GOP to cut 40% from hurricane forecasting

[Infohawk]

A federal sales tax, Yanks.

You prove to be so fiscally and socially inept, it is time to grow up into a mature and fiscally conservative state that has the rational and responsibility to handle the fundamentals of modern finance.

Unfortunately this will not happen with a generally stupid population and pandering plus incompetent idealogues as chosen representatives.

The maturity and responsbility is lacking to both implement responsible but tough budget cuts in concert with a rise in taxes.

Thank you snobby Canadian.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Shit, now we wont know when hurricanes are coming!

LOL. Do you really think it matters? Do you not believe in fate. There is no place for ya to run . No place to hide . The underground bunkers will be the first to go in the end. There is a place of refuge. But only a good spirit can find it.

 

[khon]

Classic Republican cut: Small savings now, big costs later.

 

[monovillage]

I wonder how much the cuts proposed will impact the forecasting. NASA spent a billion or so to launch the GLORY satellites and failed miserably when both crashed into the ocean one in 2009 and one in 2011. Lay the damn blame where it belongs, it's not the money, it's not the funding, it's epic failure of NASA/NOAA to do their damn jobs without screwing up by the numbers. We were launching satellites 50 years ago and now these clowns keep screwing up and your solution is to throw more money at them?
The funding is out there, we just have to spend it wisely and not on overstuffed inept bureaucracies .
http://spaceflightnow.com/taurus/glory/failure.html

 

[Sonikku]

Much like climate change, I'm sure hurricanes are all just a myth anyway.

 

[Genx87]

LOL. Do you really think it matters? Do you not believe in fate. There is no place for ya to run . No place to hide . The underground bunkers will be the first to go in the end. There is a place of refuge. But only a good spirit can find it.

I will add my sarcasm tag in the future

 

[Craig234]

I asked the Salon writer to clarify the White house 'advocating' the austerity budget. It was the general cave on cutting, not specific for those cuts:

It's mostly about the White House acquiescing to GOP austerity talk, though the Democrats in general failed to actually pass a 2011 budget, voting instead on continuing resolutions that didn't fund NOAA's satellite program. Details -- http://www.spacenews.com/civil/1102...de-107b-for-joint-polar-satellite-system.html and http://www.eenews.net/cw/sample/print/2

And the White House did support the debt ceiling 'deal' which gave NOAA less than they requested (and created the supercommittee and trigger cuts which could dramatically slash spending on science in general)

 

[Nemesis 1]

I will add my sarcasm tag in the future

I new you were being sarcastic. It was easily seen . I just extended it to fit my agenda

 

[Whiskey16]

Thank you snobby Canadian.

I called it as it is. I apologise if you feel to be in a better position and cannot face valid criticism from those who lived through similar dillemas but adjusted and resolved.

In the mid 1990's Canada made tough choices and continues to reap the relative and fiscal benefits, though the current federal government is losing such sound fiscal responsibility.

Sadly the US society and political culture retains an immature and irresponsible outlook that it is exceptional among states and may not only continue to print money, borrow excessively, but notably live with excessive debt and be so special as to continue on with pathetically low taxes. Traction with voters from federal to local levels is to retain the status quo or jump to ideological insanities of still avoiding a responsible tax system or insanely inane cuts.

Cuts won't save you. Governments need an increased and stable source of revenue as well. You must implement new taxes.

 

[monovillage]

Didn't you resolve it by electing the Harper government....except for the B.C. yahoos that were rioting for a hockey game.

 

[Darwin333]

As a left leaning libertarian, I can't say this is a bad thing.

The only problem I see is the spending that should be cut from 100 other places the same as from this one.

People who live in those high risk hurricane zones crack me up any way.

IMHO it is much better than living in a high risk earthquake or a high risk tornado zone because you get tons of warning that a hurricane is coming and can get the hell out of the way. Not so much with tornadoes and earthquakes. Pretty much all of the highly populated areas of the US are at significant risk of some sort of natural disaster hitting sooner or later, I'll take the ones you can see and prepare for versus those that you can't.

 

[Darwin333]

I wonder how much the cuts proposed will impact the forecasting. NASA spent a billion or so to launch the GLORY satellites and failed miserably when both crashed into the ocean one in 2009 and one in 2011. Lay the damn blame where it belongs, it's not the money, it's not the funding, it's epic failure of NASA/NOAA to do their damn jobs without screwing up by the numbers. We were launching satellites 50 years ago and now these clowns keep screwing up and your solution is to throw more money at them?
The funding is out there, we just have to spend it wisely and not on overstuffed inept bureaucracies .
http://spaceflightnow.com/taurus/glory/failure.html

No kidding.

You would think launching a 90' missile that has a 3,000lb payload 1,000km up into low Earth orbit, outside of Earths atmosphere (for the most part) and into the vacuum of space, using more than 500,000lbs of thrust in its 4 stages and releasing said payload would be rather simple by now...

 

[werepossum]

No kidding.

You would think launching a 90' missile that has a 3,000lb payload 1,000km up into low Earth orbit, outside of Earths atmosphere (for the most part) and into the vacuum of space, using more than 500,000lbs of thrust in its 4 stages and releasing said payload would be rather simple by now...

Although there is a point to be said about something we've been doing for half a century would be simple now.

 

[Whiskey16]

Didn't you resolve it by electing the Harper government....except for the B.C. yahoos that were rioting for a hockey game.

:\ Inanely off-topic? That government was not in power in the 1990s.

I was quite clear upon dates.

The USA has plenty to learn from the practices of other states. It is not reasonable to present the current Canadian government as relatively fiscally sound in comparison to the governments that preceded it.

The USA fiscal ills from the federal to local levels require responsible but tough budget cuts in concert with increases in taxes.

 

[Darwin333]

I'm not sure what that means, but they're not a 'tabloid' in terms of being like the 'aliens disguised as American's cats and dogs' type tabloid.

They're a 'serious' political publisher along with quite a bit more frivolous, but not in the 'trashy tabloid' manner.

They have been headed by Joan Walsh who is a regular political television commentator, publish Glenn Greenwald, have had journalists like Eric Bohlert.

They've broken serious stories such as co-breaking the Abu Ghraib photos (with CBS IIRC).

Generally they're a fine reference source.

On other things, they can be a bit 'amateur hour', but that's pretty harmless; television commentary, advice column, and so on. So do newspapers.

Fern raised some pretty serious questions that disagree with your assertion that they are a "fine reference source".

 

[Darwin333]

Although there is a point to be said about something we've been doing for half a century would be simple now.

Shrug, we still crash planes and we have damn near infinite more experience building and flying planes then building and launching shit into friggen space. Not to mention that when something goes bad on a plane in flight it is often able to still land, something goes wrong after you light the engines on a rocket (you sort of can't turn em off once lit) there is rarely anything that can be done.

 

[Fear No Evil]

We aren't out of money- we just refuse to tax our rich appropriately, in line with the rest of the first world.

That won't solve everything, but it's a start in the right direction. It's all too easy for those at the top to demand austerity from the rest of us while they sacrifice nothing. Lead by example, gentlemen- make some sacrifices of your own. It's not like you can't afford it.

There's no reason everything has to be Cut, cut, cut! other than the raving anti-gubmint ideology of the Right.

Maybe we could reduce some of the Ag subsidies to save money- I haven't noticed any farm state Repubs calling for any sacrifice by their own wealthiest contributors...

Or maybe we could look at some truly radical tax changes, like this-

http://www.apttax.com/

Its won't fix everything? It won't fix ANYTHING. We're spending nearly 4 trillion dollars a year. Jesus H Fucking Christ in a Handbasket how much do we need to spend?

 

[theeedude]

lol, because America will be literally blown off the map without hurricane flights.

No, but a lot more people will die if these planes don't go in and provide timely warning of developing hurricanes. Not that you care.

 

[theeedude]

Please. Elaborate on this.

Nothing further to elaborate. Your opinion lacks any semblance of intellect.

 

[Vic Vega]

And people survived just fine when we all lived in grass huts...that's not an argument to get rid of modern building materials.

I don't see anyone making that comparison - mostly because it's retarded.

The budget has to be cut.