Posted on 02/26/2015 7:11:18 AM PST by SeekAndFind
When you think of the downstream effects of the Obama administration’s EPA regulations, the first states which come to mind tend to be in coal country and what remains of the rust belt and manufacturing centers. That’s all true enough, but it seems that when the government puts its thumb on the scale, the ripples can be felt in ever widening circles. This includes what might be one of the last states you’d think of… Vermont.
Vermont will lose 3.4 percent of its manufacturing jobs by 2023 due to Obama administration climate regulations, according to a report on the impact of EPA rules on labor.
In recent years, the EPA has issued new rules for power plants and vehicles in an attempt to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
While many studies examine how the rules will affect global emissions, a study published last week by The Heritage Foundation calculates how many manufacturing jobs states will lose due to environmental regulations.
According to the report, the U.S. will surrender 586,000 manufacturing jobs by 2023 due to increased regulatory cost burdens on businesses. Of those job losses, an estimated 1,378 will come from Vermont.
The Mountain State isn’t the only one in this rather light manufacturing area feeling the squeeze. The report estimates that tiny Rhode Island will lose 3.16% of their manufacturing jobs and New Hampshire will bleed out a shocking 6.39%. But Vermont still seems like the strangest sister in this particular group. How do they explain this?
Vermont’s latest jobs report indicates that, after suffering several years of losses, the state is down to only 337,300 workers. The new regulations will put the pinch on employers by driving up costs across multiple sectors, leading to smaller employers having to let some folks go. It’s not that massive of a number by itself in national terms, but when you have that few jobs to begin with any significant bite is more painful.
This is just a handy set of numbers to keep in your pocket until 2016. Vermont and Connecticut may be mostly lost causes, but the good people of New Hampshire may want to recall that six percent job loss figure (Thanks, EPA!) when they next head to the polls.
Why aren’t tariffs imposed on countries that don’t adhere to the same regulations the US companies are?
Why is it allowed to hamstring US companies to foreign competition, but then not hold foreign companies to the same stringent standards US companies are?
Good. As solid supporters of Progressives and Socialists they deserve it.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.
H. L. Mencken
And how many of those work for the governments: City, County, State and Education system or other taxing authority? Subtract those jobs since they don't contribute to the treasuries of the governments................
Because that wouldn't help destroy fundamentally transform America.
We have a congress that is supposed to legislate, yet it allows agencies to effectively make laws. Just sayin....
Embrace the suck, Vermont. You gave us Howard Dean and Leaky Leahy.
In Hitler's Germany, one of the milestones in his consolidation of power was the infamous "Enabling Act" which said that whatever the Chancellor said was law was the law.
We're less focused and more subtle, but we've fallen into much the same situation through continued Congressional delegation of regulatory power to Executive controlled agencies, and through the tremendous growth in the size of the regulatory apparatus.
Don’t forget the biggest communist of them all; Bernie Sanders.
LOL...the 'good' people left soviet Red Hampshire quite awhile ago; to be replaced by New Yorkers and Massh*les...natch; they re-elected most of their beloved democrats in 2014...Hassan, Kuster, Shaheen...spit.
337,300 workers? How many are fast food? Government? Hey Vermont, Wake up! Liberalism has failed you.
And, by the way, don’t ask me to pick up the bill for you to sit on your behind.
RE: And, by the way, don’t ask me to pick up the bill for you to sit on your behind.
Unfortunately, they don’t have to ask [if Washington can help it].
Happy to hear it.
They like the commie life, then they can all work on communal farms for their daily bread.
“Why is it allowed to hamstring US companies to foreign competition, but then not hold foreign companies to the same stringent standards US companies are?”
Since 1990 the globalists in academia, Congress, and business have perverted the concept of free trade.
The founding fathers view of free trade had nothing to do with tariffs. Under British rule colonial merchants chafed at British government restrictions as to what nations they could trade with as well as crown grants of exclusivity for various products to individual politically favored companies. Free trade to our founders meant the freedom to trade with any nation, company or individual without government restriction.
For the first 130 years of the nation’s history high tariffs funded the operation of the federal government (there was no income tax) and prevented foreign nations from interfering with the development of industry inside the United States. During that period, US merchants freely traded around the world (except during the Civil War when the US government blockaded southern ports) while the US developed the largest manufacturing economy on the planet and the world’s highest standard of living. High tariffs did not prevent Yankee merchants from developing a global trading network.
The founders understood that tariffs represent a fee to foreign enterprises for access to a market. Why should a Chinese government subsidized factory have free access to the US market when a domestic US company pays a federal tax rate of 30%+ and state taxes for the privilege of selling its products to US citizens? The founding fathers would consider our current definition of “free trade” as being “no tariffs” laughable.
The elimination of tariffs benefits big banks, multinational corporations, and third world countries at the expense of the middle class in developed nations. If our founding fathers looked at the USA of today, and the undeclared economic war we are losing to China, they would immediately levy a stiff tariff on imported goods, reversing the failed 25 year experiment with no tariff free trade.
For an answer to your specific question, talk to the politicians owned by the “too big to fail” Wall Street banks and multinational corporations.
You need to write a book.
Unfortunately, they don’t have to ask [if Washington can help it].
So true. We’ve got folks in Washington that I believe are intentionally trying to break our system.
They know that one way to make us a socialist (softer name for communist) nation is by means of economic collapse.
It enriches importers for a short time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.