412
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Jul 2024
412 points (98.4% liked)
politics
19104 readers
1775 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It's completely fucking bonkers NOAA is an amazing organization and delivers so much value on such a small budget.
This is exactly why they need to destroy it, the "free" market can't compete with the economic efficiency of a well run government program
Are there any real private competitors though? The work that NOAA does is only valuable because of the extreme scale it's carried out by and replicating that would be quite expensive.
No, and there genuinely can’t be due to everything NOAA does. I used to work in the engineering group for NWS and there are so many parts to weather prediction and climate recording it’s not even funny. Sure there are satellites and radar, but there’s also over 200 weather balloons released each day across the US, there’s highly specialized software that fills the unique non-profit driven mission of the NWS, there’s advanced weather modeling run on super computers, there’s a whole network of thousands of volunteer observers that record temperature, dew point, soil temps, evaporation readings, and more to support agriculture, and then there’s the outreach both to places like schools but also to support things like amateur radio clubs and weather enthusiast clubs that all provide free observations and reports. Private industry consumes all of that data for free to repackage and sell as a product (they technically add value by tailoring it in many cases or use it to run proprietary models). All of that is just the NWS as well, NOAA does so much more that impacts everything from agriculture to fisheries and it’s so clear that the hard right pushing P2025 have no clue what they actually do. This single move would likely destroy the US position as a global breadbasket, and it’s just one tiny piece of P2025.
Holy shit
Oh it gets worse and still only in NWS area. All of the severe weather alerts from thunderstorms to hurricanes are also done by NWS. Not to mention the radio stations they broadcast all of that information on that are also used to help tune antennas and receivers.
This would kill thousands of people every year. And it's mostly red states that would feel the biggest burden of being hurt. It does not make any sense except to acknowledge that the people writing P2025 really do not give 2 flying shits about anyone but themselves.
It would hurt red states, you say? That happens to be something red states LOVE voting for!
Shout-out to all my nexrad tech homies out there 📡
It amazes me that people do not seem to know this, so it bears repeating strenuously.
Without NWS there is effectively no weather data. Oh sure, you have Wunderground's handful of private weather stations with their dodgy uncalibrated data. But anything high quality and worth using in forecasting models comes from the gubmint.
No weather data means agriculture is seriously fucked. Aviation is even more fucked. Shipping is fucked. The electricity grid is fucked. Construction, mining, sports... the list of industries that depend on accurate data and forecasting is massive.
AccuWeather has been lobbying for this; Joe Bastardi knows he can't do as good a job so he wants to end the competition
Accuweather doesn't compete with NWS, they rely on it's data.
Both are true. And they want the data privatized so only they can profit from it.
I was glossing over the details. To clarify - and I think you mean this - they want the free data from NWS but they don't want that same data to be publicly available. Except that's not generally how federal government data works - by law in most cases it has to be made public. But that's kind of irrelevant in the context of "disband the NWS" at least in the sense that Accuweather very much wants the free ride to continue or failing that to get handed all the NWS resources, which isn't gonna fly not least because other providers would strongly object. IOW, this is all kind of DOA.
I'm sure the actual legislation would be a transition to privatisation. Suddenly musk and bezos et al a are demonstrating their weather satellites
Indeed. But; If you can eradicate the free market first, the private market can take over and use high running/development costs to justify high access fees.
They cannot stand the existence of a good example. They HATE it. This is why they seek to make worse, and then destroy, things like public schools, libraries, and the USPS.