemen pactices that have existed for a long time.  the problem is simple.  that is training and poor management.

 

these things are also, and should also, be done by insurance carriers, fwiw.  i've worked in a chemical plant and had to be a part of the startup tour for the insurance guy who was a specialist sent to ensure safety of our chemicals.  there are other agencies that will get to the bottom of this - oshaa and state level dol's and fire marshal's etc. will take up the slack most definitely.



#292 B-Man

B-Man

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,469 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 10:03 AM

The debate is (finally) on..................

 

 

ROLL CALL: This Budget Isn’t Dead on Arrival: Trump’s budget draws the battle lines between the parties.

 

 

The practical truth is that the president’s budget sets the tone, direction and parameters of the debate over government operations each year. While members of Congress have a stake in making the public and press think that they are in charge of their own constitutional authority to make spending decisions, they tend to follow the course of the president if he is in the same party as the majorities in the House and Senate.

 

Conservative spending hawks are hailing this budget because they know it is consequential in changing the nature of the debate over the government’s role in American life.

 

“The people in Washington have mortgages, car payments and bills to pay that depend on government not shrinking,” said Sheila Cole, a former executive director of the Republican Study Committee under then-Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana. “Much of America is tired of their sky-is-falling, big-spending mentality. President Trump is tapping into that sentiment.”

 

 

 

 

Lay off everybody who was declared “nonessential” during the last government shutdown. . . .

:thumbsup:



#293 B-Man

B-Man

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,469 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 10:36 AM

Oh, and how come we don't here any more about (one of) the Left's latest fairy tales ?

 

 

Media hysteria over supposed Meals On Wheels cuts debunked from Left and Right

 

Mother Jones and National Review agree that media claims of cuts are false

 

 

 

 

That “Trump kills Meals on Wheels” story didn’t hold up for long

#294 nkreed

nkreed

    Practice Squad

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 192 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 10:38 AM

here in nc we have the nc star program which creates a privatized group through the public channel which recommend and oversee programs wishing to join.  some major companies are involved, GE for example, and they go to sites and tour to offer recomendations with how to address safety.  

http://www.nclabor.c...a/star/star.htm

 

what i am seeing that drives me nuts is over regulation due to someone messing up.  the texas fertilizer explosion that now more or less banned the use of ammonium nitrate which was one of the best fertilizers ever.  now you have to use ammonium sulfate and lower your pH when you need to raise it?  that's retarded.

 

 

i know what happens with investigation i know what happens with safety training.  but...it comes down to a lack of training and the archaic managemen pactices that have existed for a long time.  the problem is simple.  that is training and poor management.

 

these things are also, and should also, be done by insurance carriers, fwiw.  i've worked in a chemical plant and had to be a part of the startup tour for the insurance guy who was a specialist sent to ensure safety of our chemicals.  there are other agencies that will get to the bottom of this - oshaa and state level dol's and fire marshal's etc. will take up the slack most definitely.

I know what the STAR program (for Fed OSHA states, Voluntary Protection Program) is.  It is an audit of your workplace once and then supplemental audits every X amount of years.  The program was put in place to to decrease the amount of OSHA routine inspections.  If a company stated they were following the VPP (or STAR) guidelines, then they were pretty much exempt from routine inspections.  It's just like being ISO 9001 compliant.  You make a claim, an audit is done once, and every few years they come back for a surveillance audit.  It's a nice sign to say "look we are really safe!" but really it's no different than other companies.

 

So you worked in the chemical industry, so you must be aware of the hierarchy of controls (https://en.wikipedia...hazard_controls).  Elimination, substitution, engineering controls, administrative controls, PPE.  Rarely does a company work with the first two, since it would hurt their business.  I get it.  However the last three tend to be inverted in industries, where a reliance on PPE is paramount.  The examples I provided showed a lot of shortcuts being taken that led to the disasters.  

 

If it were just simply middle management and training then your right it'd be fixed.  It's not that though.  Organizationally, there are major issues when the companies only look for soaring stock prices.  They make their company an upside down triangle, ready to tip over at any moment.  The executives don't care, however, because they make their money and move on (hence the job losses in America). One of the first things to go down the drain in these instances is the spending of safety and propagation of blaming the workers (and believe me if you were truly looking for the root cause of incidents, workers actions are rarely the problem).

 

Insurance companies have done their damage as is.  Safety programs are becoming convoluted and unnecessarily contradictory because of them. One policy will state to do X, while a second and third policy will state NOT to do X.  Why is that??  It's to decrease culpability of the management and to show insurance that we have a program in place to cover your issues.

 

State level DOL's and OSHA will not pick up the slack,.  There are underfunded to begin with.  The in-depth investigations will not get completed because they take too much time, and the organizations will deem them to cost prohibitive (not to mention the lobbying inside the organizations). 



#295 DC Tom

DC Tom

    Also sniping at retards from the balcony

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 60,369 posts

Posted 19 March 2017 - 11:06 AM

 
I assume any regional economic development (there are about 5 on that list) is nothing more than old political payoffs that have been institutionalized.


Except for the DRA not being all that old (it was established in 2000), I'd agree.

#296 B-Man

B-Man

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,469 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 06:23 PM

The Left remains confused about why there is opposition to NEA funding

 

 

Unlike the debate over federal funding of the Meals on Wheels program (which barely happens at all) there is a legitimate question being raised over the possible termination of funding for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). This is a fight which has been going on between conservatives and liberals since at least the Reagan administration if not before. Brought into existence as part of President Johnson’s Great Society initiatives, questions about the propriety of such federal funding have lingered at various heat levels virtually since the beginning. While the problem is very much of their own making, conservatives generally find themselves having the wrong argument about the NEA and playing the game directly in the court where liberals most want to do battle.

 

This pattern continues with yet another report from the Washington Post where Travis Andrews “explains” to everyone that the only reason there is opposition is because conservatives are too stodgy to be able to appreciate “provocative” art such as the photographs of Robert Mapplethorpe or the odoriferous body of work by Andres Serrano, including the so-called “piss Christ.”

 

As I said above, when politicians (almost exclusively Republicans) rail against NEA funding you hear them bringing up precisely the same arguments cited by the author. And why not? Those are some truly offensive works and there is understandable frustration at seeing taxpayer dollars going into their creation or promotion. The reason this is the wrong argument to have is that the underlying problem with federal funding of the NEA would be just as valid if they promoted nothing but a collection of fine sculptures depicting the faces of world leaders. Or it could be a series of finger paintings of unicorns and kittens done by children and lifted from their parents’ refrigerators.

This isn’t a question of the qualitative “value” of any of the art. Such value remains subjective and truly in the eye of the beholder, even if many of us remain mystified at some of the trash which is passed off as “art.”

 

This is a question of whether or not scarce federal funding is properly applied to something as subjective and completely unrelated to the business of running the country as the arts. Further, even if the national debt were currently sitting at zero and we were running a budget surplus, much like other divisive topics in society, why should the tax dollars of probably half the population be applied to any unnecessary function which those taxpayers completely disagree with or find reprehensible?

The arts, like everything else in society, can rise and fall on their own merit. The reason that we don’t have tremendous federal funding supporting the creation of blockbuster Hollywood movies is that such offerings tend to be popular and the business of making them is profitable. Creating paintings, sculpture, poetry or theatrical performances may not be as profitable, but if it has value to sufficient people, patrons may be found to support the work. If no such patronage is forthcoming then perhaps the “art” is better left to the lonely artist toiling away in their studio.

If we are going to have to have this debate all over again perhaps we could leave Robert Mapplethorpe out of it this time. It’s really not about him or the “piss Christ” or Andy Warhol’s paintings of soup cans. It’s about the government’s responsibility to handle taxpayer dollars with care and in an appropriate fashion.



#297 Tiberius

Tiberius

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,362 posts

Posted 28 March 2017 - 09:53 AM

I wish this guy spoke up sooner

http://thehill.com/p...ining-jobs-back

The head of the largest private coal firm in the U.S. says President Trump won’t be able to bring back coal industry jobs despite a push this week to deregulate fossil fuels. 

Robert Murray, the founder and CEO of Murray Energy, said Trump should “temper his expectations,” given the way market forces — rather than regulations — have hurt the coal industry and reduced employment. 

“I suggested that he temper his expectations,” Murray told The Guardian. “Those are my exact words. He can’t bring them back.” 

 



#298 B-Man

B-Man

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,469 posts

Posted 28 March 2017 - 12:16 PM

THIS DOESN’T GET MADE OFTEN ENOUGH: The Moral Case for Spending Restraint.



#299 Tiberius

Tiberius

    All Pro

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,362 posts

Posted 28 March 2017 - 01:12 PM

THIS DOESN’T GET MADE OFTEN ENOUGH: The Moral Case for Spending Restraint.

Yup, because those debts taken on in the 60's and 70's are sure crushing us 



#300 iinii

iinii

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,911 posts

Posted 28 March 2017 - 04:49 PM

The Trump Economy is based on the "Golden Rule" .....