Trump doesn’t see the elephant in the room.
That elephant is mother nature. Al Gore, who was Clinton’s VP, made a film called An Inconvenient Truth. He predicted many years ago that because of Global Warming, storms of all types would become more severe. Politicians and others disregarded it as untruthful and conspiracy theory.
However, we are now seeing the effects of what he predicted. In the west, the temperature is rising and creating more wildfires and draughts with higher velocity winds. On the east coast, the storms are more severe with heavier rainfall, blinding snow, and stronger hurricanes. In the Midwest, heavier rainfall and stronger tornadoes.
The effects of these severe storms are causing havoc for the people, businesses, and the economy in general. Each year, there is more loss of life and property. Currently there is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to handle the funding for the recovery of these disasters. But now Trump is thinking about abolishing FEMA.
Trump has said that he wants to take the burden from the federal government for funding the recovery of the effects of these storms and place it on each state. So, they would be responsible for their own disaster recovery. But what if the states don’t have the total funding for the recovery of these severe storms? If the federal government does not provide the funding, where will that funding come from?
Recently, the Trump administration implemented significant layoffs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), affecting around 5% of its workforce. These cuts included meteorologists, hurricane researchers, and other specialized personnel, raising concerns about the impact on weather forecasting, disaster preparedness, and public safety. Critics argue that these layoffs could hinder NOAA's ability to provide life-saving information and maintain its essential services…
What are your thoughts?Unfortunately, we have gone far down the road of simply accepting that any "disaster" (defined as any property or bodily damage) be paid for by someone other than the one affected. The result is that we have people all over the country building houses in flood plains, in forest fire territory, in places where natural disasters commonly occur...and then failing to insure their property. In the case of fires, we have for decades made very poor choices about land/fire management, increasing the opportunity for nasty fires, because we don't want to see burnt trees in our backyard.
Let government rebuild is the common thread any more, without regard for personal responsibility for their decisions. It is not a reasonable request.
"Critics argue that these layoffs could hinder NOAA's ability to provide life-saving information and maintain its essential services…"
But they don't mention the duties of those laid off. They just say it COULD hinder NOAA's ability, without giving any details. We scream out and demand specifics from DOGE...but simply accept exaggerations and foggy "if's" and "maybe's" from it's detractors? Not me, thank you; if you have a negative about what DOGE is doing and who is let go, give specifics on duties, how many are doing it, what they are paid and what the results of their employment is. Then I can make an informed decision on whether DOGE did right or not; simply stating that their action might have negative consequences means less than nothing.I'm glad you asked. Of course, you could have done the research yourself.
The layoffs that hit about 800 NOAA employees last week will hamstring the agency's fleet of hurricane research aircraft, experts warn.
Threat level: NOAA's aircraft have specialized equipment that the Air Force's Hurricane Hunters lack. Their flights during hurricane season are aimed at feeding data into computer models to improve forecast accuracy.
hreat level: NOAA's aircraft have specialized equipment that the Air Force's Hurricane Hunters lack. Their flights during hurricane season are aimed at feeding data into computer models to improve forecast accuracy.
The now-thinly staffed team of flight directors, engineers, scientists and mechanics means NOAA will struggle to maintain a 24-hour-a-day tempo of flying its modified Gulfstream jet and aging WP-3 research aircraft, said Josh Ripp, who was laid off as a flight engineer since he was a probationary employee.
Ripp said the missing flights will translate into less accurate forecasts and greater risk for coastal residents who are used to having at least two to three days' warning of a hurricane's predicted landfall location.
He told Axios in an interview that the agency is now either short one person or is at just the level of personnel needed to staff 24/7 flight operations, which has been the desired tempo during past seasons.
However, that assumes no one gets sick or has a family emergency and cannot crew a flight. NOAA, he said, is now "playing the odds that everyone there is going to be fine all season."
Two others associated with NOAA's hurricane research program confirmed the challenges the agency faces after the layoffs hit its Office of Marine and Aviation Operations in Lakeland, Fla.
According to Andrew Hazelton, who was laid off from working on hurricane forecast models at the National Hurricane Center, the cuts may compromise forecast accuracy and ultimately cost lives.
He said NOAA uses the information from the flights in two ways. One is to gauge the intensity and movement of a storm, since such data is immediately relayed to the Hurricane Center.
The other is to use the specialized equipment — such as powerful, tail-mounted-Doppler radar — to gather data that's fed into hurricane forecast models to better anticipate a storm's movement and shifts in intensity.
Consistent NOAA and Air Force Reserve hurricane reconnaissance has helped lead to vast improvements in hurricane track forecasts in particular, with new gains made in intensity projections in recent years.
Between the lines: NOAA only has a minimum capacity of flight directors, positions that require years of training, according to one source familiar with staffing issues who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution if they are rehired.
It missed out on gaining three who were in the hiring process when the Trump administration instituted a government-wide freeze, and then lost two to the layoffs, the source said.
"This leaves the exact number for staffing four total WP-3 and G-IV crews," the source said. "It leaves no room for anyone to get sick or have a life event that precludes them from being able to fly."
"It will, of course, also lead to burnout of the remaining flight directors," they said, noting that flight engineers are also at "critically low" levels of personnel.
Hazelton told Axios that NOAA is running the risk that a storm will approach the coast and that the agency won't be able to fly into and around it with its advanced capabilities.
Your thoughts please.Let me see if I got it right. NOAA has enough personnel (undefined as to their task) to fly their planes. But a laid off man says they they will now have trouble manning their planes, and that they will not be able to fly their planes.
Others say that because they are not over-staffed they will not be able to fly. Sorry, but I worked in a factory for 22 years with the exact number of employees needed to operate it and never once shut it down for lack of help.
But I asked for the job of someone laid off that would prohibit operations. Did they lay off 800 pilots or 800 janitors? 800 stewardesses or 800 mechanics? Once more, we're being told that layoffs will hurt massively...but without being given knowledge of just WHO was laid off, why they were laid off, how many others do the same job and what they were paid.
No one seems to care - we just assume that the job won't get done now. Unfortunately for that concept my own personal experience with government agencies is that they are grossly overstaffed compared to private industry - that they could lose as much as 50% of the crew and still get the job done...if they all worked as private industry workers do."Unfortunately for that concept my own personnel concept with government agencies is that they are grossly overstaffed compared to private industry -"
Your personal concept as is with most of your others, is incorrect...They laid off enough people to make it detrimental to do their jobs. Comparing factory workers to what it takes to fly and maintain sophisticated aircraft and forecast severe weather in advance is a false equivalence, which you are very good at bringing it up.
You don't get it. If they don't have the people to forewarn of hurricanes and other severe weather, it could be even more disastrous, especially for people living in the coastal areas. They need advance notice to get the hell out of DOGE. A little play on words."They laid off enough people to make it detrimental to do their jobs."
PP, you keep saying that. And you keep neglecting to give any specifics at all showing it to be true. And I keep asking.
I don't think we're going to get anywhere. You don't know who was fired and what their job was. You don't know how many are left to do the work, or how many the work takes. You just assume there aren't enough, and I assume I (and you) don't know enough to make that determination.Sorry, but I do not choose to give the NYT my information. But looking at the first sentence (all I can see): "Together with recent firings and resignations, the new cuts could hamper the National Weather Service’s ability to produce lifesaving forecasts, scientists say.
So could a bad weather day. Ice on the roads, a flash flood. A demonstration in the streets, a pack of 1,000 wild dogs running into the building.
The point is that could (or "might" or "maybe" or "possibly" all mean the same thing. Not that there will be problems, but that there might be problems. And consider that there might be problems if we doubled the workforce twice. "Might" is an awfully big word and is commonly used to scare people into believing something that has a really low probability of happening, but suits the policies and desires of the speaker.
(I couldn't see the rest of the article, but highly doubt that it gave specifics on who was fired or would be fired.)You are right when you have a work force of over 13,000 people compared to your factory worker example. You expect them to name all he departments and job descriptions of the people who were let go.
I'm tired of going down a rabbit hole for you. Either accept it or don't. I hope you and yours are not affected by the increase in severe storms as a result of climate change or global warming.
Here is the latest article from the NYT.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the nation’s premier agency for weather and climate science, has been told by the Trump administration to prepare to lose another 1,000 workers, raising concerns that NOAA’s lifesaving forecasts might be hindered as hurricane and disaster season approaches.
The new dismissals would come in addition to the roughly 1,300 NOAA staff members who have already resigned or been laid off in recent weeks. The moves have alarmed scientists, meteorologists and others at the agency, which includes the National Weather Service. Some activities, including the launching of weather balloons, have already been suspended because of staffing shortages.
Together, the reductions would represent nearly 20 percent of NOAA’s approximately 13,000-member work force.
Managers within NOAA have been told to draw up proposals for layoffs and reorganizations to trim the agency’s staff by at least 1,000 people, according to eight people who requested anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the plans publicly. The effort is part of the “reductions in force” that President Trump required as part of an executive order last month, as he and the billionaire Elon Musk make rapid, large-scale cuts to the federal bureaucracy.
NOAA managers have been asked to complete their proposals by Tuesday, one of the people said. The proposals are likely to involve eliminating some of the agency’s functions, though managers have received little guidance about which programs to prioritize for cutting.
Representatives for NOAA didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Saturday.
The recent employee departures have already affected NOAA’s operations in many realms: predicting hurricanes and tornadoes, overseeing fisheries and endangered species, monitoring the changes that humans are bringing about to Earth’s climate and ecosystems.
NOAA, a $6.8 billion agency within the Commerce Department, has been singled out for cuts by some of Mr. Trump’s allies. Project 2025, the policy blueprint published by the Heritage Foundation that is echoed in many of the Trump administration’s actions, calls NOAA “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.” The document calls for the agency to be dismantled and some of its functions eliminated or privatized.
(My research)
NOAA's budget is relatively small compared to many other federal agencies. For fiscal year 2024, NOAA received approximately $7.1 billion in funding. In contrast, larger agencies like the Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human Services have budgets in the hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars2. For example, the Department of Defense's budget is over $1 trillion.PP, there is a big difference between how you and I look at these things. You take the word of the people working there and assume Trump, Musk and everyone else at DOGE are actively trying to harm the country. I think you have more empathy for those losing their jobs than those paying for the jobs, and I think that empathy is more important than reducing costs.
I am on the other side of the room. I assume those losing their jobs, or seeing their friends lose their jobs, are going to lie about the results. They are going to push, and push HARD to keep every single employee on the payroll (including themselves!), and if they don't outright lie about it all they will attempt to give the listener a very false impression. I assume that the naysayers (you, for instance) take that empathy path I listed above, and will jump on the chance to pass along any negatives they hear...such as those from the people fearing for their jobs (or having lost their job already).
That's human nature, and God knows we see it throughout our country. The concept of "Ask now what your country can do your you, but what you can do for your country" is long gone; we have become a nation of leeches, sucking at the government teat at every opportunity.
So I ask hard questions, looking for truth rather than assumptions and efforts to present a lie as truth. I don't see you doing that, rather just assuming that what you are told is gospel - that we need every employee we have on the massive, bloated payroll of government.
So you're right. Either actively question and search (hard!) for truthful answers or don't. Either take the word of those losing their jobs, or don't. Either accept that we either cut costs or go bankrupt, or don't.Let me get this straight. You don't believe the people who are being laid off because of DOGE. However you do believe the man who has lied over 30,000 times in his first term and continues to lie every time he opens his mouth now. "There was no insurrection. It was a love fest. I am innocent of all four of the indictments levied on me.
Trump was asked about the alleged clash Friday during an unrelated event at the White Hosue and said, "there is no clash." He added that Rubio and Musk "get along fantastically well" and "they're both doing a fantastic job."
Even though you can hear and see things with your own eyes and ears, Trump will deny it and put a positive spin on it.You will find it extremely difficult to find anything in my post that indicates I believe everything (or even a majority) of what Trump says.
Such ramblings, putting words into other's mouths or declaring what they are thinking, does nothing for your discussion.
"Either actively question and search (hard!) for truthful answers or don't." Does NOT mean I "believe the man who has lied over 30,000 times in his first term and continues to lie every time he opens his mouth now." That comes purely, 100%, from your own imagination.
And if you simply swallow whatever anyone with such a massive iron in the fire as the food on their table, the roof over their head and the clothes on their back says about the usefulness of removing those things, you are in much more dire need of help with your reasoning ability than I am.I started this forum six weeks ago and I predicted this was going to happen. It is just the beginning of Trump denying disaster relief to states. I believe there will be rebellion as other states apply for disaster relief from FEMA. Sara Huckabee Sanders is one of his devoted MAGA supporters. Many of the states that have been hit by tornadoes and floods are MAGA states.
Trump denies Arkansas after storms that killed more than 40 people
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … &ei=13Well to be fair, this is what Arkansas voted for...Dear Citizens of Arkansas, your governor and her father are the biggest supporters of Trump and they both have always said trump will always do what's best for America and it's citizens.
So I can only say this ;
"Thoughts and Prayers" but the citizens of Arkansas needs to pull themselves up by their very own Boot-straps and STOP asking the government handouts and freebies, that's what trump wants you to do....
Hurricane season should be fun though right? Buckle up Florida, South Carolina, Louisiana...
I believe that dear leader has also denied disaster relief to West Virginia... So they are also winning!
Pretending to care about people suffering from natural disaster was just a campaign issue.If the states can't afford to fund their own disaster relief , I think there is going to be rebellion in MAGA world.
This is according to FEMA currently:
For this current fiscal year, this agency has been granted authority to spend $65B out of this federal account. They carried over a balance of $15B from last year, were given $49B in new appropriations, and have authority to use $36M of other budgetary resources.
To date, 63.4% ($41B) of the total $65B has been obligated. The fact that it has been obligated means nothing to dear leader and his merry band of hatchet men, including the one with the chain saw.
https://www.usaspending.gov/federal_account/070-0702FEMA denies assistance to 8 Kentucky counties impacted by flooding, governor says.
Here we go again. This is the second state that Trump and company is denying needed disaster relief.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/fema- … &ei=29
What is the basis then of NOAA being overstaffed? What evidence has DOGE presented to support what and who and why they cut? Where is the evidence of that?
Why don't you ask DOGE? Certainly I don't have that information!
Related Discussions
- 674
Elon Musk
by Willowarbor 32 hours ago
Musk needs his own thread... OPINION We have an unelected billionaire running the country through a shadow government without formal checks. Musk is not a cabinet member and has not been subjected to a Senate confirmation process. But he now has an office in the West Wing, along with one in...
- 98
Why is help so difficult and slow to reach Purto Rico?
by Jack Lee 7 years ago
After a major hurricane hit Purto Rico dead on, why is it so difficult to get them help? Food, water, and basic necessities...? We are only a few hundred miles away. There are ships and air transports and all kinds of relief efforts by private charities and our US military. There are many cruise...
- 12
Would you give up 5% of your pay to prevent your coworkers from being laid off?
by Cindy Scaccia 9 years ago
Would you give up 5% of your pay to prevent your coworkers from being laid off?How would you react if your company cut your pay by 5% to prevent layoffs? If you think of all you have compared to a person who has nothing, do you feel like you can sacrifice some small pleasures in order to help out a...
- 58
What Do We Have Here? A Constitutional Crisis?
by Willowarbor 2 months ago
Vance's statement that "Judges aren't allowed to control the executive's legitimate power" has sparked concerns among legal experts, who suggest it could lead to a constitutional crisis or a breakdown of the American political system. This is due to the fundamental principle that...
- 31
The Trump Purges: Retribution or Necessity
by ga anderson 2 months ago
Instead of getting a morning chuckle, this one opened a whole can of confirmation bias. And that's not a good thing. Amid all of the headlines about Pres. Trump's deep state/retribution 'purges', I stumbled across a new O'keefe 'undercover' film. My perception of O'keefe isn't positive, but...
- 59
Is there anyone in the Trump administration who hasn't met with the Russians?
by Randy Godwin 7 years ago
Is there anyone in the Trump administration who hasn't met with the Russians?Donald Jr., son-in-law and Manafort met with a well know Putin connected lawyer ostensibly to hear dirt on Hillary. That was one version, then Jr. added to the tale after a NYT article spilled the beans on the meeting....