Farewell FEMA - good luck states!
Without wishing ill to anyone, I think the world needs a natural disaster at Mara-lago (sp?). An earthquake, or a swarm of locusts perhaps? Perhaps then ‘certain people’ would understand the need for a nation-wide, coordinated disaster response team.
oh, wait. I’ve just remembered: those who don’t study history are doomed to repeat mistakes from the past
ETA to fix spelling. Autocorrect is annoying.
joanne said:
Without wishing ill to anyone, I think the world needs a natural disaster at Mara-lago (sp?). An earthquake, or a swarm of locusts perhaps? Perhaps then ‘certain people’ would understand the need for a nation-wide, coordinated disaster response team.
oh, wait. I’ve just remembered: those who don’t study history are doomed to repeat mistakes from the past
ETA to fix spelling. Autocorrect is annoying.
Or the sea turning red! Yes, something Biblical in keeping with his newfound piety.
A lot of the liberal commentary I've been seeing on this implies that Trump wants to leave the financing of disaster aid to the states. This does not appear to be true. What he appears to be proposing is a disbanding of FEMA as we know it and making the states beef up their own disaster agencies to take over disaster management, but the federal government would still provide financial disaster aid.
Make no mistake though - this is still a profoundly stupid proposal and it's another piece of the project to dismantle the federal government.
Grover Norquist's long time dream is coming to fruition:
"I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the
size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."
Let’s be clear. If FEMA is disbanded, some private company will hire key individuals, build the same rapid response capabilities, and sell them to the states at higher prices, while lining someone’s pockets and paying lobbyists. States will get less and pay more (and create their own standards for who is deserving of disaster relief). I tend to think any crucial business that our new government wants to get out of will be a major business opportunity for a well-connected supporter.
susan1014 said:
Let’s be clear. If FEMA is disbanded, some private company will hire key individuals, build the same rapid response capabilities, and sell them to the states at higher prices, while lining someone’s pockets and paying lobbyists. States will get less and pay more (and create their own standards for who is deserving of disaster relief). I tend to think any crucial business that our new government wants to get out of will be a major business opportunity for a well-connected supporter.
I hadn't thought about the privatization angle. Good point and very likely to happen.
Also, I love how many of these radical first week proposals weren't even hinted at during the campaign, except, I guess, in Project 2025, which Trump told us he knew nothing about it, and the media dutifully followed along and stopped bringing it up.
drummerboy said:
A lot of the liberal commentary I've been seeing on this implies that Trump wants to leave the financing of disaster aid to the states. This does not appear to be true. What he appears to be proposing is a disbanding of FEMA as we know it and making the states beef up their own disaster agencies to take over disaster management, but the federal government would still provide financial disaster aid.
And that federal government aid apparently will have strings attached. He's suggesting he would help California with conditions. Voter :ID and rerouting water to flow to the Los Angelos area.
Morganna said:
drummerboy said:
A lot of the liberal commentary I've been seeing on this implies that Trump wants to leave the financing of disaster aid to the states. This does not appear to be true. What he appears to be proposing is a disbanding of FEMA as we know it and making the states beef up their own disaster agencies to take over disaster management, but the federal government would still provide financial disaster aid.
And that federal government aid apparently will have strings attached. He's suggesting he would help California with conditions. Voter :ID and rerouting water to flow to the Los Angelos area.
yes, that's why Trump does not intend to turn funding over to the states. He wants to be able to use federal funding as a cudgel.
This is probably already happening in Los Angeles. Rich people who can self-insure will live in flame retardant homes in nice places that insurance companies won't insure.
Along with the loss of FEMA, NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) is being gutted, as well.
So, who's going to be keeping an eye on the weather and climate, which affects all of us?
This is what you see when you go to the https://earth.nullschool.net/ website
It's my unresearched suspicion that there may be private companies who'd like to step in and profit from picking up the functions of NOAA and other agencies. Good luck to us all.
mjc said:
It's my unresearched suspicion that there may be private companies who'd like to step in and profit from picking up the functions of NOAA and other agencies. Good luck to us all.
private companies owned by a certain South African immigrant?
Maybe be partly due to Accu Weather's lobbying. Myers' is its founder.
Myers faced criticism in 2005 when he supported the National Weather Service Duties Act of 2005, a bill introduced by U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) that would have prohibited the National Weather Service
from publishing weather data to the public when private-sector
entities, such as AccuWeather, perform the same function commercially.[9] Myers has been a long-time large donor to the Republican Party, its candidates, and to Santorum, a former home-state Senator.[10][11]
The federal civil service may no longer see the competent applying.
Why would those of competence apply knowing they may all be let go because they're on probation?
You might argue there will be a new administration after Trump but who is to say there won't be a Trump 3.0.
I think future federal job applicants will mostly be the desperate, the losers and the political opportunists.
TGreene says: "Why would those of competence apply knowing they may all be let go because they're on probation?"
Wouldn't this just put them on the same footing as private-company hires though? Not disagreeing that the current meshugass makes civil service less attractive. Can only hope the courts and Congress can clean some of it up.
Meantime, you're likely right about political opportunists : (
mjc said:
TGreene says: "Why would those of competence apply knowing they may all be let go because they're on probation?"
Wouldn't this just put them on the same footing as private-company hires though?
No.
Because private companies do not do mass firings of all their probationary employees. They only let go those who don't perform to their standard or do limited layoffs based on economic need.
Private companies I worked for did not look at probationary status when they laid off.
Probationary layoffs mostly occur in union shops strictly based on seniority per their union negotiated contracts.
How did a TASS reporter even get into the oval office if he wasn't approved?
“TASS was not on the approved list of media for today’s pool,” a White House official told CNN in a statement. “As soon as it came to the attention of press office staff that he was in the Oval, he was escorted out by the Press Secretary.”
Just bizarre!
It just occurred to me (sometimes I’m slow) the weather forecasting done for rocket launches and re-entries would be done by specialists in NOAA. As well as long-range ocean weather, for ships. And the military.
Whoopsie!
jamie said:
How did a TASS reporter even get into the oval office if he wasn't approved?
“TASS was not on the approved list of media for today’s pool,” a White House official told CNN in a statement. “As soon as it came to the attention of press office staff that he was in the Oval, he was escorted out by the Press Secretary.”
Just bizarre!
In Russia, Putin takes questions from all reporters, including American. Don't see why TASS should be kept out.
nan said:
jamie said:
How did a TASS reporter even get into the oval office if he wasn't approved?
“TASS was not on the approved list of media for today’s pool,” a White House official told CNN in a statement. “As soon as it came to the attention of press office staff that he was in the Oval, he was escorted out by the Press Secretary.”
Just bizarre!
In Russia, Putin takes questions from all reporters, including American. Don't see why TASS should be kept out.
no matter who it is, it's kind of a security breach when someone not on the invite list walks into the Oval Office, don't you think?
ml1 said:
nan said:
jamie said:
How did a TASS reporter even get into the oval office if he wasn't approved?
“TASS was not on the approved list of media for today’s pool,” a White House official told CNN in a statement. “As soon as it came to the attention of press office staff that he was in the Oval, he was escorted out by the Press Secretary.”
Just bizarre!
In Russia, Putin takes questions from all reporters, including American. Don't see why TASS should be kept out.
no matter who it is, it's kind of a security breach when someone not on the invite list walks into the Oval Office, don't you think?
Yes.
nan said:
In Russia, Putin takes questions from all reporters, including American. Don't see why TASS should be kept out.
OMG
OMG
OMG
meh, not really.
expected sycophancy to anyone opposing The Great Satan.
You know who basically wants to disband FEMA and leave everything to the states.
He pledged much more money to North Carolina.
And maybe some money to California if the increase they flow of water from the north to the south, stop trying to save a fish and get voter ID cards.