"Approximately this size" in magnitude or actual ground motion?

 

FWIW the plants I've seen use standards that are at least as conservative as IBC and go by the USGS seismic region ratings. So once again, it's those lying fraud geologists that are to blame. Maybe if you actually figured out some EARTHQUAKE SCIENCE instead of just banking on the GLOBAL WARMING HOAX we'd know for sure!!!!1!!1

All the more reason why the USGS should have its budget cut, like NOAA. We don't need to know this stuff.

All the more reason why the USGS should have its budget cut, like NOAA. We don't need to know this stuff.

Just a hypothetical question here...

 

If you were forced to choose, say, five departments or areas in the federal government to cust substantially... can be any agency, any given funding channel, etc... What would you choose?

 

Just a hypothetical question here...

 

If you were forced to choose, say, five departments or areas in the federal government to cust substantially... can be any agency, any given funding channel, etc... What would you choose?

Do I assume the DOD and DHS are off limits because they are too obvious?

Do I assume the DOD and DHS are off limits because they are too obvious?

Nothing is off limits. Go for it.

 

Though if you go as broadly as DOD or DHS, I'd like to hear you be more specific within each. NOAA and USGS are agencies within departments... DOD and DHS are entire departments with many agencies each (although DHS is really a shadow department, since it's agencies fall within various cabinets).

 

 

Nothing is off limits. Go for it.

 

Though if you go as broadly as DOD or DHS, I'd like to hear you be more specific within each. NOAA and USGS are agencies within departments... DOD and DHS are entire departments with many agencies each (although DHS is really a shadow department, since it's agencies fall within various cabinets).

If I had no Congress to deal with...

 

I'd gut the department of agriculture first. A huge chunk of its money is spent subsidizing production that is already unnecessary and makes the U.S. less healthy. An additional chunk of its marketing dollars are spent doing things like coming up with Domino's "Real cheese!" advertising campaign to support cheese producers.

 

I'd massively pull back on DOD spending, first by ending the wars, but more importantly by closing bases, particularly overseas, and slashing the procurement and maintenance budgets. We don't need 300+ F-22's. Largest possible savings here.

 

Department of Energy, I'd cut nuclear loan guarantees, I'd cut high-carbon energy subsidies, if I got to do everything I could I'd fix the completely broken extraction lease auction system, and I'd add in a carbon tax. I'd do whatever was possible to solve that nuclear waste disposal problem...Yucca is probably finished, but there are other general concepts that have never been tested.

 

The DHS probably has the longest list of things that could be cut or repurposed. Immigrations and Customs is a mess. The TSA is a mess.

 

If I had to make cuts, there's trimmable fat in HHS. FHA loans provide a real societal benefit and long-term savings, but no where here did I get to count that.

 

Interior...Think I already noted this, but they also work to handle energy lease auctions, which is a corrupt cesspool.

 

Department of Justice...country as a whole spends way too much on prisons. DEA, FBI, and prisons are the largest part of this budget.

 

State Department...way too much money goes to Israel, way too much money goes to countries like Pakistan that just turn around and buy jet fighters with the money.

 

Transit...well, frankly they're underfunded. They've been having to deal with less since the gas tax has not been raised to keep up with inflation.

 

Treasury is underfunded for what they're asked to do...enforcing that maze of regulations which we've discussed in other areas.

 

The Corps of Engineers...complete debacle of a mess of a debacle. See about 5 posts back.

 

EPA...underfunded, need Superfund back in particular.

 

NASA...well, depends on if you want a spaceprogram or not.

 

NSF...could probably use 5% more than it gets, but is pretty close to where it should be. When you pump up the NSF funds in any given year you wind up degrading the quality of the proposals you fund.

 

Edit: 2 other points. 1: there's still substantial savings available through an expansion of Medicare or even a reworking of Medicare again, and 2., doing any of these right now fails to make a dent in the actual budget deficit, because cutting federal jobs right now just moves people onto unemployment insurance and Medicaid.

If I had no Congress to deal with...

 

I'd gut the department of agriculture first. A huge chunk of its money is spent subsidizing production that is already unnecessary and makes the U.S. less healthy. An additional chunk of its marketing dollars are spent doing things like coming up with Domino's "Real cheese!" advertising campaign to support cheese producers.

 

I'd massively pull back on DOD spending, first by ending the wars, but more importantly by closing bases, particularly overseas, and slashing the procurement and maintenance budgets. We don't need 300+ F-22's. Largest possible savings here.

 

Department of Energy, I'd cut nuclear loan guarantees, I'd cut high-carbon energy subsidies, if I got to do everything I could I'd fix the completely broken extraction lease auction system, and I'd add in a carbon tax. I'd do whatever was possible to solve that nuclear waste disposal problem...Yucca is probably finished, but there are other general concepts that have never been tested.

 

The DHS probably has the longest list of things that could be cut or repurposed. Immigrations and Customs is a mess. The TSA is a mess.

 

If I had to make cuts, there's trimmable fat in HHS. FHA loans provide a real societal benefit and long-term savings, but no where here did I get to count that.

 

Interior...Think I already noted this, but they also work to handle energy lease auctions, which is a corrupt cesspool.

 

Department of Justice...country as a whole spends way too much on prisons. DEA, FBI, and prisons are the largest part of this budget.

 

State Department...way too much money goes to Israel, way too much money goes to countries like Pakistan that just turn around and buy jet fighters with the money.

 

Transit...well, frankly they're underfunded. They've been having to deal with less since the gas tax has not been raised to keep up with inflation.

 

Treasury is underfunded for what they're asked to do...enforcing that maze of regulations which we've discussed in other areas.

 

The Corps of Engineers...complete debacle of a mess of a debacle. See about 5 posts back.

 

EPA...underfunded, need Superfund back in particular.

 

NASA...well, depends on if you want a spaceprogram or not.

 

NSF...could probably use 5% more than it gets, but is pretty close to where it should be. When you pump up the NSF funds in any given year you wind up degrading the quality of the proposals you fund.

 

Edit: 2 other points. 1: there's still substantial savings available through an expansion of Medicare or even a reworking of Medicare again, and 2., doing any of these right now fails to make a dent in the actual budget deficit, because cutting federal jobs right now just moves people onto unemployment insurance and Medicaid.

 

Well first, thanks for writing a real response. That took thought.

 

Second, believe it or not, I agree with some of what you said - all the bolded in fact.

 

Maybe this should have been its own thread - What Would You Cut?

 

Maybe this should have been its own thread - What Would You Cut?

I'm pretty sure we've done that before, actually.

Decently entertaining leak today. A group of 11 northeast states commissioned what appears to be an independent study of the impact of stricter air quality and greenhouse gas regulations on employment within those states. Basically, their findings are...the stronger you make your pollution standards, the stronger your economy is.

WSJ graphic.

WSJ graphic.

 

Doesn't mean they are producing.

Your numbers are off on F-22.

Your numbers are off on F-22.

Did we stop those after 100 useless ones and spend $35 billion on 0 F-35's? I have trouble keeping track of those many hundreds of billions.

Doesn't mean they are producing.

Of course. Once it's drilled it's an asset that can appreciate as oil everywhere else dries up.

Did we stop those after 100 useless ones and spend $35 billion on 0 F-35's? I have trouble keeping track of those many hundreds of billions.

 

 

Yea, everything's useless when it comes to defense spending. Everything. Let's go save Libya again. And let the Chinese just march over the entire world. Etc. Yup. We're American weenies that just throw money at everything useless.

Yea, everything's useless when it comes to defense spending. Everything. Let's go save Libya again. And let the Chinese just march over the entire world. Etc. Yup. We're American weenies that just throw money at everything useless.

Yes. The Chinese are going to march over the entire world. Yes.

 

I think you've just illustrated quite well why the defense budget should be cut.

Germany hit >20% of its power from renewable sources in the first half of 2011.

Yes. The Chinese are going to march over the entire world. Yes.

 

I think you've just illustrated quite well why the defense budget should be cut.

 

 

Yup. Everything defense industry sucks. Tattoo it on your forehead.

Yup. Everything defense industry sucks. Tattoo it on your forehead.

Because arguing for defense cuts and arguing for a defense budget if 0 are the same thing and I totally couldn't find a logical fallacy on there.

Because arguing for defense cuts and arguing for a defense budget if 0 are the same thing and I totally couldn't find a logical fallacy on there.

 

 

Anything modern is a waste of money, obviously. Stop the programs now. NOW!

 

In that way, our existing technology can be rapidly overcome by other countries and we wouldn't matter in the world anymore. USA SUKS! USA USA USA SUKS!!! All right! We got what we wanted, because at least now we can make all of our grandchildren pay before they're even born for all the entitlements ya'll have gotten in the last 6 years or so (starting with medicare plan d, which is a boondoggle).

Anything modern is a waste of money, obviously. Stop the programs now. NOW!

 

In that way, our existing technology can be rapidly overcome by other countries and we wouldn't matter in the world anymore. USA SUKS! USA USA USA SUKS!!! All right! We got what we wanted, because at least now we can make all of our grandchildren pay before they're even born for all the entitlements ya'll have gotten in the last 6 years or so (starting with medicare plan d, which is a boondoggle).

If we cut defense spending by 2/3 we'd still spend 10x as much as China.

 

At least I can scoff at you the next time you complain about government waste, because clearly you really don't care about cutting spending, just spending you don't like.

If we cut defense spending by 2/3 we'd still spend 10x as much as China.

 

At least I can scoff at you the next time you complain about government waste, because clearly you really don't care about cutting spending, just spending you don't like.

 

Boy, that sound familiar...

[/b]

 

Boy, that sound familiar...

Why, because you do it too?

Solyndra, a solar-cell maker in California and recipient of over $500m in federally guaranteed loans as well as $1b in private funding, closed its doors an filed for Chapter 11.

Solyndra, a solar-cell maker in California and recipient of over $500m in federally guaranteed loans as well as $1b in private funding, closed its doors an filed for Chapter 11.

I realize there will always be a bunch of these startups that fall out, but... this will happen more often now because this country elected to go to war in Iraq instead of getting out in FRONT of these technologies. Now, China and other countries are already producing technology that is better and cheaper.

 

Seems like Solyndra was trying to innovate by promoting a different type of solar cell, but it appears it never presented any technological advantage over existing ones.

 

I don't know the details of what they were producing outside of the ATC report I heard yesterday. The problem seemed to be that they could never get manufacturing costs below those of conventional solar panels and couldn't project doing so in the future. The story brought up concerns that were raised at the time of the loans that the billion-dollar investor happened to be a big Democrat supporter and concerns over the wisdom of investing so much money in a company that had never turned and couldn't reasonably project turning a profit in the near future.