Wouldn't we all love it if some other country(ies) would contribute? Unfortunately, neither Europe nor China will in any appreciable amount, despite whatever the propaganda systems are currently saying. The US is the only game in town, and will remain so.
Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
521–530 of 587 posts
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
I foresee three big challenges to funding science at the state level. Shifting to state-level funding would require states to independently raise new taxes. Each state would have to work within the constraints of its state level constitution for levying that tax. Research would no longer be pork. This seems politically difficult. States would have to either coordinate on which grants to fund or accept a siloed, fragm…
> Each state would have to work within the constraints of its state level constitution for levying that tax. Interstate compacts exist. For example, states can make an agreement that a company can receive grant funds only if it's incorporated in a state that spends a certain percentage of the budget on scientific research. San-Francisco (in a ham-fisted way) tried to do something similar, by prohibiting city-sponsore…
> Interstate compacts exist.
Not without positive action by Congress they don't. (US Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 10.)
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#523Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is a strong federative country. Individual states are almost literally _states_ (as in "country") and have a lot of power. They can impose their own carbon taxes, net neutrality rules, fund research, etc. And more importantly, their local democracy is going strong.
Actually, in many cases they cannot. Take a look at the EPA "exception" that California has needed in order to impose more stringent fuel efficiency standards for automobiles. Many forms of commerce or communication that are relevant across state lines (net neutrality rules, etc.) are considered a federal prerogative and states have limited ability to control these. Yes, states could do more to fund research--and hop…
> Take a look at the EPA "exception" that California has needed in order to impose more stringent fuel efficiency standards for automobiles.
Yet, WA now has a carbon tax for companies operating within its borders. And it was found constitutional by the SCOTUS.
> Many forms of commerce or communication that are relevant across state lines (net neutrality rules, etc.) are considered a federal prerogative and states have limited ability to control these.
The interstate agreements are allowed as long as they don't infringe on the sovereign Federal power.
And there are plenty of workarounds. For example, CA has these ridiculous agricultural inspection stations on freeways. They are legal because they don't technically deny you the freedom of movement, declining to submit to an inspection simply revokes your driving privilege in CA.
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Each state would have to work within the constraints of its state level constitution for levying that tax. Interstate compacts exist. For example, states can make an agreement that a company can receive grant funds only if it's incorporated in a state that spends a certain percentage of the budget on scientific research. San-Francisco (in a ham-fisted way) tried to do something similar, by prohibiting city-sponsore…
> Interstate compacts exist. Not without positive action by Congress they don't. (US Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 10.)
As I replied in another message:
That's not quite correct. The judicial practice in the US is that the intestate compacts (agreements) require Congressional authorization only if they infringe on the sovereign Federal powers.
One good example for the 2nd Amendment lovers: states are free to make reciprocal agreements with other states for concealed carry permits. It doesn't require any authorization from the Congress.
Another example are the laws for taxation of multi-state corporations that the neighboring states can negotiate together.
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#525Earlier quoted context omitted.
And this is just one of many ways the US is currently shooting itself in the foot (or, if you prefer, cutting off its nose to spite its face). Thanks, Elon! Putin and Xi must be cheering... > Europe will gladly do take backsies on their WWII brain drain. ...until the extreme-right populists (supported by the current US administration) come to power there too?
Given that European countries and the EU except a few outliers runs on proportional representation it is way harder for the extreme right to win a majority. We’ve been dealing with our own extreme right parties for the past 20-30 years. They generally bounce between 10-25% of the vote depending on where in the political cycle they are. Like all parties do. Never enough to dictate policy, but enough to influence when…
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the US party systems.
The "parliamentary party" is probably to which you refer. The elected congressfolk and legislators.
The political party, the people who run the party, is often elected at the precinct and county level. No idea how European parties work, but I suspect something similar (the UK Conservatives are similar).
Americans may realize that they're a party member and they've never once voted for a party officeholder, and don't even know they can or should be. Whatever percent it is to take over a party, we actually don't know because there is rarely a public vote. They are able to because the leftwing propaganda (NPR etc) have made their consumers dumb as hell. It's a twisted self-perpetuating system with which we have little visibility much less participation.
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
When legal and predictable processes are undermined no one can rely on the government being a good actor. A good reputation takes generations to establish and seconds to destroy. No one will trust the government now.
> When legal and predictable processes are undermined ... Being legally undermined is hardly a bad thing. We voted for unified Republican control of both branches of the legislator and the POTUS. You might not like the outcomes, but there's nothing illegal about what the executive branch is doing, how it's doig it, or the legislation that Congress will be passing in the coming months. > ... no one can rely on the gov…
"We" didn't vote for that. 49.8% of voters did, or about 23% of all people living in the US.
> there's nothing illegal about what the executive branch is doing
Why do you believe that? There are a lot of people filing lawsuits saying that there's a ton illegal about how the executive branch is doing things, and quite a few judges agree enough to order Trump to stop doing what he's doing until we can figure out what's going on.
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#527Notwithstanding the other awful aspects of all of this, there’s a certain vibe of, “people who don’t understand how a system works attempting to act like they know how the system works and are too cowardly to admit they are breaking everything.” This just reads like “Character Limit” except replace Twitter with the federal government.
Breaking everything? I'm not aware of any huge changes in state government yet. You know, the governments that run everything.
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#528Earlier quoted context omitted.
Government employee payroll makes up a tiny fraction of the budget. It's actually a horrible place to start.
> It's actually a horrible place to start. That depends on what the options are. The executive branch likely does have authority to fire probationary employees. They likely don't have authority to immediately fire non coronation dry employees or to end programs and departments created congress. This may be the best lever they think they legally have today. If that is the case, and that's an if, they are trying to sti…
They legally have all the branches. They can use Congress to cut programs they don't want
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#529[flagged]
“I need to lose weight, so I cut off my fingertips. Why is everyone saying that’s bad?” If you want to cut the federal deficit, we need to restore tax rates to the level they were at around the turn of the century - rich people were fine back then, nobody gave up because their yacht only had a small helicopter – and reduce spending on the big areas which are the only ones where it’s mathematically possible for cuts t…
Well that's a nice straw man. I think a more apt analogy would be I need to lose weight so I'm giving up the after-dinner mint I have after every meal.
It's a start.
Re: Everyone at NSF overseeing the Platforms for Wireless Experimentation is gone
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
> yes Can you explain why you think this? The financial outlook isn't good, not terrible but still. "No Capacity for New Commitments State Faces Annual Multiyear Deficits of Around $20b" [1] >Indeed. And the Blue States have way more money than most of the Red states. Based on what? Note that GDP doesn't represent available funds to state governments >But many sides can play this game once the can of worms is open Tr…
> "No Capacity for New Commitments State Faces Annual Multiyear Deficits of Around $20b" [1] The budget of California is $320B. This is more than the _entire_ discretionary budget of the US. > "Ric Grenell, a Trump ally serving as his envoy for special missions, said Friday that “there will be conditions” to any federal aid for the state. Yeah, these are public statements. I expect that there's frantic back-room deal…
> Yeah, these are public statements. I expect that there's frantic back-room dealing right now to make sure that the relief funds are not attached to any conditions. Because in the long-term, that will benefit the states that have money.
I hope so but it also seems people keep thinking Republicans/Trump won't step over a line but end up doing it
>The budget of California is $320B. This is more than the _entire_ discretionary budget of the US.
It's 1.7T https://www.cbo.gov/publication/most-recent/graphics