Trump, Coal Jobs, and the 2016 election

[psiberzerker]

coal is really the only source of decent income in areas of the US.

Yes, it is, and it's also a great resource for industrial processes.  However, coal work is downright toxic.  It still kills people, and there's massive safety issues in the industry as well.  How it's mined also affects it's impact on the environment, but Plasma Gasification significant'y lowers the carbon footprint going into the atmosphere.  (Also, Sulfides, Nitrates, lead, mercury, cadmium, arsenic, gallium...)

Just about all the impurities in coal, which are useful for Industries are better extracted by plasma gasification, than using it as an extremely filthy fuel.  Not to mention, several of those products (Including Anthracenes) can be bonded into Photo-voltaics to generate renewable energy.

However, the more automated the process, the fewer human lives it destroys for profit.

Good jobs are a persuasive argument.  Archetypically horrible, life crushing toxic jobs really aren't.  I can show you designs for robots that can't get lung cancer from it.  (Which opens up better paying technical trades like servicing, with much lower casualty rates.)

[IrishGirl]

coal is really the only source of decent income in areas of the US.

Yes, it is, and it's also a great resource for industrial processes.  However, coal work is downright toxic.  It still kills people, and there's massive safety issues in the industry as well.  How it's mined also affects it's impact on the environment, but Plasma Gasification significant'y lowers the carbon footprint going into the atmosphere.  (Also, Sulfides, Nitrates, lead, mercury, cadmium, arsenic, gallium...)

Just about all the impurities in coal, which are useful for Industries are better extracted by plasma gasification, than using it as an extremely filthy fuel.  Not to mention, several of those products (Including Anthracenes) can be bonded into Photo-voltaics to generate renewable energy.

However, the more automated the process, the fewer human lives it destroys for profit.

Good jobs are a persuasive argument.  Archetypically horrible, life crushing toxic jobs really aren't.  I can show you designs for robots that can't get lung cancer from it.  (Which opens up better paying technical trades like servicing, with much lower casualty rates.)

So you're argument is "Fuck the rural poor that want a job?"

You see, THAT is the problem I was pointing out...that you decided to totally ignore the bulk of.

You are NOT addressing how they will be employed when you remove that job.  You are just addressing the climate change problem and that the job is bad...and as I said before (and as you ignored before) the job is bad...but it's the ONLY decent job available in several states equating to 33 electoral votes.

I'm glad that you are anti-coal...but at least try to address the concerns that I am trying to point out WITHOUT cherry picking a single sentence to totally change what was said.

Really, you aren't arguing then...changing what I said is not an argument.  It's simply changing what I said.  You aren't even addressing any of the points there.  

You are really just changing what I said...and addressing what I changed.  This is the behavioral problem we discussed before.  Kindly stop.

[psiberzerker]

So you're argument is "Fuck the rural poor that want a job?"

No, I don't have an argument with you, I'm discussing the coal industry now, and you're twisting my words again.

You are NOT addressing how they will be employed when you remove that job.  You are just addressing the climate change problem and that the job is bad.

You're not addressing the need to remove that job, because it's hazardous to their health.  Someone who's not a petrochemical engineer can worry about job placement.  I'm an industrial engineer, not human resources.  

I'm glad that you are anti-coal.

I'm not anti-coal, I'm for reforming the coal industry so it's less toxic to everyone.  If you want a politicaly correct catch phrase you understand, I'm Clean Coal.

You aren't even addressing any of the points there.

Because you said them just fine, so I can make points of my own.  Since I actually know, and have worked in the coal industry.  I don't believe in "Jobs" as a resource, so I talked about Coal, as a resource.

[IrishGirl]

You aren't even addressing any of the points there.

Because you said them just fine.

Then who the fuck are you arguing with?

[psiberzerker]

Then who the fuck are you arguing with?

Nobody.  I'm discussing this.  Who the fuck are you arguing with?

[IrishGirl]

Then who the fuck are you arguing with?

Nobody.  I'm discussing this.  Who the fuck are you arguing with?

Then we have reached an agreement.  If you are NOT arguing with me and changing the topic, don't quote me, that way it doesn't seem like you're twisting the shit out of what people say...just start a new post on the thread minus a quotation that has NOTHING to do with what you are talking about.

[psiberzerker]

don't quote me,

Okay, (after this.)  I didn't realize that was how I was triggering you.  I'm sorry, I can agree to that.  Thank you for clearing that up.

[IrishGirl]

don't quote me,

Okay, (after this.)  I didn't realize that was how I was triggering you.  I'm sorry, I can agree to that.  Thank you for clearing that up.

Then we have reached an accord.  When if you don't quote me and then say something completely different, I won't assume it was directed at what I said.

[Jed_]

So agree to disagree, and fuck if I can’t get you two to get along and please the powers that be (yeah I mean you Lois).

[Lois]

you refer to immigrants crossing our southern border like this:

“We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — we’re stopping a lot of them,” Mr. Trump said in the Cabinet Room during an hourlong meeting that reporters were allowed to document. “You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people, these are animals, and we’re taking them out of the country at a level and at a rate that’s never happened before.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/us/politics/trump-undocumented-immigrants-animals.html

As for the excuse that he was referring to MS-13 gang members, could someone please tell Trump that MS-13 was formed in the United States and exported to El Salvador?  Furthermore, the people wanting in are fleeing the gang violence?

[Katiebee]

Back in topic, coal jobs are going away for economic reasons. The mining companies have been moving to automation increasingly, and that reduces the number of miners.

Also, coal is more expensive than natural gas, and guess what? The energy companies prefer a fuel that gives them a larger margin. And that means coal is not in as high a demand.

The side benefits are in health and environmental pollution.

In other words, your objections are not based in hard reality.

Get upset with the mining companies looking at their profit margins. But that will put you in a quandary as well.

[Athos_131]

...you attack a black man who built a school, while you are responsible for imprisoning children.

#Resist

[bandit]

If you support Donald Trump and any of his ICE/Immagration policies.  or  If you want to deport the wives of US military who have fought and served this country and their wives have been in this country for 20 years. (yes that is a real tory from Tampa Bay) 

[Athos_131]

If you support Donald Trump and any of his ICE/Immagration policies.  or  If you want to deport the wives of US military who have fought and served this country and their wives have been in this country for 20 years. (yes that is a real tory from Tampa Bay) 

The husband voted for Trump.

#Resist

[IrishGirl]

Back in topic, coal jobs are going away for economic reasons. The mining companies have been moving to automation increasingly, and that reduces the number of miners.

Also, coal is more expensive than natural gas, and guess what? The energy companies prefer a fuel that gives them a larger margin. And that means coal is not in as high a demand.

The side benefits are in health and environmental pollution.

In other words, your objections are not based in hard reality.

Get upset with the mining companies looking at their profit margins. But that will put you in a quandary as well.

It's really not about being upset over the source of energy.  Coal, Hydro, wind, solar, nuclear...that wasn't the point.

The point was that there are a lot of people and states that are economically dependent on coal as a source of work.

Take coal away and those already poverty stricken states are even more poverty stricken...and WITHOUT the population to really draw attention.

Now, take coal away and bring in something else that they can make a living on...fine.  you aren't screwing entire states over then.

But that's not what happened.  Their jobs were taken away...they were insulted for not voting for the people that took their jobs...and they kept being told how privileged they were as they sank even deeper into poverty in areas of the country that don't have the access to programs that help them.

And add to it that now the same party is arguing that you just can't bring manufacturing jobs back for...reasons.  And they aren't seeing any hope.

That creates an ENORMOUS backlash.

You add that backlash to insulting them for not voting for Hillary, and you add that to everyone telling them how privileged they are as they are living in poverty...and suddenly you have a situation that is going to breed racism.

It's not the coal that's the problem.  It's taking it away while while not bringing replacement jobs to the area...coupled with, honestly, slapping them in the face that's the issue.

If other jobs were put in place when coal was taken, we wouldn't be seen such a horribly racist radicalization of that area.

But now you have poverty+idol hands+anger.  The math isn't that hard.

[Athos_131]

It's not the coal that's the problem.  It's taking it away while while not bringing replacement jobs to the area...

Awaiting Trump's coal comeback, miners reject retraining

#Resist

[IrishGirl]

It's not the coal that's the problem.  It's taking it away while while not bringing replacement jobs to the area...

Awaiting Trump's coal comeback, miners reject retraining

#Resist

This could be why:

https://www.uc.pa.gov/faq/claimant/Pages/Job-Training-FAQS.aspx

If you don't feel like clicking in it:

Unemployment compensation (UC) does not pay training costs or tuition.

It's not exactly free and they don't exactly have money.

[Katiebee]

Back in topic, coal jobs are going away for economic reasons. The mining companies have been moving to automation increasingly, and that reduces the number of miners.

Also, coal is more expensive than natural gas, and guess what? The energy companies prefer a fuel that gives them a larger margin. And that means coal is not in as high a demand.

The side benefits are in health and environmental pollution.

In other words, your objections are not based in hard reality.

Get upset with the mining companies looking at their profit margins. But that will put you in a quandary as well.

It's really not about being upset over the source of energy.  Coal, Hydro, wind, solar, nuclear...that wasn't the point.

The point was that there are a lot of people and states that are economically dependent on coal as a source of work.

Take coal away and those already poverty stricken states are even more poverty stricken...and WITHOUT the population to really draw attention.

Now, take coal away and bring in something else that they can make a living on...fine.  you aren't screwing entire states over then.

But that's not what happened.  Their jobs were taken away...they were insulted for not voting for the people that took their jobs...and they kept being told how privileged they were as they sank even deeper into poverty in areas of the country that don't have the access to programs that help them.

And add to it that now the same party is arguing that you just can't bring manufacturing jobs back for...reasons.  And they aren't seeing any hope.

That creates an ENORMOUS backlash.

You add that backlash to insulting them for not voting for Hillary, and you add that to everyone telling them how privileged they are as they are living in poverty...and suddenly you have a situation that is going to breed racism.

It's not the coal that's the problem.  It's taking it away while while not bringing replacement jobs to the area...coupled with, honestly, slapping them in the face that's the issue.

If other jobs were put in place when coal was taken, we wouldn't be seen such a horribly racist radicalization of that area.

But now you have poverty+idol hands+anger.  The math isn't that hard.

so you want the government to give them jobs? You want the government to force businesses to create jobs for them?

That’s beyond socialism, and into communism.
It appears you are faulting capitalism. So please explain what you mean.

[Katiebee]

One has to wonder what happened to the buggy makers, and the poor whip makers when cars came about. When the market moves to cheaper labor, cheaper manufacturing, cheaper supplies or even more efficient production, there isn’t anything to do but to change.

Coal became too expensive, and other things are more cost effective. Businesses are not required to provide jobs per se. They are required to be profitable.

[IrishGirl]

so you want the government to give them jobs? You want the government to force businesses to create jobs for them?

That’s beyond socialism, and into communism.
It appears you are faulting capitalism. So please explain what you mean.

The Government is taking their jobs away.  Obama did an attack on coal.

And it's not moving beyond communism, FDR set up a public works program and was still a capitalist.  there are even retraining programs as Athos pointed out...however they aren't exactly free.

There are measures that can be taken to lesson the economic blow to already impoverished areas...we just as a country--and the far left in specific--would rather be antagonistic to the poor and unemployed in that part of America rather than encourage economic growth.

I lived in Boston, I currently live in Chicago.  In either city I could easily get to MANY things from free clinics to job fairs, to community colleges, to Ivy Leagues and do it cheaply.

The people in those areas can't.  The resources are simply not there.  But we can afford to focus them in other areas.

A mass of unemployed people anywhere is dangerous, that fosters a lot of things that create real and present dangers.  To make the situation worse and then antagonism is planting the seeds to massive problems onto domestic terrorism.  

A simple public works program like America once had...FREE job training...even just access to resources that are available in larger cities could all easily remedy the situation without moving into communism, or even socialism.