Notifications
Clear all

Mapp gets his $88000 car. Unbelievable!

Page 2 / 3
 
rotorhead
(@rotorhead)
Trusted Member

EPA

"Anyone interested in the environment is abuzz with the news that Myron Ebell is leading the transition re the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This Wikipedia article summarizes why the ‘greens’ would be alarmed at this appointment.

The Hill has an interesting article: Myron Ebell is Perfectly Suited to Lead the Transition. Excerpts:

Consequently, Ebell has expressed concern about EPA positions, including the Clean Power Plan. The EPA’s controversial power plan is based on an inadequate understanding of global warming and should not drive our middle class into energy poverty against congressional will.

It is critical to understand that while the federal government, through Congress, establishes the overall goals of environmental protection through laws like the Clean Air and Water acts, the implementation of those laws is by state governments.

State governments and their citizens have demonstrated the ability to implement programs that protect our environment without destroying the very thing that makes environmental protection possible: a strong economy.

Over the last eight years the Obama administration has abandoned this successful approach to environmental protection as envisioned by Congress. Instead, they have turned to special interest groups to drive centralized planning. Prime examples include the 2015 EPA Power Plan and the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule.

These rules contain illusory flexibility to states when in reality they represent a huge shift of control from states to the federal government. Even the current administration acknowledged that the power plan was symbolic and would do little to improve air quality.

The power plan would be expensive and shut down energy plants that have not yet been paid for, thereby stranding those costs with ratepayers. It would harm the industrial sector by significantly increasing electricity rates, which would throttle manufacturing industries that require low energy prices to compete.

Similarly, under WOTUS land use decisions would be federalized. Our nation’s agricultural industry would be hamstrung by costly and unnecessary land use restrictions, which would stifle growth opportunities. The expansion of manufacturing, commercial and residential development would be left to federal bureaucrats.

Fortunately, dozens of states and state agencies stood their ground against the federal government and won stays against these rules. We hope the Trump EPA will review existing rules and base its policy decisions on sound data and measurable results.

History has demonstrated time and again that just as “all politics is local,” so is environmental protection. State and local governments know best how to apply the many tools available to protect the environment and public health.We still need the EPA, but not the EPA of the past.

Returning control of our environment to the states also limits the dark money from self-serving lobbyists and deep-pocketed special interest groups masquerading as environmentalists."

http://judithcurry.com/2016/11/13/trumping-the-climate/

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 17, 2016 11:33 pm
Gumbo
(@Gumbo)
Advanced Member

Good luck with that speee1dy.
His cabinet is filled with the corporate robbers.
It's a list of the most unfit and unsuitable working for the vastly unqualified.

What made President Obama so vastly qualified to be President? He was a first term senator from Illinois. Before that he was a community organizer. Never created a job in his life or worked for a living. He is a lawyer of course. I don't recall his vast experience ever being called into question
by the media.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 1:29 am
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

Obama was an excellent president. He got the economy back from the dreadful downturn/recession of the Bush administrations.
He served 7 years as an Illinois State Senator, resigning to assume U.S. Senate responsibilities. He also worked as a community organizer and a civil rights attorney. Obama was also a Senior Lecturer in Constitutional Law at University of Chicago Law School.

Nor was he a racist, sexist, xenophobic, misanthropic, misogynistic, fascist, pathologically lying, predatory, duplicitous, arrogant, ignorant demagogue.

We need a stronger EPA to protect our environment, our lands, our waters, the air we breathe from polluters, not a handicapped one.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 8:22 am
Gumbo
(@Gumbo)
Advanced Member

President Obama accomplished little in his 8 year presidency. He did get The ACA passed without bylatteral support. That turned out to be a disaster as predicted.
His left wing policies were in acted with no congressional vote. So they will be reversed within a matter of months. So in the end what can really be said about his vast accomplishments?
When he was elected many of us thought that race relations would turn a corner for the better. I hoped he would be a modern day Dr. King. That was also not to be. You can't unite people by being uncompromising. So today we have a
staggering national debt. The world views us as weak. More people are on welfare than ever before. Great Job Man!

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 10:24 am
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

Given the unprecedented republican obstructionism towards him, it's amazing he was able to get our economy back on track and help protect the environment, reduce gas prices, etc.

Did you forget the staggering debt and an economy ground to dust by Bush that he inherited?

Had the republicans worked together to improve the ACA, instead of wasting time and money, attempting to repeal it when they have nothing to offer as a substitute, it could've been a much better product

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 10:56 am
CruzanIron
(@cruzaniron)
Expert

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/nov/17/trump-begins-filling-environmental-posts-with-clowns?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Facebook

Once again, left wing BS. Trump has not appointed an CABINET positions yet.
This is just more fear mongering from left wing media sources.
You know, the same ones that said he would lose.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 11:11 am
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert
Gumbo
(@Gumbo)
Advanced Member

The economy wasn't ground to dust by any President. The economy runs in cycles.
Clinton didn't create the economy he presided over. He was just in the right place and time. The actions of the current President are felt the most after they leave. Such as NAFTA.
President Obama doubled the National debt he inherited. He spent piles of money on infrastructure projects that lacked proper accountability and were awarded to people that gave to the Clinton Foundation.
For the most part the American people were robbed with that program. He also bailed out the big banks and Auto makers that the liberals claim to have no relationship with. Without President Obama we wouldn't have the Chevrolet Volt and that would be a huge loss.:D

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 1:18 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

When Obama came in, unemployment was at 9.3 percent. Now it’s at only 4.9 percent.

Trump will have a way easier job on his hands than President Obama did, that’s for sure.

Average Unemployment Rate By Year

2009: 9.3 percent
2010: 9.6 percent
2011: 8.9 percent
2012: 8.1 percent
2013: 7.4 percent
2014: 6.2 percent
2015: 5.3 percent
2016: 4.9 percent

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 1:40 pm
speee1dy
(@speee1dy)
Expert

obama had democratic control of both house and senate for a few years

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 1:59 pm
JohnnyU
(@JohnnyU)
Advanced Member

The labor participation rate dropped from 66% to 63% and accounts for a significant reduction in the unemployment rate.

Its interesting that the Labor Force Participation rate hasn't improved with the improved economy

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 2:09 pm
watruw8ing4
(@watruw8ing4)
Trusted Member

obama had democratic control of both house and senate for a few years

To have control, you need a filibuster-proof Senate. That amounted to somewhere between 75 and 90 session days.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 2:24 pm
STTsailor
(@STTsailor)
Trusted Member

The labor participation rate dropped from 66% to 63% and accounts for a significant reduction in the unemployment rate.

Its interesting that the Labor Force Participation rate hasn't improved with the improved economy

There are these that are unemployable..one unemployment runs out they go for disability plus cash economy. Entire towns in PR and 30% of population declare no income. How is that possible?

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 2:30 pm
watruw8ing4
(@watruw8ing4)
Trusted Member

The labor participation rate dropped from 66% to 63% and accounts for a significant reduction in the unemployment rate.

Its interesting that the Labor Force Participation rate hasn't improved with the improved economy

The rate is in line with predictions made before Obama was elected. (The government uses a 10 year forward prediction - I forget which agency at the moment, and am running late - but it's easily googled). I'm counted in that number, by the way, and believe me, it's not because I've stopped looking for work because I find it fruitless. It's because I, like many boomers, chose to leave the work force.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 2:32 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

No jobs.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 2:32 pm
JohnnyU
(@JohnnyU)
Advanced Member

No jobs.

Are you blaming Obama

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 2:37 pm
JohnnyU
(@JohnnyU)
Advanced Member

The labor participation rate dropped from 66% to 63% and accounts for a significant reduction in the unemployment rate.

Its interesting that the Labor Force Participation rate hasn't improved with the improved economy

The rate is in line with predictions made before Obama was elected. (The government uses a 10 year forward prediction - I forget which agency at the moment, and am running late - but it's easily googled). I'm counted in that number, by the way, and believe me, it's not because I've stopped looking for work because I find it fruitless. It's because I, like many boomers, chose to leave the work force.

Probably BLS

Demographics does play a part, but I dont think there is that big of a demographic shift with retiring boomers (Much literature out there is noting that as a whole Boomers are working later in life) causing the participation rate to drop.

There are also folks entering the workforce as folk exit. Again, I haven't seen the Demographic push that Boomers are creating an employment hole that needs to be filled. If there were an all things being equal, we would see a pretty good surge in incomes, which to date hasn't happend for the majority

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 2:45 pm
LiquidFluoride
(@LiquidFluoride)
Trusted Member

Obama was an excellent president. .

Hmmm, I'd count him as one of the worst presidents we ever had.

First president to openly assassinate his own citizens.. that's one hell of a "first".

Presidents have ZERO todo with the economy... He pumped a bunch of stimulus money into the economy.. know what that does? it just kicks the can down the road.. governments can't save economies by putting money into them unless they are building infrastructure for the real economic engine: the middle class.

When Obama came in, unemployment was at 9.3 percent. Now it’s at only 4.9 percent.

Trump will have a way easier job on his hands than President Obama did, that’s for sure.

Average Unemployment Rate By Year

2009: 9.3 percent
2010: 9.6 percent
2011: 8.9 percent
2012: 8.1 percent
2013: 7.4 percent
2014: 6.2 percent
2015: 5.3 percent
2016: 4.9 percent

I see a clear influence at 2008 here... b

Kinda makes that 4.9% number pointless when (now, thanks to obama? (no I don't think it was him)) the number of people unemployed is at 37% (you see, statistics can be tricky, you have to actually understand them to properly use them)

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 3:43 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

Guess you'd rather go back to the Bush recession years which may very well happen under trump.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 4:19 pm
LiquidFluoride
(@LiquidFluoride)
Trusted Member

Guess you'd rather go back to the Bush recession years which may very well happen under trump.

I guarantee you that there will be an economic crash, and very soon; but it has nothing to do with obama, and certainly nothing to do with trump.

Just basic math.

On average a Fiat currency lasts around 30-40 years Ours is a bit exceptional because it was mandatory to buy oil in USD up until recently. Now that the relationship between oil and the USD are broken we guaranteed a strong "re-correction" as the US does very little to back it's dollar economically.

so just FYI, don't blame whats coming on trump, when the fed raises interest rates (maybe as soon as December) that will signal the downturn.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 4:38 pm
islandjoan
(@islandjoan)
Trusted Member

Hey what happened to Mapp and his expensive ride?

Somehow this thread got hijacked by Trump!

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 5:28 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

Mapp and Trump?
Same predatory bird.. different colored feathers

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 6:49 pm
Alana33
(@alana33)
Expert

No jobs.

Are you blaming Obama

No.
I'm blaming the PR government that overextended their debt.
Just like the USVI is doing.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2016 6:56 pm
watruw8ing4
(@watruw8ing4)
Trusted Member

The labor participation rate dropped from 66% to 63% and accounts for a significant reduction in the unemployment rate.

Its interesting that the Labor Force Participation rate hasn't improved with the improved economy

The rate is in line with predictions made before Obama was elected. (The government uses a 10 year forward prediction - I forget which agency at the moment, and am running late - but it's easily googled). I'm counted in that number, by the way, and believe me, it's not because I've stopped looking for work because I find it fruitless. It's because I, like many boomers, chose to leave the work force.

Probably BLS

Demographics does play a part, but I dont think there is that big of a demographic shift with retiring boomers (Much literature out there is noting that as a whole Boomers are working later in life) causing the participation rate to drop.

There are also folks entering the workforce as folk exit. Again, I haven't seen the Demographic push that Boomers are creating an employment hole that needs to be filled. If there were an all things being equal, we would see a pretty good surge in incomes, which to date hasn't happend for the majority

I'm not saying part of this rate isn't due to discouraged workers. It is. And demographics isn't the whole story. What you or I think isn't the end-all, because even the number crunchers can't agree. However there are numbers that show that, even with many boomers working later, there was still a sharp rise in that demographic, as many more are leaving the work force, as predicted - some earlier than predicted. There was also a rise in those leaving due to disability. Also counted in that mix: more women choosing to be stay at home moms again, more young people in school. That they can do that again is encouraging.

I'm not even going to try and figure out why there's no boomer hole (looks like it's going to be a wonderful beach day, so I'd rather not waste my time looking). But can speculate that it could partially also be because productivity has risen. Companies quickly learn to do more with less when necessary. And the recession made that necessary. I'd also point out that, even though small, and not felt individually by enough people, wages are on the uptick.

Here's an interesting breakdown (I know it was done in 2014, but it does show a more recent trend ).

Point is, that you can't discount low unemployment rate strictly on participation rate. The situation is far too complex.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 19, 2016 11:17 am
Scubadoo
(@Scubadoo)
Trusted Member

But can speculate that it could partially also be because productivity has risen. Companies quickly learn to do more with less when necessary. And the recession made that necessary.

Bingo. and part of the reason we don't see some of those jobs coming back even when the economy improves. It's often said that American workers in general are the most productive in the world.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 20, 2016 3:08 am
Page 2 / 3
Close Menu