2012 Manufacturing Employment
Total Manufacturing 223,300
Transportation Equipment 49,400
Motor Vehicle Parts 29,000
Machinery/Appliances 27,700
Food 26,400
Fabricated Metals 19,300
Paper (and printing) 19,200
Petro/Coal 15,600
Primary Metals 11,500
Motor Vehicles 14,400
Wood Products 9,300
Computer/Electronic Products 6,100
Chemical NA
Source: KY Department for Employment Services (click here)
Total Manufacturing 223,300
Transportation Equipment 49,400
Motor Vehicle Parts 29,000
Machinery/Appliances 27,700
Food 26,400
Fabricated Metals 19,300
Paper (and printing) 19,200
Petro/Coal 15,600
Primary Metals 11,500
Motor Vehicles 14,400
Wood Products 9,300
Computer/Electronic Products 6,100
Chemical NA
Source: KY Department for Employment Services (click here)
There is not one coal company among the top ten in Kentucky industried. There are 4,380,000 people in Kentucky. There isn't that much of the state impacted by the coal industry when it comes to employment. Seems like much to do about nothing.
Top 10 Manufacturers/ Service & Technology
Companies by Employment
United Parcel Service, Inc. 12,517
Toyota Motor Corporation 12,028
Humana, Inc. 11,836
Ford Motor Co. 8,491
Amazon.com 6,529
General Electric Co. 6,053
FMR LLC 3,900
Berkshire Hathaway 3,392
Xerox Corporation 3,374
J&F Participações S/A 2,700
Source: Kentucky Cabinet for Economic Development, Office
of Research and Public Affairs
www.ThinkKentucky.com/kyedc/pdfs/KYTop25Firms.pdf
Mining in Kentucky is among the best paying with earnings on average per week of $1,342. Unions. Unions in Kentucky. Interesting, right? McConnell detests unions but the most unionized industry in the state is important enough to attempt a political scandal. Why?
Kentucky coal is about 8 percent of the nation's source of coal according to the US Energy Department. It can't possibly carry that much brevity to the elections in Kentucky, can it? In comparison, Wyoming produces the most coal of US production at 39%. Not West Virginia, but, Wyoming.
Why is coal such a huge political issue in Kentucky?
Because Mitch McConnell is the third top recipient of coal's political contributions, that's why. Cronyism.
Who are the first two?
Interestingly, Ohio has only two coal mines in Century and Pohatan No. 6. Both are owned by Murray Energy and are a minor part of the coal picture in the USA, yet the House Speaker received the largest contribution from the coal industry. See, that. It pays to be Speaker of the House who directs the members of the US House and it's legislation. More interesting, isn't it? The coal industry must be very happy with Boehner and McConnell.
I thought this was interesting related to coal mining jobs in Kentucky.
The amount of coal mined in eastern Kentucky (click here) has fluctuated since the late 1970s, dropping briefly in the early 1980s, rising sharply and remaining high through the late 1980s and mid 1990s, then declining somewhat in the late 1990s. Despite these fluctuations, coal production in 2004 was only slightly lower than it was in 1979. By contrast, mining employment in eastern Kentucky declined dramatically over the same period. This is primarily the result of technological innovations that enabled more coal to be mined with fewer workers (see Figure 1).
I'll be darn. The fall in coal employment has absolutely nothing to do with coal production or federal prohibitions (which doesn't exist), but, it is because the coal industry used more and more and more technology and less and less and less persons to mine coal. Now, if the coal industry disappeared off the map would it actually impact the USA or Kentucky employment rate? Absolutely not. Now, in Kentucky there would be at the very most 15,600 human beings in need of training and refocus for employment. 15 thousand.
So, if the coal industry is dumping all this money into the political coffers of McConnell when coal employment is being replaced by technology what is all the fuss about ? saving ? the coal industry in Kentucky? It is a lot of nonsense and LIES. In my opinion, there is no coal crisis in Kentucky and the employment picture in the best paying job in the state is bleak simply because the coal industry doesn't want human beings, they want machines so they don't have to pay the American Middle Class.
How much of an election issue is this? Huge. Only it isn't about preserving coal employment, it is however, about the draconian manner in which the coal industry has gutted employment in opting for a mechanized industry. I mean if one wants to speak to the issue and employment there is only one real focus, but, it doesn't take expensive ads to do it.
If I were running for office in Kentucky I would eagerly point to the reason for Mr. McConnell's focus on the industry in receiving the third highest political contribution from the industry and how he never bothered to save one coal mining job since his first election to the US Senate in 1985. In fact, it could be said Senator McConnell looked the other way as Kentucky coal mining jobs were eagerly replaced by mechanization. Mitch McConnell did NOTHING to save Kentucky coal mining employment all this time in office. Not one bill, until June 4, 2014, did he propose to preserve the best paying job in Kentucky. A far cry from high on the agenda of a 29 year run in office. The legislation McConnell sought on June 4, 2014 can easily be coined, "Closing the barn door far after the horse left."
McConnell's irate attitude about coal mining is to protect the wealth to the wealthy, not about employment.
See that. The best of truth is the most powerful truth. What were the positions since 1985 by McConnell when it comes to coal mining unions?
Sierra Club survey on the new measure to end CO2 pollution. (click here)
With Millennials, the older they are the more they are independent in their judgement of the energy industry in comparison of those still dependent on parents and the fewer and fewer view the EPA unfavorably. Only 20 percent of Millennials hold an unfavorable rating of the EPA from age 26 upward. I think it is the 'child's future' connection that increases their awareness of the energy legacy they have been dealt and will leave to their children.
Mining in Kentucky is among the best paying with earnings on average per week of $1,342. Unions. Unions in Kentucky. Interesting, right? McConnell detests unions but the most unionized industry in the state is important enough to attempt a political scandal. Why?
Kentucky coal is about 8 percent of the nation's source of coal according to the US Energy Department. It can't possibly carry that much brevity to the elections in Kentucky, can it? In comparison, Wyoming produces the most coal of US production at 39%. Not West Virginia, but, Wyoming.
Why is coal such a huge political issue in Kentucky?
| McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) | Senate |  $132,800 |
Who are the first two?
| Boehner, John (R-OH) | House | $251,108 |
| Capito, Shelley Moore (R-WV) | House | $188,975 |
I thought this was interesting related to coal mining jobs in Kentucky.
The amount of coal mined in eastern Kentucky (click here) has fluctuated since the late 1970s, dropping briefly in the early 1980s, rising sharply and remaining high through the late 1980s and mid 1990s, then declining somewhat in the late 1990s. Despite these fluctuations, coal production in 2004 was only slightly lower than it was in 1979. By contrast, mining employment in eastern Kentucky declined dramatically over the same period. This is primarily the result of technological innovations that enabled more coal to be mined with fewer workers (see Figure 1).
I'll be darn. The fall in coal employment has absolutely nothing to do with coal production or federal prohibitions (which doesn't exist), but, it is because the coal industry used more and more and more technology and less and less and less persons to mine coal. Now, if the coal industry disappeared off the map would it actually impact the USA or Kentucky employment rate? Absolutely not. Now, in Kentucky there would be at the very most 15,600 human beings in need of training and refocus for employment. 15 thousand. So, if the coal industry is dumping all this money into the political coffers of McConnell when coal employment is being replaced by technology what is all the fuss about ? saving ? the coal industry in Kentucky? It is a lot of nonsense and LIES. In my opinion, there is no coal crisis in Kentucky and the employment picture in the best paying job in the state is bleak simply because the coal industry doesn't want human beings, they want machines so they don't have to pay the American Middle Class.
How much of an election issue is this? Huge. Only it isn't about preserving coal employment, it is however, about the draconian manner in which the coal industry has gutted employment in opting for a mechanized industry. I mean if one wants to speak to the issue and employment there is only one real focus, but, it doesn't take expensive ads to do it.
If I were running for office in Kentucky I would eagerly point to the reason for Mr. McConnell's focus on the industry in receiving the third highest political contribution from the industry and how he never bothered to save one coal mining job since his first election to the US Senate in 1985. In fact, it could be said Senator McConnell looked the other way as Kentucky coal mining jobs were eagerly replaced by mechanization. Mitch McConnell did NOTHING to save Kentucky coal mining employment all this time in office. Not one bill, until June 4, 2014, did he propose to preserve the best paying job in Kentucky. A far cry from high on the agenda of a 29 year run in office. The legislation McConnell sought on June 4, 2014 can easily be coined, "Closing the barn door far after the horse left."
McConnell's irate attitude about coal mining is to protect the wealth to the wealthy, not about employment.
See that. The best of truth is the most powerful truth. What were the positions since 1985 by McConnell when it comes to coal mining unions?
With Millennials, the older they are the more they are independent in their judgement of the energy industry in comparison of those still dependent on parents and the fewer and fewer view the EPA unfavorably. Only 20 percent of Millennials hold an unfavorable rating of the EPA from age 26 upward. I think it is the 'child's future' connection that increases their awareness of the energy legacy they have been dealt and will leave to their children.
