16 replies to this topic

[VAGATOR]

RICHMOND -- A government report shows the state's economy continued to grow at a healthy pace in the fourth quarter of 2004 but warns that looming cuts in federal spending present potential risks to Hampton Roads.

Virginia's employment growth of 2.8 percent was the ninth fastest in the nation during the quarter, according to the report by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The job market has been fueled by defense spending, particularly in the northern and eastern parts of the state, and has contributed to soaring home prices.

Pending military cutbacks, including the possibility that the Navy base in Norfolk could lose an aircraft carrier, pose "significant risks" to the area's economic growth. In addition, NASA recently announced plans to eliminate as many as 1,000 jobs at its Langley Research Center in Hampton.

"You've got a mixture of things happening in (Hampton Roads)," said Jack Phelps, an FDIC regional manager.

http://www.dailypres...adlines-topnews

[vdogg]

VAGATOR, on Apr 6 2005, 06:43 PM, said:

RICHMOND -- A government report shows the state's economy continued to grow at a healthy pace in the fourth quarter of 2004 but warns that looming cuts in federal spending present potential risks to Hampton Roads.

Virginia's employment growth of 2.8 percent was the ninth fastest in the nation during the quarter, according to the report by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The job market has been fueled by defense spending, particularly in the northern and eastern parts of the state, and has contributed to soaring home prices.

Pending military cutbacks, including the possibility that the Navy base in Norfolk could lose an aircraft carrier, pose "significant risks" to the area's economic growth. In addition, NASA recently announced plans to eliminate as many as 1,000 jobs at its Langley Research Center in Hampton.

"You've got a mixture of things happening in (Hampton Roads)," said Jack Phelps, an FDIC regional manager.

http://www.dailypres...adlines-topnews

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Man, I sure hope we don't slow down too much.  

[urbanvb]

No way! We cannot afford to slow down too much. Bad, bad.

[wrldcoupe4]

Hopefully, NASA will only layoff a minimal amount of people when the big round of cuts come. It would be even better if no one was laid off, though I'm not sure if that is possible. I really hope Langley can come out better than what is forecast:

Quote

18 will lose jobs at NASA Langley

Richmond Times-Dispatch

Apr 19, 2005

NASA's Langley Research Center will lay off 18 employees at its precision machine shop, officials announced yesterday.

The layoffs, scheduled to take effect July 5, are designed to make operation of the shop more efficient.

Although the government had long operated the shops, the center was required to bid against commercial companies after NASA determined there was no reason the work had to be done by government employees, said Marny Skora, a spokeswoman for the center.

Making the operation more efficient enabled the center to win the bid and to keep some of the government employees at work, she said.

These layoffs are not related to a proposed budget cut at NASA Langley, which officials say could lead to 1,000 workers, about a quarter of the center's work force, losing their jobs.

"This is a different initiative than budget cuts," Skora said, "and this is something that has been in the works a number of years."

RTD article

[urbanfan]

wrldcoupe4, on Apr 19 2005, 01:48 AM, said:

Hopefully, NASA will only layoff a minimal amount of people when the big round of cuts come. It would be even better if no one was laid off, though I'm not sure if that is possible. I really hope Langley can come out better than what is forecast:
RTD article

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Time and time again the media has played loss of military personell up so much and in the end the forecasts were never true.  The media doen't do much reporting when everything is good only when bad comes and then the make it worse than it is.  I don't feel that these rounds of Nasa cuts are going to hurt much.  The jobs being eliminated are not the high tech high paying jobs.  They are the manufacturing and testing jobs that are here.  The government is trying to eliminate excess and work with less.  I don't see why they can't.  alot of what is being done at Nasa as far as modeling can be done with computers now adays.  However is Hampton loses Fort Monroe and 1,000 jobs at Nasa which I don't think is going to happen, we could have some tough times.  I guess we'll find out.  Although I would have to say that the military impact of loosing thousands of sailors at a time during war didn't have the economic impact every one said it would have if we went to war.  I think this area has enough of a steamroll going to sludge through it.

[rusthebuss]

urbanfan, on Apr 19 2005, 08:41 AM, said:

Time and time again the media has played loss of military personell up so much and in the end the forecasts were never true.  The media doen't do much reporting when everything is good only when bad comes and then the make it worse than it is.  I don't feel that these rounds of Nasa cuts are going to hurt much.  The jobs being eliminated are not the high tech high paying jobs.  They are the manufacturing and testing jobs that are here.  The government is trying to eliminate excess and work with less.  I don't see why they can't.  alot of what is being done at Nasa as far as modeling can be done with computers now adays.  However is Hampton loses Fort Monroe and 1,000 jobs at Nasa which I don't think is going to happen, we could have some tough times.  I guess we'll find out.  Although I would have to say that the military impact of loosing thousands of sailors at a time during war didn't have the economic impact every one said it would have if we went to war.  I think this area has enough of a steamroll going to sludge through it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

People always count us out and think that if the military shuts something down ohhh HR is going down the drain. There is sooooo much more here than just the military and its steadily growing beyond the military. In 2002 we had an economy 10 billion stronger than Richmond, and 5 billion stronger than Raleigh, NC. We had the fourth largest economy behind ATL, Miami, and Charlotte. So there is much more than just the military here.

[Glassoul]

rusthebuss, on Apr 19 2005, 09:30 AM, said:

People always count us out and think that if the military shuts something down ohhh HR is going down the drain. There is sooooo much more here than just the military and its steadily growing beyond the military. In 2002 we had an economy 10 billion stronger than Richmond, and 5 billion stronger than Raleigh, NC. We had the fourth largest economy behind ATL, Miami, and Charlotte. So there is much more than just the military here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Might want to check that statement again.

Defense spending accounts for 35% of GDP in Hampton Roads... and after a period of decline in the late eighties and nineties, the region has again become increasingly reliant  In the last 2 years Hampton Roads non-military growth spending is below both the rest of Virginia and the nation. For the record, it constitues 3 out of every 4 dollars of new growth in the region....

Outside of government, the biggest increases in primary impact have come through the tourism and port.

Edited by Glassoul, 19 April 2005 - 09:13 PM.

[wrldcoupe4]

Glassoul, on Apr 19 2005, 11:03 PM, said:

Might want to check that statement again.

Defense spending accounts for 35% of GDP in Hampton Roads... and after a period of decline in the late eighties and nineties, the region has again become increaingly reliant on defense spending sine 2000. Hampton Roads non-military growth spending is below both the rest of Virginia and the nation. For the record, it constitues 3 out of every 4 dollars of new growth in the region....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How large is the hampton roads economy without defense spending?

[Glassoul]

wrldcoupe4, on Apr 19 2005, 11:12 PM, said:

How large is the hampton roads economy without defense spending?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Total HR regional domestic product, including defense, is $60 billion dollars. I don't have the number is front of me for direct defense spending. The figure I used in the previous post  is assumed to be direct spending on all defense dept. employees, contractors, awarded military contracts, etc. It does not include things like a sailor going out to a restaurant, or if Lockheed Martin adds new jobs to the region (which is the result of increased defence spending).

[urbanvb]

I still think 35% is a whopping number - if you think about it it is not that far from 50%.

[Glassoul]

guynvb, on Apr 19 2005, 11:27 PM, said:

I still think 35% is a whopping number - if you think about it it is not that far from 50%.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If you included all of the secondary and other markets that military spending affects, with the caveat of recognizing the enourmous complexity of such a question and not having access nor the time to analysis the relavent data, then I'd say you're looking at probably 55%-60% of the well being of HR being down to the defence department.

Like I stated up top, there has been growth in the tourism and port sectors, but that growth is miniscule compared to what the increases in defense spending that Bush has sent to HR.

Edited by Glassoul, 19 April 2005 - 09:33 PM.

[wrldcoupe4]

well rephrased, what is the GDP of Hampton Roads...I'm curious to know what it is with/without defense spending. Speaking of this I saw an article on Sen. Warner trying to save the carrier USS Kennedy; here's part of it:

WASHINGTON -- Sen. John W. Warner, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, asked the Senate yesterday to reverse, for now, Navy plans to mothball the USS John F. Kennedy aircraft carrier.


The step by Warner, R-Va. and a highly influential member of Congress on defense matters, set the stage for debate as early as this week as the Senate considers an $81 billion supplemental spending bill for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Kennedy is conventionally powered and based in Mayport, Fla. Virginia lawmakers have fretted about the loss of millions of dollars for the Hampton Roads ship-repair industry if the Kennedy is mothballed this summer and not overhauled, as previously planned.

In addition, the lawmakers are concerned about the possible domino effect if the Kennedy is mothballed, because the Navy might later shift a Norfolk-based, nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to Florida to avoid having too many carriers based in Virginia.

Warner submitted an amendment to pursue the Kennedy overhaul and effectively postpone for months, or perhaps longer, any decision on reducing the fleet of active carriers from the current 12. Co-sponsors included Sens. George Allen, R-Va.; Bill Nelson, D-Fla.; and Mel Martinez, R-Fla.

"I believe that any plan to mothball this vessel is shortsighted, especially during this time of war and China's rapid naval buildup," Allen said.

RTD article

[Glassoul]

wrldcoupe4, on Apr 19 2005, 11:32 PM, said:

well rephrased, what is the GDP of Hampton Roads...I'm curious to know what it is with/without defense spending. Speaking of this I saw an article on Sen. Warner trying to save the carrier USS Kennedy; here's part of it:

HR GDP is $60 billion as of 2004. Military accounts directly for 35% of that. Indirectly, a helluva lot more.

Keeping the JFK in HR is more about politics than it is about having a major impact on the economy, since it is a highly publicized deal. Politics trumpeting over good economic sense is usually par for the course no matter what side or where you are in the world.

My personal guess is that it will end up staying for a few more years. Warner has a lot of clout on capital hill, especially being the chair of the defense spending.  As far as being worried about China, again that is politics. I wouldn't be too worried about China, because any war with them isn't ultimately going to be decided by naval or aircraft warfare...

Edited by Glassoul, 19 April 2005 - 09:43 PM.

[wrldcoupe4]

Glassoul, on Apr 19 2005, 11:36 PM, said:

HR GDP is $60 billion as of 2004. Military accounts directly for 35% of that. Indirectly, a helluva lot more.

Keeping the JFK in HR is more about politics than it is about having a major impact on the economy, since it is a highly publicized deal. Politics trumpeting over good economic sense is usually par for the course no matter what side or where you are in the world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, $21 billion is pretty big direct impact on the HR and Virginia economy. I really hope there is minimum impact there and the rest of VA during the base closures....I think the article was more about JFK getting refurbished in HR than it being here. It would be a big blow to NN Shipbuilding I think.

[rusthebuss]

wrldcoupe4, on Apr 20 2005, 12:00 AM, said:

Wow, $21 billion is pretty big direct impact on the HR and Virginia economy. I really hope there is minimum impact there and the rest of VA during the base closures....I think the article was more about JFK getting refurbished in HR than it being here. It would be a big blow to NN Shipbuilding I think.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The part of being here is that it was scheduled for its overhaul in NNews, not being stationed here. It is stationed in Mayport. Mayport was going to use the 300 million to make the base nuclear capable. It can't handle a nuclear ship as of right now. And the overhauln of the Kennedy is not necessarily political but its a money thing right now. Northrup and Grumman had that contract and was depending on that overhaul to last them for a few years. It would be a blow to the shipyard and thats what its about and when the decommission the kennedy they would take a carrier group from Norfolk

[wrldcoupe4]

That's what I said.

[rusthebuss]

I hope one day the cities will decide to do the NYC approach to having multiple cities and making it technically speaking one. We could definitely get more federal money and attract some good businesses to the area and get the transportation issues resolved as well. Maybe one day we could hold a meeting together and get all the mayors together and discuss this issue and try to bring them together and show the benefits and that the mayors would not lose their power and how it would be a positive thing for this area as a WHOLE. It sounds stupid but i had a dream last night about this and it  worked so well with that system. I  know its crazy sounding.

Edited by rusthebuss, 20 April 2005 - 08:56 AM.