Consequently, if we really want to bring more manufacturing, we badly need engineers. The choices are educate more engineers and/or hire more foreign engineers. Plain and simple, without more engineers it's pointless to build more production facilities.

But we need those coal mining jobs...

Current number of unemployed Americans = 7.9 million.

There you go again, making things up.

According to the President, there are 96 million people in America not working...

To be more accurate - there are 174,00 blue collar jobs, full time jobs related to the coal industry.

This link shows the tens of thousands of "coal related" jobs, not included in that number: https://www.bls.gov/...nt/naics4_212100.htm

In addition:

(CNSNews.com) - The United States has lost approximately 191,000 jobs in the mining industry since September 2014 including approximately 7,000 that were lost in April, according to data published today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The coal mining industry alone has lost approximately 10,900 jobs since April of last year.

http://www.cnsnews.com/...-jobs-september-2014


Plus, we have companies like Bucyrus that building mining equipment, that employs nearly 8,500 in Milwaukee alone. Then, we need to factor in the folks who make trucks and trains to transport the coal, process the fuel for transportation, etc., etc., etc.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

in any event, it warms my heart to see the compassionate liberal wing of the forum be able to write off these individual people and families as not statistically significant.

Technically, he's correct.

http://www.cnsnews.com/...18-obama-took-office

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Okay, then triple the number. Now it goes from 4.9% to 5.2%, which assumes that coal goes away and isn't replaced, which we know not to be the case.


The point is, outside of being directly impacted, why care about *these* unemployed people anymore than other unemployed people?


My personal opinion, if we just want to keep people employed, wouldn't it make more sense to employ them doing something that we actually need rather than something that we need to get rid of?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

The loss of coal jobs isn't even about the jobs....it's about the coal. We need coal for baseload electricity. We are closing the nuclear plants which is one of the other baseload options. Wind and sun just aren't going to cut it in the long run. Everybody wants their clean electric cars.....but that electricity still has to be produced by something on a large scale basis.

If one thread goes south, they are obligated to start a similar one to try and bolster their flawed position.

174,000 is what percent of 7.9 million? Hmm 2%, I did this in my head so I could be way off but let's take a look at this from what we have done to strip citizens of their rights based on much less than 1% even less than .001% but now 2% is a meaningless statistic. Interesting, veeeerrryyyyy interesting.

Fucking Trump, caring about blue collar jobs and keeping campaign promises,,,,,,, what kind of a politician is he?!?

---

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

From Tom/Vitus

"That might be the case, but I am all for whatever can be done to protect them for as long as possible"

Wait . . Republicans using protectionist governmental practices to keep jobs going. I thought the Republican party was the party of totally free and open capitalism? A Darwinian economic survival of the fittest model. If you can't keep up too-bad-so-sad! :) Half serious!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

So clearly this isn't about people losing jobs. Its specifically about COAL worker losing jobs (allegedly). So why shedding so many tears for coal miners but not for other industries?

It's about people in an entire industry losing jobs, and what they're going to be able to do instead. No, it's not necessarily about the total number of jobs dispersed throughout the entire nation. Yes, if we shut down the entire coal industry, we'd lose a couple of hundred thousand jobs. If we added 5% more teachers, no net loss in jobs. Awesome. Except for those people in coal mining country, who are all out of jobs, because it's not like they're all going to become teachers, disperse throughout the country, and find work in education. No, what you're going to have is a devastated economy in those areas, with all the attendant suffering.


I'm just curious why the same people who don't want to see minimum raise risen or don't care about teachers losing jobs care so much about an obsolete industry that's pouting the planet purely for the sake of saving THEIR jobs (assuming its not your job that's being cut).

You're conflating issues that aren't necessarily related, as well as attributing positions to people that they might not hold. I've argued in here before for a living wage. At the same time, I see the problems inherent with the idea, and I can see similar pros and cons with raising the minimum wage. And who says I or anyone else doesn't care about teachers losing their jobs? I've often complained about education cuts (though more accurately, budget priorities) that eliminate or reduce education in the art, music, physical education, shop classes, etc. I have no desire to put teachers out of work. I don't need to oppose employment for teachers to favor employment for coal miners.

That isn't to say I'm for just increasing the supply of teaching jobs artificially for it's own sake. Every industry has a need for a certain amount of employees in various capacities, and generally that level has reached its own equilibrium. And just because there are some teachers who can't find work teaching doesn't necessarily mean I think we should create a teaching spot to accommodate each and every one of them. But if we were facing a situation where massive amounts of teaching jobs were being eliminated because, say, they were being replaced by online training, I'd be real interested in preserving those jobs until I was sure the people who lose them have a viable alternative. It's not enough to just say, well, we don't need teachers anymore because we can instruct students online, so see ya later. If it's pretty clear that the majority of them won't be able to find comparable work, we should hold off on the whole internet teaching thing.

Right now the only viable alternative I've heard for people in that position is to take up some kind of trade, and it's not a bad idea. But the world can only employ so many plumbers, you know? You'll come back with "more education," I suppose, but I really don't put much faith in that as a broad solution. A lot of people can't afford to go, and even if we changed that problem, a lot of people just aren't suited for it. Not only that, there just aren't that many jobs that actually require college degrees. Even the ones that do are going to start declining anyway.

I say protect as many of these jobs as possible for as long as possible until someone comes up with some kind of solution. If it ultimately can't be maintained, that's the breaks, but geez, let's not just abandon these people when we have the ability to help. People act as if the fact that coal or manufacturing jobs won't be around 10 or 15 or 20 years from now means it doesn't really matter if we lose them right now. That's crazy.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Wait . . Republicans using protectionist governmental practices to keep jobs going. I thought the Republican party was the party of totally free and open capitalism?

First off, I'm not Republican.

Second, there's long been a protectionist wing of the Republican party. They haven't all always been radical free marketers.

"Protectionist" has been a common smear against some conservatives for years. I myself don't really see what's so objectionable about it.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

So stopping a war on coal by stopping or reducing regulations imposed by a previous administration whose stated purpose was to destroy the industry is now defined as a protectionist governmental practice.

See how I didn't reference Obama there. 😀

'Free and open capitalism' usually doesn't entail job-killing regulatory requirements :) This isn't protectionism, this is reduced regulatory burden.

Taking it a step further though, for a more realistic conversation, it's a bunch of blue collar jobs that disappeared in regions where there's nothing else available. Those regions need to tackle the issue head on and figure out how to bring jobs into the region. But part of electing Trump for these people is bringing jobs to the region, at least that's their belief. It's far more nuanced than that, but in the short term reducing the regulatory burden will likely prompt a bit of a spike in coal jobs for a while.

I share your opinion and, in a perfect world, yes, this would be ideal. But, as I mentioned in the other coal thread - this just isn't a reality for some people in some areas. There are entire segments of the population for whom manual labor really is the only option. Then we must account for their location and determine what manual labor is available to them.

I have a client in northern WI that is desperate to hire welders to work on ships. They even went so far as to fund new welding training centers in a local technical college and in several high schools. They are still forced to hire temp employees to fill the void. Meanwhile, there are tens of thousands of unemployed welders and potential welders in the south and parts of the rust belt. But, upward mobility is not an option for those folks.

So, you have the issue of location, lack of mobility, education, etc., etc.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Give me a break.

You are being intellectually dishonest and you know it.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I have no desire to put teachers out of work. I don't need to oppose employment for teachers to favor employment for coal miners.



The fact that you have to spell this piece out should let everybody know what it's like arguing with BarryP.

To further JSA's point, the number of workers that would be impacted by this would include all the people that design and manufacture equipment used in mining, transporting, and cleaning. Then you could start to contemplate all the other people that make a living off of supplying the miners with basic necessities and you start eliminating income possibilities in entire swaths of the country. Not just one industry...

So stopping a war on coal by stopping or reducing regulations imposed by a previous administration whose stated purpose was to destroy the industry is now defined as a protectionist governmental practice.


Thank you

I was unaware of this nuanced, but very important detail.

Still - it's a business/industry that is in decline (thankfully) and there really is no big up-side or future in it. So isn't all of this a bit moot?

On a long road-trip last fall driving down to South Carolina for the Hincapie Gran Fondo we drove through a large part of West Virginia. My wife and I kept remarking as the absolutely beautiful scenery kept rolling by, what an amazing looking place it was. We kept wondering where we could pull over and go for a bike ride.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

More intellectual dishonesty.


Its not about it being a small number. Its about asking why THESE 174,000 jobs and not someone else's 174,000 jobs.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Its not about it being a small number. Its about asking why THESE 174,000 jobs and not someone else's 174,000 jobs.

Because THESE 174,000 jobs are heavily concentrated in a particular geographic area, for one thing.

More importantly, because these 174,000 jobs are held by people who have already seen job opportunities dry up, and because they don't have a realistic option to replace those jobs. It's not just about the 174,000 jobs lost now- it's also about all the similar jobs that have already been lost, and are not longer available for them to seek.

If we were looking at the death of teaching in the next 20 years, would you be concerned about all the teachers who were being put out of work? Why or why not?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Again, in the interests of truth and honesty, as I pointed out a couple times, we are talking about well more than 174,000 jobs. If you want to keep claiming intellectual dishonesty in others, then stop being intellectually dishonest yourself.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

All fair and reasonable points.

I personally don't think Make Coal Great Again is the way to go. A slow phase out plan with some sort of plan to help the local economies would make much more sense.


If these towns need coal to survive, then its only inevitable that they are going to fail. That doesn't mean that I suggest ripping the bandaid off, but preparing to phase it out now would certainly be better than ripping it off later.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Forget Coal!

Can Trump bring back the copper industry?

I want to get paid $150,000 a year to drive a huge truck around.
And live in some semi abandoned mining town in Montana, Arizona or Nevada- where I can buy a Victoorian Mansion for $50,000.

That would be a bit of a pay cut.
But the lower cost of living.
And the lower stress would make up for it.

A 60 year old man is on his way out, on the back side of the hill, so to speak. If someone has their foot on his throat, the person who removes said foot from old man's throat isn't putting him on life support but letting nature take it's course.

---

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

Absolutely. And a dick to boot. But

I am off today and this is how I am choosing to entertain myself and

I have tried to contribute where I can in addition to just being a dick

How's that for intellectual honesty

A slow phase out plan with some sort of plan to help the local economies would make much more sense.

OK. What kind of plan do you have in mind?



If these towns need coal to survive, then its only inevitable that they are going to fail. That doesn't mean that I suggest ripping the bandaid off, but preparing to phase it out now would certainly be better than ripping it off later.

I am fine with that. No, I'm violently in favor of that. The problem, though, is that I want us to be able to phase something IN at the same time we're phasing coal out. And I have not heard what that something could be.

And it isn't limited to coal mining, and certainly not limited to coal mining towns. I see this as an issue that has already impacted vast swaths of Americans, and is going to impact many, many more in the very near future. People have largely not cared too much about the losses to the middle class, because they happened to those without a college degree, and who really cares if Detroit rusts into oblivion, I guess. But the losses are going to accelerate and swallow up more and more people at that skill level, and it isn't going to stop with them. I fear that what we're facing is an employment cataclysm, and a holding a couple of college degrees isn't going to save many people. I hope I'm wrong about that, but in the meantime, large numbers of Americans are facing the problem already. I think we should do what we can to protect them and their ability to work hard and earn a good living for themselves and their families.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Is that what you were in favor of when the EPA hammered the coal industry under Obama? There was a time and place for 'slow phase out plan', now is not that time. The jobs are gone, the coal regions are in awful shape. What the aim is for Trump, in the short term, seems to be to roll back those regs and help regain some of those jobs. Maybe then some retraining will help, work with the states to incentivize some clean energy companies to open up shop for more blue collar positions.

It's funny, for eight years under Obama no one batted an eye when he hammered the 'I want to kill the coal industry' narrative. Now the voters have spoken and surprisingly, those who worked in the mines kinda liked having jobs. There's a responsible way to do things, I think what Obama and the EPA did was pretty irresponsible.

It is all a bit moot. Except

To those it affects dierectly and
To those who choose to start threads about it as a way to trash the current holder of the office who is tying to do something about it.

I am just trying to point out that the current holder of the office didn't just pick this as a pet cause. It was done in direct response to the fact that the previous holder targeted this industry for elimination. And did so without answering many of the good questions being raised here. Like what about these people's lives. And what about electricity. And what about nuclear. And the two candidates seeking to replace him on the same side followed suit

This whole thread is about how many or how few jobs we are talking about. But it ignores that trump is speaking to this issue and to manufacturing jobs etc etc and it is resonating. Not just because he is speaking positively about it but because the other side either didn't speak as well about it or in some cases was directly opposed to it. That's fine but don't expect the people who it affects directly to support you. And if you want to win a national election you can no longer do that to the coal and rust belt and expect to prevail. Even if you do win the popular vote of the country as a whole.


EDIT: bottom line here Steve is you and I are both not thrilled that the man is in office. But instead of looking at all the conspiracy theories as to why the happened the D party really ought to be taking a close look at how and why that happened and start doing something about the states like MI and WI that they just assumed were in their pocket to start the process.

Technically, he's correct.

Yes but Trump is pulling a "Sessions" by being very misleading.

So why isn't anyone fighting for the nuclear jobs? These are higher paying, safer jobs which have more transferrable skills.

Hmmmm......I guess I can respect that.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Hence one of the problems with our election process. No one would care much about coal jobs if they didn't need PA and OH to win elections.


I think this goes back to the O-OP (from the other thread). Everyone understands that it resonates. I just don't think Trump is going to bring back coal and manufacturing in any meaningful way. Trump is promising to return the cheese that's been moved because people don't want to change (yes, I get the fact that a 60 year old coal miner has little other options), but I just don't think its going to happen.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

The political conversation though is stupid. Don't promise to bring back jobs that aren't coming back. Promise to bring NEW jobs into that area to replace the coal jobs. Why not manufacture solar panels or something that is part of a GROWING industry? Why promise (falsely) to prop up a dying industry?

I know why of course. Because that's what the people want to hear. Well, I want to hear the president promise a $50k per year raise, a 4 day work week (three during the prime summer riding hours) and retirement at 50. The difference is I KNOW that's a fantasy. Somebody needs to tell the hard truth to the people of KY and WV, etc. that coal is a dying industry and help them find something to replace it.

Let's fucking be honest and actually help the people as opposed to lying about how you're going to help them. Though I'm directing my rant at Trump and the republicans I am of course fully aware that another version of this rant can be directed at the democrats, and rightly so. Let's solve problems and not just make unrealistic promises that are impossible to keep.

I don't remember any presidential candidates in the 70's or 80's promising to bring the typewriter manufacturing jobs back...

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

I think the miners and the supporting industries and all their families would, don't you?

That said, do you care more about coal jobs or genderless/transgender bathrooms? I think it's a decent corollary...let's say about 1% of the workforce is impacted by the coal industry, about 1% of people are impacted by gender identity. One the one hand there's outcry about not providing bathroom options for trans people, on the other there's outcry over EPA regulations killing jobs. Which one should we care more about?

I think you are wrong here. About problems with our election process; what you describe is not a problem it is exactly why we have the process we do. And when MI and WI were consistently blue this process wasn't a problem at all. And about anyone caring about coal jobs in PA and OH. I think YOU don't care about coal jobs in PA and OH because these jobs butt up against something you are passionate about. That's fine but it blinds you to the way others see it.
;
I think the previous administration cared about coal jobs in PA and OH. And wanted to eliminate as many as they could.

I think the current administration cares about coal jobs in PA and OH and is trying to save as many as they can for as long as they can.

Both administrations "cared" about these job. The people who these jobs directly effect voted based on their view of which one cared the way they cared.

I say let the coal industry die.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Are you saying let it die, or kill it like the regulations put in place over the last few years were designed to do?

---

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra

I think you are wrong here. About problems with our election process; what you describe is not a problem it is exactly why we have the process we do.

Exactly. Long live the electoral college.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Let it.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Gephardt did (kind of). Hard-core protectionism has historically been a Democrat/union thing. This version is pretty much pure Gephardt wrapped up with enough red, white and blue nationalism, and big dollop of electoral pandering to allow the GOP to swallow it for a now. Thread reminds me of an article from two months ago (black lung):

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/15/505577680/advanced-black-lung-cases-surge-in-appalachia

I disagree about it being why we have the process we do. We have the process we do because there was no TV and it was a several day's travel by horse to hear a politician's speech.

I do, however, get your point about the Tyranny of the Majority. ie The majority aren't coal miners so the majority won't care, yet the jobs are saved by the electoral college. How many upstate NY jobs were saved by the electoral college? Coal is only an issue because happenstance of which states the coal happens to reside in. If Philly and Pittsburg didn't exist in PA, the state would be solidly red and no one would be courting the vote here.

I'm certainly compassionate about shipping jobs over seas. That's something that's not necessary. Whole towns are devastated because companies have to compete with other companies shipping their jobs over seas. All of that could have been stopped with legislation, but no one did (from either party).

Coal is a different issue altogether. It needs to go away.


And FWIW, I vote against my own economic self interests all the time. Do you think I voted for Bush when I was a defense contractor? We had HUGE business as a result of the very war that I opposed.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Great idea, hire those 174,000 peeps into ICE and border patrol so they get to work rounding up all those illegal criminal aliens.

If I had to choose between the two, I'd choose that.



(though I'm on record for being anti-illegal immigration).

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Promise to bring NEW jobs into that area to replace the coal jobs. Why not manufacture solar panels or something that is part of a GROWING industry?

Because yesterday the same people who are objecting to Trump's promise to help save coal mining jobs were objecting to Trump's promise to help save manufacturing jobs, on the very same grounds.

If you think it's just the coal mining jobs that are being lost, and they can be replaced with manufacturing jobs in the clean energy biz, I'm all in for that. But I thought all the manufacturing jobs that don't get shipped overseas are about to be lost to automation, so is that really a viable option?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I'm not sure where you drove through (77 corridor?), but will definitely agree that parts of WV are quite pretty (I grew up in coal country, 30 miles from WV).

However if you ever fly over the parts of WV where mountaintop removal has been going on, you will be amazed at the change in landscape, and "absolutely beautiful" is not the term that will come to mind.

I'll see your ONE solar company bankruptcy and raise you... 42.

https://www.snl.com/interactiveX/Article.aspx?cdid=A-32872208-12845&FreeAccess=1


And that is ignoring the fact that Solyndra was trying to develop and new technology and failed as opposed to these 42 companies that went out of business by just trying to continue to do business as they always had. i.e. a failing industry.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

Well, far less black lung in border patrol.

I believe you. Just as I believe you "care" about coal jobs and your vote(s) reflect support for those who care about it in the same way you do.

I am not "opposed" to coal jobs going away. Its the means and methods I take issue with.

does that also ignore the $535M in stimulus we spent on it? Edit: sorry it was only 535M not 535B

Why does Trump hate natural gas workers?

http://dailysignal.com/...een-energy-failures/


I have no idea how credible this source is. It is just the first thing after I googled "bankrupt solar companies"

https://www.greentechmedia.com/...mpanies-2015-Edition

heres another list which I believe begins in the years after the first article was published.

Again, I am just spit balling here with google........

Solar was an example off the top of my head. Pick any GROWING industry that needs employees with high school degrees.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

Look, I'm not trying to be difficult, but what industry are you talking about?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

doesn't the industry we pick also have to account for the loss of the uses of coal as well?

it's a really cool industry. It replaces any need for coal and fully employees all the people already directly and indirectly employed in the coal industry. And it does it instantaneously.

And it does it while the Fed govt is simultaneously trying to destroy this industry while funding its competitors (other privately held companies) with tax dollars.

You should really jump on this before someone else beats you to it. This is gonna be YUGE!!!!!!!!

good question.

If he was placing unreasonable regulation on the natural gas industry we could make that case.

If he planned to relieve the coal industry of regulation beyond that which was imposed on it for (I believe) the sole purpose of destroying it we could as well.

If he started sending taxpayer funds to either industry in an attempt to take the place of what venture capitalists should be doing in seeking alternative sources of energy we could as well.

But he's not really doing any of that (so far) is he.

I'll be the first in line to complain when he does.

That is just crazy talk. Coal, steam powered ships, buggy whips, typewriters. That's the kind of jobs we need to protect.

drn92

Oh my gawd! That's brilliant!!! Why hasn't anyone thought of that?!?!?!

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies promoted under the Obama Administrations (denotes government money lost):

1. Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
2. SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3. Solyndra ($535 million)*
4. Beacon Power ($43 million)*
5. Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
6. SunPower ($1.2 billion)
7. First Solar ($1.46 billion)
8. Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
9. EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
10. Amonix ($5.9 million)
11. Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
12. Abound Solar ($400 million)*
13. A123 Systems ($279 million)*
14. Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
15. Johnson Controls ($299 million)
16. Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
17. ECOtality ($126.2 million)
18. Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
19. Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
20. Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
21. Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
22. Range Fuels ($80 million)*
23. Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
24. Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
25. Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
26. GreenVolts ($500,000)
27. Vestas ($50 million)
28. LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
29. Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
30. Navistar ($39 million)
31. Satcon ($3 million)*
32. Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
33. Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I think that is the same list as the article I attached in #52 above so I feel better about the source.

The article attached has a paragraph right below the list which makes the point that the bigger issue is the Fed Govt getting involved in the picking of winners and losers in the first place. That's what private equity and VC is for.

Uhm ... yeah ... because Obama promised to put them out of business!

That's the point, genius!!!

Wow.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Coal is an antique, or soon will be. Get over it.

Weird thought...
Could it be that low energy prices (especially natural gas) was the cause of both the coal AND the green energy bankruptcies?

Of course, coal companies go bankrupt every 20 years without or without competition from natural gas or clean energy.

Antiques are worth a lot of money, more than the IKEA of industries promoted by the former Administration.

You are REALLY off your game tonight!

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Or it could be the former President who promised to put them out of business ...

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

with what?

EDIT: wasn't George W. pushing switch grass once upon a time. I don't remember what for but the term sticks in my mind. Where are we with switch grass?

Yeah.
Economics are irrelevant.
Its all about what Trump and Obama say.

Trump will put an end to this economics crap.

Holy fuck, please stick to engineering because you have no grasp of economics. Funnier yet, your job probably is indirectly influenced by the coal industry. Oh, hang you're an "engineer" and apparently the steel you use to build shit doesn't need coal. Just another idiot with a 5.0 GPA that can't see past his nose. On the bright side you can probably see Virginia from your house!

What's the LR consensus about nuclear? Is that the way for us to go in the future? Or is it natural gas? And how do we get the natural gas? Why does drill baby drill not work for oil but works for natural gas (or do we not have to drill for that)?

We cant use coal. We cant drill for oil. We cant frack. We cant use the Keystone pipeline.

So far we haven't come up with a viable wind, or solar or switch grass alternative for electricity.

I am more than happy to ditch coal. Where do I go?

Do you now know what Obama did to the coal industry??? Really???

Ho-ly shit ...

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

It takes a special kind of ignorance to think it is an either/or issue.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Or to not realize that it is an issue.

Funny, NPR doesn't see a problem.

http://www.npr.org/...trump-policy-outlook

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Obama's a bastard.
First he discovered a ton of natural gas.
Then he developed the technology to extract it.
Then he donated all the natural gas and the technologies to private companies controlled by republican Texas oilmen.
All because he wanted to bankrupt the coal companies for the 17th time in the last hundred years.

Powerful and evil.

WOW! We may have found a replacement for YaHey!!!

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

we're already behind

Funny how much Canada plans to rely on coal for the foreseeable future.

• Coal is a large part of the global energy mix and represents about 29 per cent of global primary energy demandFootnote 86. Coal has met nearly half of the world’s energy demand growth over the past decade, almost all of which was attributable to rising demand from ChinaFootnote 87. Power generation accounts for two-thirds of coal consumption worldwide, with the remainder mainly used for steel manufacturing.
• Global coal prices have been declining since their 2011 peaks, mainly due to increased supply from the build-up in global production capacity that mostly occurred in AustraliaFootnote 88 as well as competition from shale gas as a fuel for the North American power market.
• Canada has about 6.6 billion tonnes of proven recoverable coal reserves, or 96 years of production at the current production rate. The great majority of Canadian coal resources are located in western Canada, but coal has also been produced in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. In 2014, there were 19 operating coal mines in Canada, all in Western Canada.

Plus, you plan to expand oil drilling and fracking ...

Here is your country's 2016 energy plan by the Canada National Energy Board:

https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/...16/index-eng.html#s9


You know, you really should learn more about your own country before obsessing over ours.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Note that's western Canada stuff. Totally foreign to me. Better ask racin-_rusty. :-)

How much of that plan was implemented? I think velocibuddha is talking about what happened while you're talking about what he had planned.

note that your coal obsession is about an entirely different country and it is not stopping you opining regularly about it.

Well a couple of things Mr. Worldly, some of the best coking coal (that's the stuff your sports car is made with) is mined in the back waters of Grande Cache host of the Canadian Death Race. That coal used to be shipped east to Ontario, now it's shipped to the far east of China. Maybe you're not aware of this, but in Alberta when the coal is shut down and the oil has run out we'll have no use for Ontario's manufacturing facilities unless you think going from building 10 or 20,000 miles of steel pipe is replaced with 20,000 garden hoes a 25 rotational molded irrigation storage tanks!

got it thanks. You may want to explain that to the voters in WV.




what I do know is we wont have to speculate on whether this was planned or implemented

You seem hung up on things that haven't happened. How is that going to help those coal miners?

There is no debate on wall street, in academy, or even in the board room of coal companies.........

Unless the price of natural gas goes way up, the coal energy industry is fvcked.

Now coking coal is another matter.
Now that the American coal companies dumped their pensions on PBGC and ripped off their creditors- maybe they can compete for a small slice of that business.

you clearly haven't been following along. You cant help those coal miners. Coal is an antique, get over it. And besides, the coal miner issue is really fakes news. They can all lose their jobs and it wont move the needle on employment or anyone besides them caring.

Trump is just ginning up an issue and promising the moon and not going to deliver for coal miners.

Plus it's all natural gas anyway. Even though that's bad too.

If we can help the coal miners at all it will be by building solar panel factories in their area. Except those manufacturing jobs are going away and being automated. So they are screwed there too.

In summary, everything was great until Trump was elected and now everything is going to hell quickly.

Try to keep up from here.

I am happy for the natural gas industry.

Trump is really fucking over those coal miners.

Take a deep breath, you seem flustered and have lost the ability to track what different people are saying. Now, what is your overall point?

this thread was supposed to have a point..........

I dunno, do you?

nope

Original point of the thread was whether or not we should be concerned with the job losses associated with the end of the coal industry, and whether or not it's worth protecting them while we can.

Secondarily, people brought up the fact that whether or not coal is dying or should die because it's bad for the environment, we actually rely on coal for a large chunk of our energy needs, and if we stop mining coal, we'll have to replace it with something. The alternatives all have their own drawbacks. Natural gas and nuclear power come with their own environmental problems, and renewable sources don't appear capable of filling the gap yet.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

My father paid for my Ivy League education with money that he made designing coal burning power plants.
He was supposedly an expert in the field.
But even he had no idea how much available natural gas existed.
His last 3 power plants have all been converted and are all burning natural gas.

No one is to blame.
The future is uncertain.
Industries and individuals have to adapt.

I am not necessarily against welfare or government subsidies.

But if Solar power was a bad bet, why on earth would we believe that another round of government support for coal will do better?

thanks for that. Apparently I got flustered and lost the ability to track what different people were saying to me. That being the case I don't know how I could be expected to remember the point of the thread I had chosen to participate in.........

can you help me with what govt support has been proposed for coal. Is it monetary or regulatory? or none at all (yet). because we cant speculate on what might happen only what has happened.

Thanks, I was mainly giving ironmayb shit for trolling

I'm pretty sure windy has been drinking. lol

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I was off work today. Needed some form of entertainment

Krugman just covered this:

https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/coal-is-a-state-of-mind/?_r=0


Two things that I think he missed: mining is a man's job. Two, mining doesn't require education. So the nostalgia for coal is, in part, for the days when an uneducated dude could make a decent living. Trump wouldn't last five minutes in a coal mine.

---

“Read the transcript.”

Maybe I've been drinking. Don't know how I got you mixed up with windywave. Maybe you both sound drunk.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I quit drinking 10 years ago but sounding like it is entirely possible. I did spend more time in this forum today than I usually do in a month combined. I have the feeling this will have the same effect on anyone who spends much time here.

Thanks. That at least covers the point I was making in the OP. Out of all the places where we are losing jobs, why the focus on coal? Not certain if the article is 100% correct, but it makes some good points. I think Vitus makes some good points as well.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Votes.

And not just coal industry worker votes. It's symbolic for a lot of people.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Meanwhile tourism is drying up in the US because of The Orange Julius Caesar. When those jobs start to go away will the right give a shit? Nope. Not a chance.

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

Tourism is booming in my town.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

I really don't think uneducated is a proper term, I know of 2 degree bearing geologists that are not employed in their field of study. One of them is most certainly uneducated when it comes to his newly chosen profession.

Your n=1 is irrelevant. And likely untrue.

https://www.google.ca/...avel/%3Fsource%3Ddam

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

j

That answer was already provided in the first thread. It's part of why a second thread about "who cares" was started

So that answer was so sufficient that another thread had to be started to arrive in the same place?

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

We've had big uptick here. Mostly Chinese, but the usual Germans, snow birds and weekenders.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

That question is irrelevant. And likely untrue

Cmon man there's got to be something bad happening for the US. I'm so invested in it.

Quite a pivot from coal to tourism. I wonder where we go next

Not really....actually not at all.

I didn't read most of the posts in that thread, so if there was a really good answer in there, I may have missed it.

I started the new thread because I thought my point about the almost insignificant size of the coal industry would have been lost in that thread (rightly or wrongly).

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

And the US is second, currently, in renewable research spending. What's your point? Guess what we also spend money on? EPA regulations that are killing the coal industry, hence the list of bankruptcies you posted that you somehow believe supports your argument.

No one is saying coal is the answer. Coal is an unfortunate reality in the short term and Obama's EPA did all they could to wipe that industry out, killing thousands of jobs in the process. What's wrong with allowing the industry to continue to provide low-cost energy in the short-term while renewables catch up and eventually take over?

Are you suggesting the the Rs are more pro labor than I think? Or that the Ds are less pro labor?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I think we've moved past those easy categorizations. They don't apply anymore.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I think it has more to do with whether labor and/or organized labor identifies in lock step with a party vs historical. And I think the previous admin with war on coal etc turned labor off more to D than previous admins

Just my opinion. It could be wrong but I think if I was party leadership I would be spending more time on that than on trump

But a "war on coal" isn't a war on labor. Circle all the way back to the OP, there just aren't that many coal jobs out there.


I get that it might be perceived that way, which is what my OP was about. Why is it perceived that way? But there's a difference between being anti-labor and being incorrectly perceived as anti-labor.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

we are talking in the political sense right?


Look, you can be as "right" as you want to be. I employ approx. 100 workers who are members of 5 different unions. And I am telling you your "perception" problem is translating to a vote problem

When the Obama Administration picked winners and losers, it absolutely was a war on labor. What was his plan when he set out to wipe out those jobs? How did it work out?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I had a chance to review your post again and it occurs to me I may be misunderstanding what you are saying.

I get that there are not that many coal jobs to make this difference.

But going back to my example: I employ sheet metal workers, pipe fitters, sprinkler fitters, electricians and plumbers. In a state no where near coal country (WI). You do realize they see a war on coal as a war on them as well, right? You do see that they identify with a coal miner way before they identify with me (or you).

Add to that the fact the Hillary didn't even bother you campaign in person once in WI; because (IMO) she believed it was a blue state (because "labor" always votes blue).

WI went red for the first time since Reagan. Coincidence? If that's what the party of labor wants to conclude that's fine with me.

You do realize they see a war on coal as a war on them as well, right? You do see that they identify with a coal miner way before they identify with me (or you).

Exactly. Because they see that they are vulnerable in the same way as the coal miners as, or manufacturing workers are, and they see how little the establishment cares.

It amazes me that people have a problem with Trump trying to protect jobs. And it's crazy that they can't seem to see how people get angry when the response to Trump's efforts is, "those jobs just aren't coming back, deal with it."

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Half the pipe fitters and plumbers at our local were employed for2-3 years building the power plant in our area a decade ago. You can try to explain natural gas vs coal to them if you want. Good luck

Only in conservative world can pro labor, pro labor, pro labor, pro labor, oh, lets get rid of these jobs that are damaging the environment that equate to 0.1% of the work force as a "war on labor."

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Yes, I get that. THAT answers the OP.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I said you are grasping at straws.

A pro environmental stance that equates to a loss of 0.1% of the jobs does not equate to a "war on labor." Sorry, that's YOUR party's platform.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

You've always had a special talent with building straw men. I'm pretty sure no one has a problem with "protecting jobs." Its two fold: a) that its specifically the wrong direction for energy and b) that he's full of shit.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

YOU are the one who wants to throw away these workers and their families! YOU are the elitist who thinks these hard working people deserve to be ignored and discarded. Must be a hell of a view from the ivory tower of yours.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

He's just another know it all engineer that has a 5.0 gpa and is stupid enough to think that his overpaying job doesn't rely on coked steel "green" (green - ish power!)

The people that you and I were speaking about earlier don't give a rats ass about pro environmental stances. They want to work. They expect you and I to provide a path for doing that, preferably pro environmental. That's why we are the smart 1% and they are just middle class (for now). But if it can't be (or until it can be) pro environmental (because we weren't smart enough to make one), the alternative can't be nothing.

If your or my choice is to eliminate their job prior to us being smart enough to provide an acceptable level of environmental safety relative to what they are doing, or an acceptable alternative to their current job such that they can continue on the same path they had been, then they are going to react as human nature dictates. And they are going to blame you or me for the failure. And they are going to seek out anyone who thinks/talks/promises/ etc etc like they do/want.

If they believe you are going out of your way to eliminate their job (or any job they identify with) they will consider you to have declared war on them and their families.

This is not some esoteric thing we are talking about.

https://www.nytimes.com/...f-rural-america.html

I like James Rebanks - I think the linked article is analogous to coal mining in so far as, the consequences of losing industries.

I think that the issue of globalisation - and coal is one area that is impacted by this in addition to environmental pressures - is really interesting.

Obviously, the US (and any other country for that matter) would prefer to export at zero tariffs and import nothing but in the real world this results in all sorts of compromises.

http://rodrik.typepad.com/...zation-trilemma.html

I do not know - realistically - what DJT can really accomplish, he can potentially delay the imminent demise of the coal industry by rolling back environmental legislation but in the long run, solar, nuclear (potentially significant new technologies coming on line in next 5-10 years) will all drive coal out of business.

the problem is less coal, than a national strategy - that most western governments have promulgated that placed cheap "x" (be it food, consumables, technology, energy etc) over local, regional and national economies and the situation that we are now confronted with in many western countries is that set out in the Rebanks article (and this one https://www.nytimes.com/...ch-towns-fading.html)

I am not sure that DJT can turn the clock back in any meaningful way against the tide of globalisation - even if he could tariff the S**t out of imports, that is obviously not without reciprocal consequences for US businesses, and even if he took a longer term view that the US needs more of Y skill (engineers for example), the lead time for that is probably no less than 5, and probably closer to 10 years from development of a policy to seeing the results at the other end.

Its not as if the US has a similar national program of development to Germany where kids are streamed and directed at an early age in to trades / engineering etc

I don't think he can do it, I think if he attempts to the US will be taught some pretty unpleasant lessons by its current trading partners and I think in most instances when governments have attempted to produce a skill set that is in short supply, they incentivise its development and then end up with to many of them

The reason that I think engineering and manufacturing wise Germany has prospered (aside from an undervalued currency) is that companies know that the workforce they get is highly skilled and has huge amounts of government support something I am not sure that the US could replicate in the short term.

You've always had a special talent with building straw men. I'm pretty sure no one has a problem with "protecting jobs."


Ridiculous. Of course they do.

Trump tries to protect jobs associated with the coal industry, and the reaction is contempt and mockery. "Trump is full of shit about coal mining! That industry is dead, the jobs aren't coming back!"

Trump talks about protecting jobs associated with manufacturing, and the reaction is contempt and mockery. Mark Cuban accuses him of not understanding the 21st century, because those jobs are going to be automated, and they aren't coming back!

Trump saves 1000 Carrier jobs from being shipped to Mexico, and he's an idiot, because Americans can't compete with cheap labor in other countries, and those jobs aren't coming back!

It's not a new refrain, either. The working class has been hearing the same old song for a long time. "Don't expect to be able to make a decent living without a college degree like your parents did, or like you were able to up until now. Global economy and all, my good man. Hup hup, pip pip. Those jobs aren't coming back!" And if you don't think there's a crystal clear undercurrent of contempt communicated along with that, you're delusional.

What never gets addressed is a realistic alternative. Then Trump comes along and at least makes a serious gesture at trying to help, and all some people can do is throw shade at him.

There's no strawman in any of that, it's just the way it is. It's most of the reason Trump got elected.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I do not post much at all or ever but I do read irregularly.

***Disclaimer*** I work installing vibration monitoring for industry (Coal, Natural Gas, Oil refining, Chemical Production, Paper Mills) I have an Engineering degree, 3.4 for those concerned. I have oil covered FRC for the oil refinery I am currently working at sitting on the hotel room floor.

I would love to see coal go away and be replaced by something better, but at current prices/technology coal mops the floor with any "green" energy for base load. Natural gas mops the floor with "green" energy for peak load. Most of the information below has been acquired from people working in the industry and the dollar examples are made up. I am to lazy to research actual prices and they are used to show how some choices are made.

1. Coal is cheep, basically dirt cheep

2. Coal plants are cleaner now that we burn very little of the shit coal that was dirt lignite. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lignite

3. Coal plants switching to natural gas has very little to do with the nominal price of natural gas. Example a coal power plant may need to spend 10 million dollars to meet new EPA standards or close down. The cost is say 5 million to convert to a natural gas boiler (side note these things are not efficient). If you say coal is $1/mega watt, natural gas is $5/mega watt an power sells on the open market for $40 a mega watt. Then the 10 M is the deciding factor for the switch not the raw fuel price. (second side note in some cases the new equipment can cause more emissions due to its own power consumption.

3. I have worked at 1 plant that has one main steam turbine, a handful of gas turbines (peakers) and in the next year will have a large solar installation. in the last year when the gas turbines would be dispatched it was cheaper to buy power on the open market.

4. Chasing wind regulations make emissions worse. One combined cycle plant I worked at quoted a 4x increase in emissions to chase wind because they would just chase load 24 hours a day as wind and solar changed outputs.

Solutions in my personal opinion.
The grid stays mostly the same.
1. We actual approve new nuclear plants to replace the coal base load to phase it out. Build this base load to cover a high percentage of peak load. Building on existing power plant ground can help if sourcing fuel is not a problem. Power transmission infrastructure is already in place and can help the job loss.
2. Develop some form of mass energy storage (batteries are less than ideal). The I believe it was ethanol from carbon dioxide if scale able could do this well. Use this energy storage during peak loads to make up any short falls. (before quoting thermodynamics read point 3)
3. Run any large base units at peak efficiency no mater the true grid load. Let solar and wind run whatever load it can. Use point 2 to soak up any excesses power and store it for peak hours.
4. Have sprinter units normally fast dispatch gas turbines that can make up any short falls or unplanned shutdowns
Cons. Potentially high costs, lack of adequate tech.

Redesign the power grid into semi-decentralized units.
Start with new housing developments. Require the houses to maintain solar or wind capable of supplying most of their energy needs. This small grid is connected to a storage bank. Think the ethanol example above due to its high energy density and storage capacity being limited only by tank size. This combined with a reasonably sized battery or capacitor bank. This can give the micro grid stable power while an ethanol fulled electrical generator starts to make up for lost generation. Multiple micro grids can be linked together to be able to support lost generation and upsets in another micro grid. This larger collection could have a conventional fuel generator for a last line backup.

The bottom line is most solar and wind applications would go tits up if not for government support. People would still adopt it but the forward progress would be a slow crawl. In this case when the prices reach an inversion point "green" being truly cheaper than cave power. There is a large chance that we would not have enough energy to make the transition as it takes energy to build solar/wind production.

Not the article I was looking for but page 3 paragraphs 3 and 4 make the point most people miss. How fast we can build these things. We can raise the productions rates but money will probably be the limiting factor.
https://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Renewable-energy-cannot-replace-FF_Lyman.pdf

Thanks for joining the conversation

We would all love to see coal be replaced by something better.

I have brought up nuclear in both threads. Silence from the anti coal crowd.

troll

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

What if instead of coal miners it was abortion doctors. Would you be singing the same tune. "Golly gee, all he wants to do is save jobs. I don't see why people are on his case because he's trying to save jobs."

Its not the "saving jobs" part that is the issue. You would want to see abortion either reduced or eliminated. In order to do that, you have to put abortion doctors out of work. That's a consequence of the goal of reducing/eliminating abortions.

If Trump said, "Make Abortions Great Again," I highly doubt you'd be touting this as a great way to keep families employed.

To anyone opposed, JSA would say, "YOU want to put these families out of work."
And you would say, "He just wants to save their jobs, and you're deriding and mocking him."



Good grief, for once I wish we could just have an honest conversation around here. This has NOTHING to do with saving or getting rid of jobs and you guys know it.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

YOU are the elitist who wants to pick which jobs are worthy and which are not!

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I keep telling you "I get that." I have understood and agreed with just about everything you wrote.

JSA, the troll, referred to Obama's position against coal as a "war on labor." It's not. Just like the right's position against abortion isn't a "war on medicine."

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I seriously wonder if you are an alcoholic. Its' taken you a while, but I've finally decided to add you to the hide list. You'll have to troll someone else from now on.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Nuclear is not a great end goal, but its a good transition technology IMO.

Obviously we'd like to see wind and solar, but nukes ca help with the interim solution.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Ok thanks. I didn't realize you had a hide list or I most likely wouldn't have started in the first place

I'm pretty anti hide list; to me it says more about the hide-Er than the hide-ee.

This gets to the heart of the question. From the conservative crowd:


On the one hand, they are all about saving coal jobs (lets accept the reasons you've given).

On the other hand, they are starkly opposed to raising the minimum wage.



While I'm open to hearing arguments to convince me otherwise, I have to wonder if this is entirely about *who* they think is impacted. ie Coal is middle aged, white, rural people. Minimum wage jobs are hipsters and other urbanites. What if Trump wanted to "Make Coffee Great Again?" Think it would get the same kind of support?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

What if instead of coal miners it was abortion doctors. Would you be singing the same tune. "Golly gee, all he wants to do is save jobs. I don't see why people are on his case because he's trying to save jobs."

No, and even ignoring the inflammatory nature of the analogy, those aren't at all similar cases. You continue to drill down too deep and focus on the mere 174,000 trees instead of looking at them as they are- part of a much larger forest.

The medical field hasn't been decimated by decades of attrition. People who hold advanced degrees haven't seen opportunities to make a good living evaporate in front of their eyes, and they haven't seen alternative doors to prosperity slam shut one after the other. The professional class has not been savaged the effects of globalism. We haven't seen whole cities and geographic regions sink into despair because the professional class has seen their fortunes decline.

Yet.

It's not a coal mining thing. It's a working class thing. And time after time, the establishment on both the left and right has demonstrated their scorn and disdain for those in the working class who have been left behind in the shiny new global economy, and shown that they simply don't care to do anything about it. The disregard is palpable, and often explicitly expressed. Trump exploited that situation to win the White House, and now every time he signals that he does want to help people in that situation- literally, every time- you guys fall over yourselves to deride him for it. "He's a fraud! Those jobs aren't coming back! Squawk! Not coming back!"

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

On the one hand, they are all about saving coal jobs (lets accept the reasons you've given).

On the other hand, they are starkly opposed to raising the minimum wage.

You know what Trump said when asked about raising the minimum wage? I don't recall exactly, but it was something along the lines of, "We can talk about the minimum wage, but I'm more concerned with making sure there are a lot of jobs that pay way better than minimum wage."

Which is exactly the point. The jobs that we're talking about losing- that have largely already been lost- are good jobs that actually produce real things and actually provide a decent living for people. They're not minimum wage jobs. Trading them for a job flipping hamburgers or selling overpriced lattes or greeting people at Walmart for minimum wage is not a winning idea, and it doesn't become a good idea just because you raise the minimum wage from 8 to 10 bucks an hour or whatever.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

You wouldn't think someone as brilliant as you would need a "hide list." Then again, elitists are often thin skinned.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

I didn't hide you.

Is there something funky going on with what posts I'm responding to? Serious question, because I keep agreeing with you, and then disagree with someone else, and then you respond as if I disagreed with you. This makes two in a row.

And the hide list is a good way to deal with trolls. I'm here to have a conversation, not to get sucked in by trolls who are just trying to find buttons to push. JSA is a 44 year old lawyer who is entirely capable of debating politics as an intelligent adult, but instead he seems to have more fun making of my hobbies or figuring out what ridiculous argument he can come up with to get under my skin and simply repeat it over and over again. Not really interested in that.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Pretty simple answer: free and open markets. Do you disagree that it's a main tenet--perhaps THE main tenet--of conservative ideology? And there you go: minimum wage laws artificially inflate low-wage industries, something that conservatives believe is a net negative; and the EPA regs have substantially impacted the coal industry. Whether or not you AGREE with that position, do you admit that it's the generally accepted beliefs of us conservatives, and not us being racist assholes? Because ohbytheway you once again implied racism; remarkable how often you do that but then say 'I never called anyone racist'.

Barry lacks the intellectual capacity to see beyond a binary decision - to wit: coal is bad, ergo, we must destroy the industry. There is no thought beyond that. For an elitist like Barry, the "solution" is that these folk need to simply go to college, get a degree, and obtain a "respectable" job like a teacher or an engineer. To Barry, it is that simple. But, guys like Barry, cannot trust these plebes to understand what is in their best interests. So, we cannot give them the option to pursue this path, rather, we need to eviscerate the positions so they have no choice. To an elitist like Barry, it just that simple.

Tom, the problem with you is that you do not recognize and accept that Barry is your better. Once you accept that, Barry can finally find his safe place in the LR.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

Pretty simple answer: free and open markets. Do you disagree that it's a main tenet--perhaps THE main tenet--of conservative ideology? And there you go: minimum wage laws artificially inflate low-wage industries, something that conservatives believe is a net negative;

I think that's a fair point and a reasonable articulation of the conservative position. I also think it leads to a real problem for the working class, because inevitably, you face the prospect of the free and open market determining that good paying jobs in manufacturing or whatever can be done more cheaply in other countries, or with robots, and so on.

Is there a point at which you say that free market principles shouldn't reign supreme, and at which maximizing profits should not be the overriding goal of business or the economy? Because if not, I think you don't really have any better answer to the problem than Trump's critics do.

I think there is a real and significant difference between artificially inflating low wage jobs (retail, mostly) and protecting good paying jobs in productive industries. I don't think that difference stands up in the face of totally free market forces, though.

The whole business model of most minimum/low wage jobs depends on cheap labor. They pay low wages because the labor doesn't add enough value to make the business viable if wages were higher. You can't pay hamburger flippers 20 bucks an hour and remain profitable as a fast food franchise. I think everyone acknowledges that.

You can, however, run a manufacturing plant or a coal mine and pay workers 20 bucks and hour and remain profitable. You just can't remain AS profitable as if you offshore the jobs to China.

I actually heard an NPR with a machinist in that exact position just last week. Guy is mid-forties, was making 22 bucks an hour, had worked at his company for years. Company was successful throughout that time, but is moving production to Mexico, where they're going to pay about a tenth of his wage to workers. He has no idea what he's going to do for work going forward, how he's going to pay the bills, how he's going to keep paying for his two kids who are in college.

Same free market at work. How do you deal with that?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

First off, I'd like to mention that I presented a simple argument because Barry was asking specifically about 'workers rights' issues and how you account for the stances on minimum wage vs coal. It's an easy answer, hence my response to him.

That said, what you're asking is far more complex and I won't pretend I know the solution. What I will say is the cost of doing business in the US needs to compare with that of foreign nations, and play on the 'American made' idea that people will support. What I do believe is that forcing businesses to pay higher wages than the market will organically support seems a good way to force some businesses to close; others to hire fewer workers; others to move to a more business-friendly environment. I'd rather we use some taxpayer money to incentivize businesses to operate in the US and make the cost of doing that business low. All that said, I'm not sure how I feel about, essentially, capping profits. I think stats show that the vast, vast majority of businesses operate on slim margins, the owner(s) aren't taking home much more than a fair return when accounting for the risk they've undertaken. The small minority of multi-national corporations raking in huge profits is certainly a concern...I work for one of the biggest banks in the world, I totally appreciate that my banks CEO making $12MM a year is pretty absurd, I just don't know what the solution is to that and it's still a very small percentage of companies that are in that type of situation, and I happen to be very happy with my job and my compensation.

A bit rambling but that's my position.

EDIT: I just realized I didn't really answer your question :) Sorry, I"m exhausted today and need to run. But you're right: retail and fast food is different than manufacturing. Additionally, retail and fast food is different in California than it is in Arkansas...hell, it's different in Boston than it is in Pittsfield. A fed minimum wage is such a bullshit one-size-fits-all 'solution' for vastly, vastly different situations. You can quite easily survive, hell thrive, on $15 an hour all over the country, but in most cities you'd practically starve. A fed minimum wage hike doesn't nothing to promote business.

The Democrats and progressives are very pro labor but only in a very specific sense -- they are clearly against ownership and management in that struggle. Campaigns like "war on labor" are always way over the top, but consider...

1.) Most American laborers regard our market system as a moral way to determine winners and losers. A President deciding to destroy an industry is immoral.
2.) Democrats are seen as the party most responsible for lax or unenforced immigration laws. Illegal immigration leads to lower labor wages.
3.) Most progressive elites do not share broad core moral values with labor class people.
4.) A recent theme incorporating #2 and #3 is progressive elites celebrating demographic changes due to immigration that will render the current (mostly white) labor class politically irrelevant.

I think those 4 reasons above are pretty heavy, politically. All any Republican or Trump had to do was make an overture to labor in many states. Meanwhile, the progressives didn't really reach out to labor. Instead, progressives just demonized Trump -- then they tried to establish guilt by association for all the new labor Trump voters.

Your last paragraph is part of the point I am trying to make re: the change in perception re: the party of labor

And let's not forget trump kicked 16 R candidates asses, including all the ones I preferred, before he took on Hillary. I don't like where he is now either but as opposed to (or in addition to) bashing him I am going to learn from how he got there

I think most people in this thread feel the same way you do. That's been a difficult point to try to stay on track in this thread. When I point out some of the flaws (for lack of a better word) in the love for coal, that's not to be dismissive of the perspectives of those voters.

And I agree with what SH said. Hillary more or less took working class workers for granted in this past election.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I think 174,000 EX-coal miners preparing ground, manufacturing, assembling, and maintaining wind and photo-voltaic farms, is a hell of an idea. I'd be significantly more content if I were taxed in order to subsidize moving them, and training them. Paying less for their healthcare over the long term sounds attractive as well. McConnell, and 2 Koch's are not going to die from black lung. - We shouldn't care about coal.

We have been hearing about the plight of the coal miner since before Sissy Spacek sang the songs. They have been crying about their lives, livelihood, lungs, 16 tons, and the Company Store for 100 years. Anyone that now stays in Coal Country, stays because they haven't the sense to leave. Don't tell me there is no escape or limited opportunities. Ya! - you probably need to "load up the truck, and move t'Beverly."

Any parent over 50yo who allowed themselves to stay, or allowed their kids to ride down into a mine being exposed to that environment, has no one to blame but themselves. I wanna care about people, and I wanna help get them outta the proverbial water - but they gotta climb into the lifeboat. We need to care about people, we need to provide alternative opportunities. One alternative energy source can't solve the equation alone, but isn't there a 40 mile long wind farm in West Texas? - we don't need to care about coal.

Over the course of the past 8 years, billions have been thrown at community college level education. Inexpensive valuable training, re-training and educational advancement that doesn't even require a HS diploma to begin. Not free; however, monetarily manageable. If that opportunity is not taken advantage of; then your problems are your own. Close the mine. Adapt!

"If what we are doing harms us...
We must change what we are doing."

Churchill (I think)