Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

According to the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), Government malfeasance on allowing the defense cuts mandated by sequestration required by failure to reduce the deficit and allowing implementation of the EPA's Final Utility MACT rule will cost the nation 2.65 million jobs vast expenses due to added regulatory burden and economic displacement within the next 10 years (over 1 million jobs lost by 2014). See below:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Defense Cuts Will Cost 1 Million Jobs.

According to a new NAM report, cuts in defense spending under the upcoming sequester, coupled with defense cuts enacted last summer, could result in the loss of more than 1 million U.S. jobs in 2014. Defense Spending Cuts: The Impact on Economic Growth and Jobs highlights the potential impact defense spending cuts will have on U.S. jobs and economic growth. This job loss in 2014, including 130,000 manufacturing jobs, will increase the unemployment rate by 0.7 percent and decrease GDP by almost 1 percent by 2012. The report shows that the long-lasting effects of these cuts will be felt all along the supply chain, from defense equipment manufacturers to everyday Americans who are protected by these products. “The men and women working in defense manufacturing will bear the brunt of the damage these cuts will inflict on small and medium-sized manufacturers. We can't risk the loss of jobs, innovation and progress that are at stake here,” said Williams-Pyro President and CEO Della Williams. The report is part of a larger effort of the NAM’s Defense Manufacturing Working Group that brings together manufacturers in the defense and aerospace industries and their suppliers to highlight the impact these industries have on our nation’s innovation and economy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Senate Fails to Save Jobs and Help Manufacturers Invest in the Future.

On Wednesday, June 20, manufacturers across the United States were disappointed when the Senate failed to stop the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from implementing its costly and burdensome Utility MACT regulation. Despite bipartisan support, Sen. James Inhofe’s (R-OK) joint resolution of disapproval (S.J. Res. 37) to overturn the EPA’s regulations for coal-fueled power plants failed by a vote of 46-53. The Utility MACT rule is one of the most expensive regulations ever issued by the EPA.
Under the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overrule a regulation by means of an expedited legislative process, S.J. Res. 37 only needed a simple majority to pass the Senate. The NAM key voted Sen. Inhofe’s proposal, which would repeal the rule so that the EPA could propose a more reasonable plan. On September 23, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 2401, which delayed implementation of the proposed Utility MACT rule.
“The Senate missed an opportunity to protect manufacturing jobs and promote growth,” said NAM Senior Vice President of Policy and Government Relations Aric Newhouse in a statement. “Manufacturers will be burdened with the cost of one of the most expensive rules ever issued by the EPA at a time when they need to be investing in the future and creating jobs.”

The final Utility MACT rule, issued in December, requires many power plants to install emission control technologies in a short compliance time frame. Many power plants will have to shut down, be significantly modified or replaced, threatening electric reliability for manufacturers. As a result, hundreds of thousands of jobs will be lost. When combined with other power plant regulations, 1.65 million jobs across the country will be lost by 2020, and electricity prices for manufacturers in the United States will skyrocket, hindering manufacturers’ competitiveness. The rule is expected to cost a total of around $95 billion, 40 percent more than the total cost of all existing EPA Clean Air Act regulations on power plants. These costs will be passed down to both manufacturers and residential consumers.
On June 8, the NAM sent a letter to the Senate with 258 company and association signatures urging support for S.J. Res. 37. In the letter, the NAM stressed that disapproving this rule would not prevent the EPA from reducing mercury emissions from power plants, but it would require the EPA to write a more sensible regulation without increasing energy prices and costing manufacturers jobs. The letter helped generate bipartisan support for the resolution.
Manufacturers will be closely watching whether the Utility MACT regulation is overturned in federal court and will continue to advocate against the EPA’s overreaching regulatory agenda that jeopardizes affordable energy. If manufacturing is to continue to lead the recovery, Congress must stop regulations such as Utility MACT from stifling job creation and economic growth.
“We will continue to urge Congress to act now to stop the EPA’s aggressive agenda and urge Washington to pass sensible policies that make it easier for manufacturers to grow their businesses and remain competitive,” said Newhouse.

Obama's own man is saying that Obama is responsible for the sputtering recovery:

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/election/2 ... than-ever/

Boeing CEO Jim McNerney on Wednesday said U.S. companies face more regulatory barriers to growth than at any time in his long career as a businessman.

The 62-year-old McNerney, also chairman of the Business Roundtable, said regulatory agencies have crafted a host of new rules and enforced them more aggressively than prior administrations. He said regulators often take a hostile approach to business and that the prevailing attitude is companies “are guilty until proven innocent.”

McNerney made his remarks during the Business Roundtable’s presentation of its latest quarterly survey of top U.S. executives. CEOs say they plan to spend and hire less in the next six months than they previously expected. CEOs less optimistic about U.S. economy.

Asked by a reporter if regulations are any worse now than in decades past, McNerney gave an emphatic yes. “It’s different today. The attitude is different,” he said. “Unless you live it it’s hard to see it.”

McNerney said the Roundtable “hears about it all day long” from member companies. The group represents large U.S. firms that employ more than 14 million people and generate sales in excess of $6 trillion a year.

As examples, McNerney cited lengthy holdups at the Federal Drug Administration for approval of medical devices and resistance at the Environmental Protection Agency to new energy projects involving fossil fuels.

He also mentioned Boeing’s own high-profile fight with a federal agency over the jetmaker’s decision to build a large manufacturing plant in South Carolina operated by non-union workers. The National Labor Relations Board accused Boeing of opening the new plant in violation of U.S. labor law, but it later dropped the case. Had Boeing lost the case it could have been forced to close a plant it spent nearly $1 billion to build.

“The EPA, FDA, NLRB – there is example after example,” McNerney said.

Presumably McNerney has made the same complaints to President Obama. After all, McNerney is a member of the president’s advisory council on American jobs and competitiveness. The president even visited a Boeing plant in Washington state early this year to deliver a speech.

McNerney has become increasingly critical of Washington. Several months ago, McNerney lamented the lack of business experience in the Obama White House specifically and Congress in general.

Of particular concern to businesses is the threat of a “fiscal cliff” at the start of 2013, when large tax increases and sharp spending cuts are slated to take effect unless Congress changes the law. McNerney said a stalemate in Washington is making some companies scale back plans for spending and hiring until they know the outcome.

“The regulatory and tax environment is not clear,” McNerney said. ““We don’t know how capital will be taxed – so there is a little bit of restraint as we approach the end of the year.”

The Boeing CEO urged Democrats and Republicans to strike a compromise even if the deal is far from perfect. “These investments are for 20 years,” he said. “You have to be able to make some assumptions.”

McNerney said companies could boost spending by billions of dollars if Washington acted.

Another example of this president and the harm he is doing :

Federal regulations can be maddening, but none more so than a current one that demands oil refiners use millions of gallons of a substance, cellulosic ethanol, that does not exist.

"As ludicrous as that sounds, it's fact," says Charles Drevna, who represents refiners. "If it weren't so frustrating and infuriating, it would be comical."

And Tom Pyle of the Institute of Energy Research says, "the cellulosic biofuel program is the embodiment of government gone wild."

Refiners are at their wit's end because the government set out requirements to blend cellulosic ethanol back in 2005, assuming that someone would make it. Seven years later, no one has.

"None, not one drop of cellulosic ethanol has been produced commercially. It's a phantom fuel," says Pyle. "It doesn't exist in the market place."

And Charles Drevna adds, "forcing us to use a product that doesn't exist, they might as well tell us to use unicorns."

And yet, they still have to pay what amounts to fines:

"Why would they ask them to blend any at all if it doesn't exist?" Pyle said. "Because they know that they can squeeze some extra dollars out of them."

The EPA does have discretion to lower the annual requirement. And one supporter explains, that's what the agency is saying.

"We are going to reduce your blending obligation by 98 percent because we feel that that’s the right thing to do," says Brooke Coleman, the executive director of the Advanced Ethanol Council of the Renewable Fuels Association. "We are going to maintain your blending obligation on the gallons that we think are going to emerge."

The EPA, which would not speak on camera, is still hoping production of cellulosic ethanol will emerge.

A study by the Congressional Research Service, however, says the government "projects that cellulosic bio fuels are not expected to be commercially available on a large scale until at least 2015."

Drevna of the refiners association says they had no other choice left since EPA insisted they still had to blend some of the nonexistent cellulosic ethanol.

"We've had to go to the courts and litigate this thing is because they just turned a blind eye to us," Drevna said.

So the refiners are now suing the EPA, in part because the mandate gets larger and larger-- 500 million gallons this year, 3 billion in 2015 and 16 billion in 2022.

And still, not a gallon of cellulosic ethanol in sight.

Don't ever question Odrama's genius policies!

Vote for Gary Johnson this November!

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Atlas Shrugged.

Justice shrugged...

Elena Kagan: The ObamaCare Recusal That Wasn't

As sitting Supreme Court justice, Elana Kagan could very well be deciding on responses to arguments that she herself had helped formulate when she was solicitor general.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/ ... wasnt.html

Sadly, this kind of redunculous regulation has seeped into the State & local Governments. There's a monastery in Louisiana. Their order specializes in woodworking. So, they got into the coffin & casket making business. OH! NOT SO FAST! Said the Funeral Director's PAC. Now, the monastery's head monk has to have his certificate as a mortuary director. The cost? four years and over $40K.

In almost any large city in the US a person who wants to open a business ethnically braiding hair (think cornrows) falls under the board of health and must become a certified cosmetologist - the same certification needed to administer Botox injections. The cost? Three years and over $16K in courses, materials and licenses. However, in Washington D.C. you can be running EMT with no training or certifications.

By the way - THIS is how firearms will finally be restricted in the US. Some bunch of jackwagons (CompTIAA) will create a "Firearms Owner's and Operator's Certification" or a FOOC. The test will be created by a separate set of jackwagons (Sylvan Testing). The certification will require a FOOCing test and 40 in class getting FOOCed. They will then sell firing ranges on requiring that people wanting to use the range be FOOCed. Of course, you can use the range under observation while your FOOC is Under Process, thus, your all FOOCed UP. Of course, you also will need a FOOC to purchase a firearm.

OK, I'll stop now.

Defense Cuts Will Cost 1 Million Jobs.

So?

Let them find jobs that don't involve killing innocent women and children in Afghanistan.

And don't give me that "protecting our freedom" crapola. Those people are specifically kept in work by the unending wars and occupation of foreign countries. That's not an economy, that's an colonial empire.

Oh now u done did it!

How can you kill women and children?

Easy! Just don't lead em so much!



Anyone I shoot at that runs away is VC. Anyone who stands still is a well disciplined VC!

This thread has slipped into the crap hole.

ShotgunBlast wrote:Vote for Gary Johnson this November!

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Why should I do that? I may as well vote for Obama or just stay home and save the money I would have spent on the gas.

wylde007 wrote:

Defense Cuts Will Cost 1 Million Jobs.

So?

Let them find jobs that don't involve killing innocent women and children in Afghanistan.

And don't give me that "protecting our freedom" crapola. Those people are specifically kept in work by the unending wars and occupation of foreign countries. That's not an economy, that's an colonial empire.

Hey wylde007 you are from the beach area, right? Here is a thought for you: When there are large defense cuts, the Navy will see some of those cuts. There will be fewer sailors in your area, fewer people to buy groceries, fewer to buy new or used cars, fewer to need those cars repaired. Less demand for contractors to build housing, less insurance sales men. Maybe that next carrier being built at Newport News will be delayed a few years. Darn, there goes a bunch of shipyard jobs and all the local jobs supported by them. I don't know what you do for a living, don't particularly care, but just based on your location, you are in ground zero of the impact area for defense cuts. What is that old saying? "Beware of what you wish for, because you just might get it."

grumpyMSG wrote:What is that old saying? "Beware of what you wish for, because you just might get it."

Someone at the Pentagon must have heard him.

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/06/study-m ... ncial-toll