mikemiller18 wrote:That's a very fatalist point of view. The problem is, everyone is paying tax dollars for a service they might not want. This is a representative government, not a socialist one. If NHC asked for donations, I would gladly reach out of my pocket to donate. With the demand of weather forecasting, I highly doubt it would be an outrageous price. Not to mention there are other ways for corporations to make a profit besides subscriptions. Websites are a good example of this.
I know that there is a no politics rule in talkin tropics, but I hope the moderators will indulge me.
I respectfully disagree with this argument. We do have a representative government. To pay for government functions including the provision of vital functions, taxes need to be paid. I may not enjoy the fact that much of my taxes go to defense spending, but I recognize it is a priority of the government. Tax paying is a citizens' burden in order to support the functions of a government. Weather prediction is a vital function in support of citizens' public safety, and public safety is a traditional role for any government (from ancient past to present). It is not a socialist function if the government is providing a service that has been traditionally taken on by the State.
The main arguments for keeping the data public:
1) To keep the agency transparent. As this is a government agency, we need to make sure the agency still works for the welfare of all citizens. As a check, the public data (including data used for prediction, data collection and analysis) are public to make sure that the government agency is doing its job. I am sure the agency needs to make temperature and weather condition predictions (to forecast snow or heat waves), why should this information be withheld from the public? We are supporting the agency with our money. We should make sure it provides the level of service we want, including all data now released to the public.
2) Data which can be used for scientific discovery needs to be preserved. Data that the NWS generates helps universities, labs, and colleges (places of scientific discovery) to advance the body of knowledge. First, it allows places of scientific discovery to replicate the methods used by (NWS) in predicting the weather, and it also allows the universities to use the data (collected and analyzed by NWS) for future experiments. Cutting the data off from the public would hurt these institutions, who would have to contract out to private companies for data that the public agency is collecting anyway. Also, it is hurtful to a public citizen to use the data that he has helped pay for.
Also, the private sector is free to compete with the National Weather Service for the provision of weather services. Seeing a number of threads about AccuWeather swiping the National Weather Service bears out this fact. Private companies can choose to send up their own satellites and develop their own radar systems -- making those systems proprietary. They can develop their own techniques of data collection and analyzing, and keep those methods private. While, it takes time to raise the capital and build up the infrastructure, a private weather company can do this if they wish. I do note that AccuWeather and other weather services seem to have no problem taking public data, and then using it for commercial purposes. If the private company really wants to compete, do it better than the other guys. That is how you gain loyal customers. Not whining about how unfair it is. This situation would be the same as if a Walmart came into town. No matter how "unfair" it is to local competition, the local competition has to compete to survive. Private weather companies do exist (already knowing there is a public competitor) and prosper, I figure that the private companies are well aware of the NWS. Yet, they still compete, (and well if you can give political contributions to politicians -- they must be doing well), and turn a profit.
[Edited: To Correct Grammar]
I could agree more though!
