Senate Bill S.786 could kill NWS internet weather products

Yes, a flat income, sales or VAT tax could certainly eliminate much of the government bureaucracy.

.... and that's exactly what we already have in place to pay for aviation
services. A flat tax on gas. Everyone who buys gas pays for the
service, and mostly everyone who buys the gas uses the service. How
much better can it get?

Jose
(r.a.o and r.a.h trimmed)
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:

Yes, a flat income, sales or VAT tax could certainly eliminate much of
the government bureaucracy.


... and that's exactly what we already have in place to pay for aviation
services. A flat tax on gas. Everyone who buys gas pays for the
service, and mostly everyone who buys the gas uses the service. How
much better can it get?

Not much for aviation, but I was talking about taxes in general. If
only it was all as simple...

Matt

Matt Barrow wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

Matt Barrow wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

In the instant
case, it is not feasible for private concerns to operate the
weather
bureau infrastructure, inclusing constellations of weather
satellites
and so on.

Oh, like the constellation of communications satellites?
And the broadcast groups?

How many of those were put into orbit by privately developed and
operated launch vehicles?

Every one of them.

NASA has no manufacturing capacity of it own.


As you will recall,
in . com I wrote:

The proper and effective way to privatize services of this sort
is to put the operational support for the service up for competative
bidding by prospective contractors and NOT by privatizing the data
themselves.

Which is precisely how NASA builds, launches and operates satellites.

That is not the sort of privatization being proposed for the NWS.

What is proposed is that the information to be distributed be
made into a privately owned intelectual property--like was done
with the Landsat data that effectively destroyed it's value to
anyone but the company to which it was given.




These are much the same people as run the Postal Disservice and
Amtrak.

Unhappy with the USPS are you? It has already been privatized.

Man, you're nievity is incredible.

Here the story a while back about the USPS fining people for carrying
first
class mail?

I was not aware that the USPS had authority to fine anyone. Federal
Law sets aside the carriage of first class mail for the USPS so
that all citizens can have their first class mail deliverd for
the same price. Those who violate that law may be enjoined or
finedby the courts I would presume, though maybe the USPS police
(e.g. the stamp cops) ocnduct the investigations. Otherwise,
persons in some parts of the country would be effectively without
mail service. Some people think that's OK, you know, the sort of
people who only think the benefits they get from government are
appropriate.

....

Yup. They took decades to convert to faster means of transport that
UPS and
FexEx had from day ONE.

UPS and Fedex perform different services. However, I have never had
the deliver problems with the USPS that I have had with UPS. Not
much experience with Fedex, nor will I since they are so friggin'
expensive.


The comparison is not the Post Office and the modern day USPS, it's
FedEx,
UPS, and a slew of local delivery services/


No it is not. None of those are privitized delivery networks for
product obtained at taxpayer expense. The current proposal has
us paying the government to obtain the data and make the forcasts,
and they pay somebody else to be able to access them.


Amtrak could not compete with the heavily subsidized airline
industry regardless of who managed it.

Want to compare subsidies for the airlines versus Amtrak?

Go ahead. Take an especially close look at fuel costs. Be sure
to include the United Airlines (spit) pension plan.

... But riddle me this, is the market
for weather reporting more lucrative in heavily populated areas
or in sparsley populated areas? Which of those two are the
preferred areas for GA?

Non-sequitur -- the market is nation wide.

'The' market for first class mail is nation wide too. Where do those
small time outfits illegally delivering first class mail spring up,
in the business districts of major cities or in the backcountry of
Montana?


Again, get a clue rather than the bilge the media and your handlers
shoved
down your throat and which you uncritically swallowed.

Oh, you're one of those paranoid nut-jobs, eh?

--

FF

George Patterson wrote:
wrote:

Oh, like the constellation of communications satellites?
And the broadcast groups?

How many of those were put into orbit by privately developed and
operated launch vehicles?

A great many of them. Although NASA used their political muscle to
stifle
private launch ventures in the States, there are companies elsewhere
who will
put up a satellite cheaper than using the shuttle.


Please tell us about some of them.

--

FF

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Matt Barrow wrote:


I can't find the source now, but I
recently saw a summary of how much money is spent simply related to
collection income taxes. This included the cost of the IRS, and all
tax
preparation services such as H&R Block, tax software, tax attorneys,
CPAs, etc. The number of people and amount of money spent simply
counting and collecting taxes (and trying to avoid the same) was simply
staggering.

But how much of this is solvable not by eliminating the taxation process,
but by (honestly, this time) simplifying it. In this day of automation,
the state of tax preparation is incredible to the point of offense. I
would not tolerate this in a vendor from whom I was purchasing by choice.

Check your cutting/snipping. That's not my post (with three levels of
indentation)



That the government has yet to get this right - along with any other
technological project of significance, like the FBI's fiasco - is a good
point for private enterprise. However, there are inherent inefficiencies
with that approach too.

Every payment has a cost, even in an efficient (ie. not government {8^)
world. The efficiency of the payment (ie. the amount that goes to
overhead
of the payment infrastructure) drops as the actual cost of the purchased
item/service drops. In other words, it's more efficient to pay a single
large sum than several smaller sums.

Government does not derive just powers from it's level of efficiency, but
from it's moral base. IOW, there are things a government MUST do by itself
(and things that it MUST NOT) due to the nature of it's power. A government
that can ititiate force against it's citizens or others is a THUG. This fact
does not go away regardless of how man people vote for it.

A legitimate governmetn cannot do anything that an individual citizen can.



This gets especially bad in the range called "micropayments", for which
the
world is still waiting on a good (accepted) solution.

By aggregating several purchases, taxes do (rather: could in theory)
provide
efficiency.

If only it were done well.

Efficiently, but not morally.

"Dude" wrote in message
...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Matt Barrow wrote:

No, it doesn't. The point made, though, is that private industry
"could
do
what the NWS does", and that's plain BS.

Whoops...that should be "couldn't do".

True. A private industry would do what the NWS does only better and
less expensively. I would certainly hope it wouldn't simply "do what
the NWS does" as that would be a real waste.

The NWS doesn't do anything by itself; it has no manufacturing capacity.
It
merely derives income from the thugs at the IRS.

In the same vein, it has no stimulus to provide a better product. That's
what the profit motive creates, "MOTIVE".

The NWS/NOAA will get it pound of flesh regardless of the quality of its
product. AAMOF, if they fall behind, they can just demand/plead the need
for
MORE money and resources...sorta like the school systems. (**** up and
move
up).



You are just assuming there is actually enough profit here to motivate
someone to invest like the government has?


Government invests?

Thank you for providing a good verification of the statist nature of public
schools as mentioned above.

"Dude" wrote in message
...
All this tax talk is good.

I kinda like www.fairtax.org myself.

I am all about free markets and eliminating government as much as
possible.
However, the bill in question does not eliminate NWS. IF they want to put
out a long term plan and show how this will help, and when we will see a
better, more efficient, and free market in weather; THEN, I will support
it.

How about the Constitutions article 1, section 8?

From here though, it sounds like the arguments are just a bunch of "free
markets are always better" talk. We don't live in a free market utopia, so
this is not always true.

What a wishy-washy pile of ****.

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Andrew Gideon wrote:

Matt Barrow wrote:



I can't find the source now, but I
recently saw a summary of how much money is spent simply related to
collection income taxes. This included the cost of the IRS, and all
tax
preparation services such as H&R Block, tax software, tax attorneys,
CPAs, etc. The number of people and amount of money spent simply
counting and collecting taxes (and trying to avoid the same) was simply
staggering.


But how much of this is solvable not by eliminating the taxation
process,
but by (honestly, this time) simplifying it. In this day of automation,
the state of tax preparation is incredible to the point of offense. I
would not tolerate this in a vendor from whom I was purchasing by
choice.

Yes, a flat income, sales or VAT tax could certainly eliminate much of
the government bureaucracy.

Yes, for the first two, No, for the VAT. Also, a VAT is the most easily
hidden and abused. It also penalizes productivity.

wrote:

Please tell us about some of them.

The big hitter is Ariane in France. They've been launching since 1980 and
currently put up more than half the satellites launched every year. They just
signed a deal with the Russian space agency, which will allow them to use the
Soyuz infrastructure.

Messerschmitt made a stab at it at about the same time, but I'm not sure they
every got operational. They were planning to build launch facilities in Africa.

Then there's International Launch Services, which is a joint venture of Lockheed
Martin and Russian rocket builder Khrunichev State Research and Production Space
Center. They were formed in 1995.

Sea Launch was also formed in 1995 and made their first commercial lift in 1999.
They launch from platforms in the ocean to get around having to deal with NASA
to use land bases in the U.S..

Boeing is also getting into the act with their Delta system.

And if you need to put up something really massive, there are several companies
in Russia who have access to updated military launch facilities, and, of course,
the Russian government will be happy to help you as well.

Launches planned for the next few months may be viewed at
http://spaceflightnow.com/tracking . As you can see, there are 40 scheduled. One
is NASA. A few others are U.S. military.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

George Patterson wrote:
wrote:

Please tell us about some of them.

The big hitter is Ariane in France. They've been launching since 1980
and
currently put up more than half the satellites launched every year.
They just
signed a deal with the Russian space agency, which will allow them to
use the
Soyuz infrastructure.

Ariane ws developed by and is operated by ESA, the European
counterpart to NASA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane

E.g. Ariane is not a private venture.


Messerschmitt made a stab at it at about the same time, but I'm not
sure they
every got operational. They were planning to build launch facilities
in Africa.

Then there's International Launch Services, which is a joint venture
of Lockheed
Martin and Russian rocket builder Khrunichev State Research and
Production Space
Center. They were formed in 1995.

Checking out their site http://www.ilslaunch.com/whoweare/ it is not
clear how many launches they have made. It is clear that they rely
on launch vehicles that were developed and proven by the US and
Soviet Governments.


Sea Launch was also formed in 1995 and made their first commercial
lift in 1999.
They launch from platforms in the ocean to get around having to deal
with NASA
to use land bases in the U.S..


Their home page is here http://www.sea-launch.com/ where they report
sixteen launches to date. Excellent! However their launch vehicles
are modifications to vehicles developed by the Soviets.

Boeing is also getting into the act with their Delta system.

And if you need to put up something really massive, there are several
companies
in Russia who have access to updated military launch facilities, and,
of course,
the Russian government will be happy to help you as well.

Which obviously are using vehicles and infrastructure deleloped
by the old Soviet Union.

IOW none of those are examples of launch vehicles developed by
private industry. I think those programs area good thing. However
they do not show industry doind something better than government,
they show something industry could not have done at all if
governments had not done the precursor work.

The Chinese will also launch commercial satellites with the Long
March.


Launches planned for the next few months may be viewed at
http://spaceflightnow.com/tracking . As you can see, there are 40
scheduled. One
is NASA. A few others are U.S. military.

I see two NASA launches, one joint NASA/NOAA, and one NOAA launch
scheduled as well as a number of USAF GPS lauches. Several launches
are for support of the ISS.