Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

@dhvv, I'm now retired and living on a rather small draw from my retirement savings. Inasmuch, my income being very low, so will be my income taxes. I'm wondering if the tax credit everyone will be entitled to would be large enough to keep my insurance premiums as low as they are now under Obamacare? Somehow, I suspect not. Congress and Trump need to tackle other factors in our healthcare system for everyone to enjoy affordable costs; like Tort Reform, eliminating state barriers to purchasing medical coverage, forcing Big Pharma to lower drug prices and offer generic formulations.

This article shows how much more the US spends than other OECD countries on healthcare and how performance compares : http://www.cnbc.com/2014/06/15/us-health-system-tops-in-spending-dead-last-in-performance.html

"The U.S. is the only advanced country without universal health coverage ".... ya, well, that's not likely to change any time soon. Universal medicare with strong collective bargaining requirements would have the potential to reduce costs in the system overall (we currently spend >%25 on paperwork alone), but I an quite sure that is not the direction the Republican's plan is heading. Paul Ryan's plan (one of the few Republican's who actually has a plan) is to privatize medicare and replace the whole system (medicare and ACA) with a "tax credit" for every American that must be spent on health care costs. The distinction between a mandate that everyone must get coverage (bad=> bad=> bad) and a tax that takes your money and returns it to you with the requirement that you spend it on health care (apparently good=> good=> good) might be lost on some;-). http://paulryan.house.gov/healthcare/

@brmk, happy to talk science and engineering with you on the causes of climate change. Do you have any actual references to support your theory that GHG emissions have no significant role in the observed warming? Or is it just more New World Order conspiracy theories to offer? If you work or work for Chevron I would expect you to be able to back up your opinion with some real science.

The GOP now has a chance to repeal and the ACA and replace it with something 'terrific' as Trump would say. The U.S. is the only advanced country without universal health coverage (https://truecostblog.com/2009/08/09/countries-with-universal-healthcare-by-date/) and we spend far more per capita with poorer health outcomes than other countries. The role of government in price regulation for prescription drugs and physician charges leads to cost control, but GOP proposals will very likely have less government regulation. Objective analysis of healthcare reform on budget deficits should be carefully considered before choosing the reforms. If it's anything like we have seen in the past, insurance and pharmaceutical company lobbyists will be helping to craft legislation to limit ways in which their profits can be controlled.

-dybz , If they totally repeal the ACA and go completely back to what we had before, I would be 100% satisfied and have no problem whatsoever. My spouse also has a pre-existing cond. My state has a law on the books that they cannot refuse coverage for pre-existing cond. That does not apply to company based employee insurance anyway, as I'm sure you know. I've never heard of a person with pre-existing being denying employer insurance. I'm sure that without the ACA, some people's rates will go up, and some will go down. Nothing is free. But of course the people getting a sweet deal mooching on the backs of the other hard-working premium payers and tax payers will always scream the loudest, saying that it was the greatest thing in the world. Nothing is free, ever was and ever will be and nothing in health care is cheap. All they can do is shift the payments around to others, and they did it in an unscrupulous manner. I'll be perfectly happy to see it go.

Despite all the Trump fan boys here, the new admin does not look too bright to me on a number of fronts. I hear a lot of shallow "believe me it will be great"s, and few specifics on anything of importance. For me COBRA ended a year ago, so signed up under ObamaCare. At my income level I get no subsidies, but glad to have options that are somewhat reasonable given my wife has "preexisting conditions". If they repeal with no replacement, many Ins. companies may exit the health exchanges all together to avoid the resulting profit uncertainties and leave all those who need insurance while unemployed (or self employed) up the creek at any price. That will not be great again.

Which head, csvd? Your big one or the small one?

I have a turtle head.

Did I tell you I have gas?

Chevron is infested with emotional, feel good liberals. It is an integral part of the company culture that JW put in place. This probably explains the many project fiascos that have happened under his watch. The stock market rally is referred to as the Trump rally for a reason. It never would have happened if Hillary had been elected. Donald Trump may well be the reason why many of you will not lose your jobs thanks to his support of the energy industry. Rock on!

@btds "honest and transparent administration" is what Obama promised, not Trump, and we got the polar opposite of that. It wouldn't have been NEAR as bad If he wouldn't have promised the EXACT opposite of what he delivered. It started in part with the closed-door No-republicans present discussions and engineering of the ACA, that needed to be passed before it was read or analyzed.

Politicians make bold, preposterous half-truth promises. I don't believe Trump is much different, although he is not a career politician. Yet he did not make any such false promise as Obama did about having an "honest and transparent administration" which is one less promise he has to keep, unlike your president, a liar and the one of the most divisive persons in the US in this generation.

I disagree that the left-wing media will go away fast and I agree with the Liberals on that. I have nothing against liberals and have many friends and family who are. The media will always slant left-wing and support the Democrat party and the likes of Hillary Clinton, whom they supported and tried their best to get in office. Not only did Hillary spend 3 times as much money campaigning as Trump, she had the majority of all media outlets on her side as her fan-club, cheerleaders up until the very last moment and them promoting and highlighting primarily the stories which shed a positive light on Hillary(as dim as it is) and a negative light on Trump. Hollywood, the entertainment business and most Journalists( not all) and members of the media tend to be liberal. That's a fact. What becomes quite ironic is when their actions violate, abuse and corrupt the very freedom of speech that they claim to be champions of. However, much of that is coordinated and orchestrated by others, including agenda-based sources and should not be pinned on the reporters themselves in all cases.

Yeah boy, I can't wait til the honest and transparent Trump administration comes to power. They'll drain the swamp faster than you can emoluments clause of the Constitution. Y'all want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn too? I think the Don is selling one.

"left-wing propaganda will fade away at last"....yup. Replaced by new evidence of massive fraud by the Trump organization, convolution with the Russians. and the glow of radioactivity rising from the west coast following the barrage of mindless tweeter exchanges that goaded the unstable Kim Jong-un into action. That will be great! (again?)

Once Trump takes office on January 20, much of this left-wing propaganda will fade away at last. The Climate Change hoax, Russian hacking conspiracy, and so many other New World Order agenda items will move to the background. A new dawn of American exceptionalism and greatness is about to unfold. Embrace it and take full advantage of its bountifulness.

@L370Drz-bxmn , Wow, another loser Hillary supporter who cannot accept the results of the election. Here's some more for you:

-You can keep your doctor

-Benghazi was caused by a video, and that conveniently timed US-based deception and complete charade had NOTHING to do with the Obama re-election campaign

-The cost of Health insurance/care will drop by an average of $2500 per family

• Hillary never lied, or committed any crimes in her handling or E-mails or classified information and is exceptionally experienced, morally sound, ethical, and qualified for the office of president!!

#ROTFLMAO@idiotliberals!

I got your greenhouse gas for you.

@L370Drz-bldj, There are thousands of sources, including many left-wing, partisan, agenda-driven and government related, that will definitely reinforce someone's partisan point or view. Many contradict each other. There are just as many presenting opposing points of view. The GHG argument has been brought up time and time again and is not pertinent, has already been explained. It has nothing to do with mankind being a direct cause of climate change. Try again. Try not to look simply for sources which only reinforce your own already carved-in-stone opinions which you are determined not to alter. For if you do, that is all you will find. The truth it does not make. If you are not a scientist or engineer yourself, I apologize, and please continue to believe whatever you want or the media and left-wing sites want/leads you, it's unlikely that you will ever become educated or have an open mind.

@bxwr, how do you know the root cause was someone used the password "PASSWORD"? Who did the hacking if it wasn't the Russians, as was the concluion of the national intelligence report? The declassified report 'Background to “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections”: The Analytic Process and Cyber Incident Attribution' is here: https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

Key Judgments (from the report):

"We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US

presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process,

denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess

Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We

have high confidence in these judgments.

 We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s

election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her

unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence

in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

 Moscow’s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia’s understanding of the

electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton

was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining

her future presidency.

 Further information has come to light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior

since early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of Russian motivations and

goals."

One of the so-called "Hacked" E-mail accounts in the DNC was compromised because someone was using the word "PASSWORD" as their password. Yet the DNC blames The Russians, Assange, Trump, etc. and everyone else that their security was "compromised" in an illicit attempt to subvert the election process, which wasn't actually affected, according to recent CIA reports. You really can't make this level of comedy up if you tried!!! LMAO!!!

@bidj, the intelligence report delivered to Obama and Trump was created by OBAMA OPERATIVES. Who are you going to believe? If I were Trump, I wouldn't fall for this additional bit of Obama's dirty tricks.

@bjgw, on global warming, there are many thousands of references we could provide to show that GHG emissions drive the warming measured over the past 100 years or so. Here is a NASA reference that describes it nicely: http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/GlobalWarming/page4.php

Where are your references to support the assertion that man's role is insignificant? There are many, many organizations that fund climate science research. Are they all demanding that recipients of their funding demonstrate there is global warming so they can keep giving them money? That makes no sense. They fund them because they've identified risks associated with GHG emissions and we need to understand those risks and mitigate emissions and adapt to changing climates.

On Russian influence on the election, did you read about the intelligence report delivered to Obama and Trump? The U.S. intelligence agencies conclude that Russia used a combination of aggressive hacking, propaganda and “fake news” to disrupt the 2016 U.S. presidential race. The Washington Post reports that "The campaign was ordered by Putin himself and initially sought primarily to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, “denigrate Secretary Clinton” and harm her electoral prospects. But as the campaign proceeded, Russia “developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump” and repeatedly sought to elevate him by “discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.” (see https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/intelligence-chiefs-expected-in-new-york-to-brief-trump-on-russian-hacking/2017/01/06/5f591416-d41a-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?tid=sm_Fb&utm_term=.618b0dbe4624)

The one thing we agree on is that Trump is an imbecile, so at least there is some common ground.

@L370Drz-afsw , Sweet, pick a couple of liberal fantasies. Man-made global warming, a hypothesis, not a theory.

1 -The planet Earth has warmed and cooled far more greatly in geologic time than man has ever and ever will experience. Not to deny the remote possibility of a minor influence by mankind, but let's not get carried away because we're idiot liberals without a cause and a self-destructive hate for any industry including the ones which create all the toys which liberals are addicted to. When you get a consensus of actual scientists not funded by the very client who's agenda they need to support to continue said funding please publish that and let us know.

2 - "Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election"

"NO ELECTIONS" were interfered with. Try Campaign and that's still a stretch. No machines were tampered with. no vote count affected. There Isn't even any evidence that anyone's vote was swayed by the revealing of truths about candidates and their associates, but I certainly hope that they were! Wouldn't you want voters to know the truth? However, the blatant lies and cover-ups (video, Benghazi)orchestrated by Obama, Hillary, Rice, and associates during the 2012 campaign tampering resulting in his re-election was far worse and performed by the lying, deceitful Obama administration and was a travesty to Democracy and the democratic process. This was performed by the very party which calls itself Democrat. No surprise there, as their trademark strategy is lying to get votes, and making false promises to get votes, and using tax-payers dollars to get votes by promising them to those who do not contribute. That's a fairly easy, albeit shameful strategy, basically picking low-hanging fruit. It's amazing, with all of the fraud, lying, deception, wealth redistribution, and buying votes that the democrats regularly participate in that they managed to lose ANY election, much less to an imbecile like Trump. You guys seriously need a pat on the back for that. Congratulations! And this very democrat party has the audacity to accuse someone ELSE of trying to influence a campaign? Seriously? That's laughable!

I still wonder if Bernie Sanders would have beaten Trump. He has integrity and a message that resonated with a lot of Democrats.

More off topic whining from folks who just can't let the election results go. I say let's wait and see how it goes once the dude gets in office. He hasn't even taken offfice yet. Thus all this bs is pure speculation on what might occur. Let it happen. Nothing you can do now anyway. Next time get out the vote. PS. Also get a decent candidate. Not that Trump was much but at least he was an outsider who would shake things up.

@auad, what topics would you suggest discussing? The science behind anthopogenic global warming and climate change? Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election? We're open to your ideas.

@auad, I guess we should all seek to be as positive and constructive as your post, huh? There has been plenty of hatred and vitriol targeted at liberals on this thread, though many of the comments were deleted by the moderator. I don't have anything against conservatives, and I believe in a number of conservative principles. However, the Trump supporters have taken things to a new level, and it's very difficult to have a conversation because there is not much shared reality. Conspiracy theories abound and the use of evidence-based logic is uncommon for many of his supporters. A column from today's New York Times gets at some of the reasons that Trump has support in rural America. Perhaps others will find it interesting as we think about how to communicate across the political spectrum: http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/opinion/why-rural-america-voted-for-trump.html?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

@81vb, that's a good response. It's annoying to see childish responses to thoughtful comments on a number of important issues.

Chevron's Progressive Dems have their granny panties in a twist now.

The liberals are making comments on this thread to the effect of - It's OK for left wing presidents to make partisan appointments to positions, Particularly SCOTUS, but not for republicans!!!!!! ROTFLMAO!! You can't make this stuff up!!! You guys all have repeatedly ignored the one truthful comment by your once highly held, self-appointed "Stalinesque" Messiah; "Elections Have Consequences"!

Blonde women are easy targets for the next wave of layoffs? No wonder the price of brunette hair color went up in price at Walmart.

No worries for many of the progressives, in reality, only the easy targets will be let go. Middle-age white males and blonde women.

@7wma, there is strength in the correct kind of diversity. Diversity in s-x and ethnicity alone is no way a strength. Quite the opposite. Unforfunately, Chevron focuses on these affirmation action quotas and hangs out the shingle as being embracing diversity. Pure BS and bad for morale of the employees in general and the stockholder.

@7nku, there is strength in diversity.

Chevron is full of Progressive Democrats. They survived the ROMs. With the Republican surge, they will be purged

or partainship in your book.

@7nae, apparently you don't even understand the issue of partisanship that is being discussed. It's already been demonstrated by Mitch McConnell and colleagues, who refuse to hold a hearing for a nominee who had broad support from both parties in the past. It's very unlikely that Trump will appoint a moderate to the Supreme Court, since he worked with the Heritage Foundation to come up with his list of candidates. Based on his cabinet picks so far, it's likely to be a far-right pick.

Partisanship doesn't only occur in Congress. Look at the Suprrme Court too. They try to hide their partisan leanings but is often evident in their decisions and declensions. That's why there is no fair place in politics. All 3 branches of US government are corrupt. It's all a game.

@6arn, Obama had already nominated 2 justices to the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. These two are well known left of center justices. While Merrick Garland is a very experienced judge, his views tend to lean left as well. I think it was a raw deal for Congress to hold up the nomination process of a ninth justice after Antonin Scalia's death, but since Obama had already gotten two liberal justices through, and already being an election year, Congress decided to withhold a third somewhat liberal judge from consideration. Call it partisan, but to a large degree, it's politics as usual. I think Trump's list of 12 judges are good choices. We'll see what happens.