posts: 340558
Data license: Public Domain
This data as json
| post_id | thread_id | thread_title | post_number | author_username | post_date | post_date_iso | post_body |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 340558 | 21050 | Gutting NOAA | 22 | seabird | Mar 13, 2025 | 2025-03-13T15:19:33-0400 | XXX said: Check your facts. The number is 1,200 NOAA employees on top of 2,000 already let go. How many went to the National Weather Service (in your opinion)? Click to expand... Firstly, a lot of the numbers are pure speculation, you and I do not know exactly. With the above post I wasn't taking those 2,000 into account because 1.) it brought the total number of employees down to 12,000, which was deemed as "average" capacity for the agency.. why would we even be talking about grave/gutting layoffs if the # total employees was above average and they trimmed it down to average? and 2.) again, it's hearsay and a lot of the employees were probationary and not long term staff, and have been reinstated in some way... The number that shifted positions is unknown, not an opinion. All I'm saying here is that it is healthy to have some skepticism of large government agencies, even if the agency is involved in the welfare of humanity. The fact that the agency operates for the welfare of humanity is sadly a blanket that shields it from skepticism and judgement. No entity should have this immunity. Science is now absolutely political.. The belief that NOAA and NWS are inherently good (just like folks thought FEMA was inherently good and efficient and practical) is off base. It's our duty to look into these things and make sure the money is used properly! Maybe not executed in the right manner as @NCJohn is saying, but potentially net beneficial. My guess is that nothing changes, NOAA operates exactly as before. |