If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USGS)   Mitt Romney didn't want to kill off FEMA and the USGS, he just wanted to turn it over to the states or the private sector. Let's see how that works   (waterdata.usgs.gov) divider line 45
    More: Followup, Mitt Romney, U.S. Geological Survey, FEMA, United States, New York, current water, private sector  
•       •       •

7421 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Oct 2012 at 11:46 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-30 12:06:49 PM  
11 votes:

turtleking: having dealt with FEMA for the last three years I can tell you without a doubt it could be handled better by a private company.


Having worked for FEMA (Mitigation Division) for about the same amount of time, I can say that your experience is not standard.

Would a private company buy your house, demolish it, and rebuild you a new one in a flood-safe area for little or no cost? Would they rehab your house to prepare or recover from disaster damage without relying on government assistance?
Would a private company put its best practices on the internet for all to read, including explaining how $5 roof straps can save tens of thousands in roof repair, or a $10 backflow valve keeps your basement from flooding?
Would a private company issue flood insurance? (This one, we can answer:) No, they got out of the game because they couldn't make a good enough profit on it. Fortunately for us, the Feds think FI is a good idea, and they don't mind taking a loss for a few years in some states.
Would a private company have created free flood maps of every part of the country to assess the flood risks of living at, say 1700 Main Street, Bumfarkville, MT (population: 70)?
Would a private company tell you exactly how to take advantage of the many many programs that provide cash or services - often at little or no cost - to people wishing to prepare for or recover from disaster damage?
Would a private company be able to provide food, shelter and water - free of charge - to potentially a million people? Without coming to the state government every few years?

I think you underestimate how much of business' "help" is seeded with government money (or tax breaks, which are essentially the same thing) or is provided by the government at far lower a cost than what the private sector would. The goal of government - especially as relates to disaster planning/recovery - is not to maximize revenue, it's to provide for its citizens.
2012-10-30 12:15:17 PM  
5 votes:
Republican belief: Why do we even need the National Weather Service? We can get this information from things like the Weather Channel!

Reality: The weather channel gets their data from the National Weather Service.
2012-10-30 12:25:40 PM  
4 votes:
Privatization works so well! That's why cell phone services are so cheap, insurance is so cheap and easy to use, utility costs are so affordable nobody goes without heat, water, and electricity. And if you get sick, medical and dental service rates are so competitive anyone can afford them!
2012-10-30 11:53:49 AM  
4 votes:
I agree. I'm tired of fixing up coastal states that get hit by hurricanes year after year after year. Let them pay for it themselves. Don't like it? Move inland.

I don't actually believe this anymore. I used to, when I was 20 and when I was a Republican.

Ah, to be so young and ignorant again.
2012-10-30 09:44:21 AM  
4 votes:
Mitt Romney is an ass of epic proportions.
2012-10-30 12:44:31 PM  
3 votes:

Civchic: zjoik: Lost Thought 00: As Rick Santorum so eloquently put it, there is no need for any government agencies to be collecting data you can find out with a Google search.

and where do you think those statistics derived from?

This is what blows my mind.

"Why do we pay someone to gather this precise scientific data? It's all on Google!"

Do people really think Google just magically whisks these things out of thin air?


Why do we still have farmers? Why don't they just buy their food at the store like everyone else?
2012-10-30 06:00:23 PM  
2 votes:

b0geyman: Great job selectively editing my post where the correct solution to the problem resides, numbnuts.


I wasn't selectively editing in an effort to edit out your "solution." I selectively edited to show the most short-sighted part of your post.


b0geyman: If individual states and the inhabitants thereof want to be covered against disaster then they should raise taxes on their own residents and pay into an insurance pool.


OK. So this is your solution? Because it won't work. Let's take Katrina. Disastrous hurricane hits Louisiana & Mississippi. Residents evacuate. Most of NOLA evacuees end up in Houston. Let's say in your scenario, Texas has paid their insurance, while Louisiana has blown their insurance money on hookers & booze. Now the burden is on Texas to take care of these Louisiana residents, regardless of who paid what. We can't just put them up in the Astrodome forever (actually, we probably could, but that's not important right now).

However, out here in the real world, we have a federal agency who employs professionals to handle such a situation. An agency who helps out no matter where you are. No matter if Louisiana paid $20 and Texas paid $20,000. Because helping people who have been in a disaster is beneficial to all of us. If you need me to outline why, then just let me know. However, I don't think it's a difficult concept. I mean, for those who aren't short-sighted, that is.

theorellior: You don't think that disaster recovery is covered under the "ensure domestic Tranquility", "provide for the common defence" or the "promote the general Welfare" clauses?


Also, I can't THIS this enough.
2012-10-30 04:39:13 PM  
2 votes:

macdaddy357: This is stupidly simple. The states can't replace FEMA because they don't have the money and the "private sector" (greedy bloodsucking corporations) don't do anything they cant get rich off of. There is no profit in disaster relief.


Take a look at the CPS reform. In Nebraska. Nothing has improved. CPS should not be for profit. Kids should not have decisions made with a balance sheet. Same with disaster recovery. I actually classify natural disasters under a national security matter, but that's only an opinion.
2012-10-30 02:50:14 PM  
2 votes:

Joe Blowme: Lando Lincoln: I agree. I'm tired of fixing up coastal states that get hit by hurricanes year after year after year. Let them pay for it themselves. Don't like it? Move inland.

I don't actually believe this anymore. I used to, when I was 20 and when I was a Republican.

Ah, to be so young and ignorant again.

Then what do you do when you run out of other peoples money?


Do you understand the basic concept of a society? One that has communal interests like infrastructure and defense?
2012-10-30 01:04:51 PM  
2 votes:

Detinwolf: Can you imagine a broke-ass place like NOLA trying to get back on its feet without federal help? Does Mitt Romney....understand things?


I think he does, quite well, actually. He sees a highly responsive market and an opportunity to capture consumer attention while competitors have limited access, opportunities to leverage data before the general public can. You see thousands of people dying, bodies of people and animals decaying in the street, malnourished children, abandoned elderly left to die in their own feces, and private police forces who only respond to the "correct" addresses.

You're both seeing the exact same events, the difference is, you sound like someone with a conscience. Safe to say you won't be getting an invite to the Ayn Rand Romney Inaugural Sneerfest.
2012-10-30 12:50:05 PM  
2 votes:

Civchic: zjoik: Lost Thought 00: As Rick Santorum so eloquently put it, there is no need for any government agencies to be collecting data you can find out with a Google search.

and where do you think those statistics derived from?

This is what blows my mind.

"Why do we pay someone to gather this precise scientific data? It's all on Google!"

Do people really think Google just magically whisks these things out of thin air?

Yes

2012-10-30 12:38:36 PM  
2 votes:

Dr Dreidel: I think you underestimate how much of business' "help" is seeded with government money (or tax breaks, which are essentially the same thing) or is provided by the government at far lower a cost than what the private sector would. The goal of government - especially as relates to disaster planning/recovery - is not to maximize revenue, it's to provide for its citizens.


This. Private, for-profit disaster response already exists as insurance companies. How're those workin' out for folks?
2012-10-30 12:31:38 PM  
2 votes:

zjoik: Lost Thought 00: As Rick Santorum so eloquently put it, there is no need for any government agencies to be collecting data you can find out with a Google search.

and where do you think those statistics derived from?


This is what blows my mind.

"Why do we pay someone to gather this precise scientific data? It's all on Google!"

Do people really think Google just magically whisks these things out of thin air?
2012-10-30 12:18:16 PM  
2 votes:

Lost Thought 00: As Rick Santorum so eloquently put it, there is no need for any government agencies to be collecting data you can find out with a Google search.


and where do you think those statistics derived from?
2012-10-30 12:07:53 PM  
2 votes:

Elzar: Mugato: Elzar: It probably cost $100/hr for some USGS web developer to spend 40 hours of dev time writing those 'warnings' - which is the way Obama wants it

Yes, web developers make $100/hour.

Contractors for the USGS bill nearly double that amount regularly for their 'professional services' - one more reason the Federal government can never compete with the efficiency that is inherent in private enterprise. You are correct in that nearly every web developer in the private IT industry do not make anything even close to $100/hr


Because GM, AT&T, Comcast, Citibank, Chase, Goldman Sachs, et al are the pinnacles of customer service and efficiency.
2012-10-30 11:28:05 AM  
2 votes:

bdub77: Mitt Romney is an ass of epic proportions.


I don't think he really understands the implications of his actions. he's lived such and isolated life that he can't 'connect the dots' anymore.
2012-10-31 01:41:24 PM  
1 votes:
I'm seriously sick of Mitt & every other GREEDY Republican's SELFISH hatred of every beneficial good-will program.
As if the world is some limited sum game where if someone else is benefiting then THEY must be losing out somehow.
It's like they can do NOTHING but think of THEMSELVES, and oppose anything that helps OTHER people.

The GOP's motto should be; "Why think FOR yourself, when you can just think OF yourself."
2012-10-31 01:53:05 AM  
1 votes:

elysive: A
Because many of those services are being closely monitored and regulated, you probably aren't being price gouged. Things are just expensive and the economy sucks. Oh, and bureaucracy does drive up the cost of doing business.


Here's an idea - instead of whining like a little crybaby about the evil boogyman called "bureaucracy" and his equally evil cousin "red tape", why not just do what you're supposed to do in the first place?
If there's a regulation that makes it so that an insurance company doesn't fu(k people over for pre-existing conditions, why not... refuse to fu(k them over for pre-existing conditions? If there's some evil regulation that restaurant bathrooms must be handicap accessible, why not just... make the bathrooms handicap accessible?

See how easy that is? Most of us, at least those with any home training whatsoever, know what is right and what is wrong. Unfortunately, the more money people make the less likely they are to listen to that inner voice which tells them "this isn't right".

See, if you look at most regulations that businesses have to deal with, including insurance companies, utility companies, cell phone and internet companies, banks and the like, you will see the reasons for those regulations written right into the regulation itself. They are to make sure that these businesses do what they are supposed to be doing in the first place but don't because doing the right thing to do would eat into their profits.

And yes, we still are being gouged, though not as deeply as if there were no regulations. This is because corporations have more of a hand in writing these regulations than ever before, with former legislators lobbying for them in DC and on the local level every single day, and present legislators being promised fat jobs as lobbyists when their terms end. There are plenty of loopholes and get-arounds they use, because they wrote the the loopholes and get-arounds, and this is why they continue to make gajillions in profits in spite of all the "regulations" and "monitoring".
2012-10-31 01:24:05 AM  
1 votes:

Dr Dreidel: The goal of government - especially as relates to disaster planning/recovery - is not to maximize revenue, it's to provide for its citizens.
The goal of government - especially as relates to disaster planning/recovery - is not to maximize revenue, it's to provide for its citizens.
The goal of government - especially as relates to disaster planning/recovery - is not to maximize revenue, it's to provide for its citizens.
The goal of government - especially as relates to disaster planning/recovery - is NOT to maximize revenue, it's to provide for its CITIZENS.


This goes for almost ALL government services we pay taxes for at all lavels, and cannot be repeated enough for the farking dickheads who don't get it.
2012-10-30 06:02:16 PM  
1 votes:

Dr Dreidel: And you don't even know what I look like.


Like it even matters at this point
2012-10-30 05:17:03 PM  
1 votes:

b0geyman: Not according to the tenth amendment to the constitution, which you have curiously deleted from the post you quoted.


You don't think that disaster recovery is covered under the "ensure domestic Tranquility", "provide for the common defence" or the "promote the general Welfare" clauses?

Well, aren't you just precious.
2012-10-30 04:07:16 PM  
1 votes:

b0geyman: The federal government is not disaster insurance. Why should the flyover states have to underwrite shiat that only happens to the coasts? If individual states and the inhabitants thereof want to be covered against disaster then they should raise taxes on their own residents and pay into an insurance pool.


It's because we're the United States of America and not the 50 colonies. If something bad happens that overwhelms a state's individual capacity, then the other states help out via the federal government.
2012-10-30 03:48:54 PM  
1 votes:

b0geyman: The federal government is not disaster insurance. Why should the flyover states have to underwrite shiat that only happens to the coasts


Oh hey, what did I just say about short-sightedness? Great example. Thanks, bro!
2012-10-30 03:44:36 PM  
1 votes:
The federal government is not disaster insurance. Why should the flyover states have to underwrite shiat that only happens to the coasts? If individual states and the inhabitants thereof want to be covered against disaster then they should raise taxes on their own residents and pay into an insurance pool.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
2012-10-30 03:06:53 PM  
1 votes:

Electromax: gulogulo: Elzar: Look we all have to make tough choices - today it may be streamgages, tomorrow, wind energy or someone else's pet project. I don't like Fed rights anymore then you do, so we get what we have here on the USGS site. It probably cost $100/hr for some USGS web developer to spend 40 hours of dev time writing those 'warnings' - which is the way Obama wants it, so he gets it. This $4000 could have been spent more prudently on upgrading these streamgages - something the private sector would be all over.

Remember folks - this USGS underfunding came on Obama's watch - his administration can't even handle something a simple USGS budget. They probably even tried outsourcing it to China or Kenya.

Shows just how little you understand about the importance of what the USGS does, let alone your inability to grasp why we monitor stream gages and why this cannot be handled at the state level. Goddamn, the American public is so scientifically and environmentally retarded!

Pretty much. We have bid very aggressively on some GIS projects that USGS was opening up for agricultural land use optimization and sustainability modeling, a hell of a lot cheaper than we would bid for a private entity and USGS rejected it because they didn't have the money. They've been extremely tight with money for the last several years (with reason) and they're doing a lot of "quiet" things I'd say are pretty essential to a lot of core industries especially here in the Midwest.

Anecdotal evidence for sure, but everything I've seen goes against the conventional wisdom of "omg US govt pays billion dollar contracts and there's no spending oversight wasteful wasteful waaaah" like Obama is personally approving every dollar that every one of the hundreds of thousands of USGS/USDA/etc employees request and spend. That poster above throws out a made up $4000 number then goes on to argue on the basis of it, even though I just attended a USGS 'data users conference' last week where plenty of industry analysts talked about how vital the data those agencies collect and surface on their sites is, and it's available free (funded by taxpayers). I know that the same folks will read that and make snide comments about OH GREAT HELPING BIG BUSINESS but a lot of these aren't web developers sneakily extorting $100/hour from uncle sam, they're regular dudes trying to get money to do their job. And the industry analysts have people from Monsanto and the like, but there are also small businesses like ours and individual farmers to balance out 'the little guy' side of things.

Sorry for rant but I hold USDA and USGS pretty highly as far as gov't agencies go, wonderful to work with and genuinely helpful and interested in being a service to the public good in my experience. That just doesn't make a narrative that's as good, but it boggles my mind how people dismiss them offhand when they're doing some of the best gov't work for the money out there, IMO.

/EPA, DoE not quite as nice thus far


Farkied as an intelligent person that knows his ass from a hole in the ground.

I couldn't agree more, the USGS and USDA both collect and act as a clearinghouse for an enormous amount of spatial data that anyone can use, from private contractors to cities and states.

Not going to go into too many details because privacy, but a state employee I work with recently won a grant to do some geologic mapping for a federal agency. As a state employee working for a state organization whose mandate from the legislature is specifically geologic mapping, his bid came in way under a private consultant's bid. So what does the consultant do?

Run to the press and complain that big government is stealing jobs from the little guy, of course. Then he wrote letters to the governor and secretary of the state demanding that the state government withdraw its bid on the federal contract. Keep in mind the guy wanted to charge almost $100k more to repackage federal and state data into new maps, WITHOUT doing any new fieldwork or analysis. So he was not only twice as expensive, his end product would have been nothing but repackaged data. Yet somehow his interview with the press harped on government inefficiency yadda yadda yadda.

And for those of you that think some government web developer created the USGS pages at $100/hr, I laugh at you, because you can count to potato.
2012-10-30 02:49:02 PM  
1 votes:
While we're at it, why not do the same thing to the armed forces? I mean, 50 Air Forces? That'd be neat, and it totally would be more efficient.
2012-10-30 02:46:22 PM  
1 votes:

Joe Blowme: Lando Lincoln: I agree. I'm tired of fixing up coastal states that get hit by hurricanes year after year after year. Let them pay for it themselves. Don't like it? Move inland.

I don't actually believe this anymore. I used to, when I was 20 and when I was a Republican.

Ah, to be so young and ignorant again.

Then what do you do when you run out of other peoples money?


Ah yes, when you identify a risk which would be catastrophic for you - say, flooding in coastal areas, tornados in the plains, earthquakes in the west, and forest fires in the south? Well that's when you look into setting up an agency which exists to coordinate resources and share best practices - so when CA isn't battling a wildfire, they can lend emergency assistance to another region, and vice versa. And you also make a commitment to each other, that when the scope of a rare but catastrophic disaster overwhelms your local resources, you will assist your neighbors so they may return to being a prosperous part of the economy, and a safe place to do business.

That was a pretty good idea you had there :)
2012-10-30 02:44:58 PM  
1 votes:
Self inflicted October Surprise. Badmouth FEMA during Hurricane season.

(Roots around in pockets for a minute)

Nope. No sympathy to give Mitt. None at all. You would have completely tanked your campaign with that. The icing on the cake is that the Hurricane plowed over 162 votes in the electoral college. And parts of Canada.
2012-10-30 02:11:04 PM  
1 votes:
This is stupidly simple. The states can't replace FEMA because they don't have the money and the "private sector" (greedy bloodsucking corporations) don't do anything they cant get rich off of. There is no profit in disaster relief.
2012-10-30 01:44:27 PM  
1 votes:

stampylives: turtleking: having dealt with FEMA for the last three years I can tell you without a doubt it could be handled better by a private company.

Yeah, everyone has a hard time picking a cable company because they just love all the options SO MUCH. Private companies with monopolies or near-monopolies make everyone happy.


What, you have a problem with the "License to Steal" business plan?

/no-bid license
2012-10-30 01:24:13 PM  
1 votes:

peg_leg: Mugato: Elzar: It probably cost $100/hr for some USGS web developer to spend 40 hours of dev time writing those 'warnings' - which is the way Obama wants it

Yes, web developers make $100/hour.

They don't get paid $100/hour, they COST $100/hour. You have to include employment taxes, P&E, insurances, etc. to get the cost number.


Plus, there is the cost of hiring a manager to look over the web developer's shoulder and make useful comments like "it needs more green."
2012-10-30 01:21:52 PM  
1 votes:

honk: elysive: all of the insurance costs in my household went up after Obamacare passed

Know what? The health benefit premiums for our company were going up anyway, to the tune of about 30% a year, for several years. I sure don't see Obamacare as any worse than what we were getting before.


This year was significantly worse for my significant other and for me...and it made more sense considering that my insurance is now covering more, but that's neither here nor there. We could go back and forth with anecdotes indefinitely. I was just promised by the media that everyone being insured would bring my insurance costs down.

It may ultimately do that, but I'm just pointing out that increased government regulation doesn't magically improve private sector prices...or at least our private insurance coverage wasn't bending us over before. If it had been I'm suspecting Obamacare would have laid down the smack and we might have seen a price decrease. I got a whole $4 refund because they spent too much on paperwork and too little on claims but I wouldn't call $4 "getting bent over".
2012-10-30 01:03:11 PM  
1 votes:

elysive: all of the insurance costs in my household went up after Obamacare passed


Know what? The health benefit premiums for our company were going up anyway, to the tune of about 30% a year, for several years. I sure don't see Obamacare as any worse than what we were getting before.
2012-10-30 12:48:04 PM  
1 votes:

gulogulo: Elzar: Look we all have to make tough choices - today it may be streamgages, tomorrow, wind energy or someone else's pet project. I don't like Fed rights anymore then you do, so we get what we have here on the USGS site. It probably cost $100/hr for some USGS web developer to spend 40 hours of dev time writing those 'warnings' - which is the way Obama wants it, so he gets it. This $4000 could have been spent more prudently on upgrading these streamgages - something the private sector would be all over.

Remember folks - this USGS underfunding came on Obama's watch - his administration can't even handle something a simple USGS budget. They probably even tried outsourcing it to China or Kenya.

Shows just how little you understand about the importance of what the USGS does, let alone your inability to grasp why we monitor stream gages and why this cannot be handled at the state level. Goddamn, the American public is so scientifically and environmentally retarded!


Pretty much. We have bid very aggressively on some GIS projects that USGS was opening up for agricultural land use optimization and sustainability modeling, a hell of a lot cheaper than we would bid for a private entity and USGS rejected it because they didn't have the money. They've been extremely tight with money for the last several years (with reason) and they're doing a lot of "quiet" things I'd say are pretty essential to a lot of core industries especially here in the Midwest.

Anecdotal evidence for sure, but everything I've seen goes against the conventional wisdom of "omg US govt pays billion dollar contracts and there's no spending oversight wasteful wasteful waaaah" like Obama is personally approving every dollar that every one of the hundreds of thousands of USGS/USDA/etc employees request and spend. That poster above throws out a made up $4000 number then goes on to argue on the basis of it, even though I just attended a USGS 'data users conference' last week where plenty of industry analysts talked about how vital the data those agencies collect and surface on their sites is, and it's available free (funded by taxpayers). I know that the same folks will read that and make snide comments about OH GREAT HELPING BIG BUSINESS but a lot of these aren't web developers sneakily extorting $100/hour from uncle sam, they're regular dudes trying to get money to do their job. And the industry analysts have people from Monsanto and the like, but there are also small businesses like ours and individual farmers to balance out 'the little guy' side of things.

Sorry for rant but I hold USDA and USGS pretty highly as far as gov't agencies go, wonderful to work with and genuinely helpful and interested in being a service to the public good in my experience. That just doesn't make a narrative that's as good, but it boggles my mind how people dismiss them offhand when they're doing some of the best gov't work for the money out there, IMO.

/EPA, DoE not quite as nice thus far
2012-10-30 12:23:54 PM  
1 votes:
Don't most states have a form of FEMA? I remember when Clinton appointed James Witt to head FEMA after he had reorganized Arkansas Office of Emergency Services. You know when FEMA had a great reputation before the horse trainer got put in charge.
2012-10-30 12:10:09 PM  
1 votes:
Meanwhile Obama and this natural disaster DOES use the States as first responder and shows that it CAN and DOES work.

FEMA should NEVER be first responder. FEMA should support the state, the state support the local and the lowest level is the first responder.

With New Orleans we had a state and city that didn't even enact their own emergency procedures, instead they sat around screaming for the Federal Government. With this one we see the state and local governments doing their jobs and it is working well.

So before you slam Romney, realize that what he's suggesting is exactly what's happening right now, and Obama seems to be supporting it.
2012-10-30 12:08:23 PM  
1 votes:
Haliburton needs to diversify since the proles aren't buying the warmongering bit at the moment. Private companies!

/$30 bucks a plate for Iraq chow hall food. farking profiteers
2012-10-30 12:01:25 PM  
1 votes:
Ya, the feds are awesome at running stuff.
2012-10-30 12:01:12 PM  
1 votes:

turtleking: having dealt with FEMA for the last three years I can tell you without a doubt it could be handled better by a private company.


Have you dealt with a private company that has a complete monopoly before?
2012-10-30 11:59:55 AM  
1 votes:

Elzar: Look we all have to make tough choices - today it may be streamgages, tomorrow, wind energy or someone else's pet project. I don't like Fed rights anymore then you do, so we get what we have here on the USGS site. It probably cost $100/hr for some USGS web developer to spend 40 hours of dev time writing those 'warnings' - which is the way Obama wants it, so he gets it. This $4000 could have been spent more prudently on upgrading these streamgages - something the private sector would be all over.

Remember folks - this USGS underfunding came on Obama's watch - his administration can't even handle something a simple USGS budget. They probably even tried outsourcing it to China or Kenya.


Shows just how little you understand about the importance of what the USGS does, let alone your inability to grasp why we monitor stream gages and why this cannot be handled at the state level. Goddamn, the American public is so scientifically and environmentally retarded!
2012-10-30 11:59:03 AM  
1 votes:

Elzar: $4000 could have been spent more prudently on upgrading these streamgages - something the private sector would be all over.


Private industry wouldn't touch it unless they can get the government to pay them $8000 with a 5 year maintenance agreement.
2012-10-30 11:50:54 AM  
1 votes:
i225.photobucket.com
2012-10-30 10:27:36 AM  
1 votes:
Look we all have to make tough choices - today it may be streamgages, tomorrow, wind energy or someone else's pet project. I don't like Fed rights anymore then you do, so we get what we have here on the USGS site. It probably cost $100/hr for some USGS web developer to spend 40 hours of dev time writing those 'warnings' - which is the way Obama wants it, so he gets it. This $4000 could have been spent more prudently on upgrading these streamgages - something the private sector would be all over.

Remember folks - this USGS underfunding came on Obama's watch - his administration can't even handle something a simple USGS budget. They probably even tried outsourcing it to China or Kenya.
2012-10-30 09:59:43 AM  
1 votes:
Whenever a politician wants something killed but has to be a pussy about it they "leave it up to the states".

Nice web design, btw. Is it 1997 already?
2012-10-30 09:51:13 AM  
1 votes:

bdub77: Mitt Romney is an ass of epic proportions.


In fairness, he has ALWAYS been an ass of epic proportions. He's just gotten bigger...
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report