Old School Wrote:I find it very odd that you would take stats from the Government over other especially when in the past you said "I do not, and will never believe the majority of the information fiven from the Government" So what changed your mind? lol
Your little history lesson was so insightful, that I can hardly wait for your lesson on what caused the 66% decrease in mining jobs between 1943 to 1963. :graduate:
In your last post, you said, "make it seem that I blame all the job losses on MTR, and I don't". or at least that's what I took it to say. Check out some of your statements.
In post 13 you said that "the practice of MTR has taken away more jobs from mines than any environmentalist will do".
In post 17 you said, "coal mining jobs decreased by 57% (whcih was actually 43%) from 177,874 to 101,322, this was due to new and cheaper mining techniques, like MTR".
In post 18 you said, "IMO the recent trend in the decraese in coal mining jobs is due to MTR".
Again in post 18 you said, "since strip mining jobs (MTR) requires very few workers, and most operations hire less than 20 workers, I think that my theory of mining operations being to blame for the fall of jobs in very valid".
During this thread alone you've said on 4 different occasions that MTR was the cause of decreased jobs in the mining industry. Would it be to much trouble to give us a straight answer, in you opinion is MTR to blame or not?
And you wonder why I question some of your statements, you want people to think your knowledgeable about mining and the mining industry. In about every thread on mining you've brought up that you have a history in mining, that you have family and friends that work in the mines, that you have been around mines your whole life, yet you post things like "45% of mining operations employee 3 people, 
or "Contour mining is rarely used". If you had any knowledge about mining at all you would know that it takes more than 3 people to operate a mine, maybe you should ask your friends or family members how many people work with them, I guarantee it would be more than 3. lol IMO I don't have to make you look like a nut case, you seem to be doing a fine job of that yourself.
The economy may be slipping, 1.) but it's due to the coal industry ?, like I said earlier jobs in the mining industry have increased 15% over the past 5 years and coal companies are still begging for more workers. The housing market is mainly to blame for the downturn in the economy, to many people spent more on homes than they could afford and many lending companies gave loans to people who they knew could not afford these homes.
First off why pull out quotes from me that I corrected later on and try to make me look bad. I corrected my incorrect post about the 57% decrease in mining jobs. So I don't think that bringing that up, and re-correcting what I already corrected really proves anything.
Nothing changed my mind on the government, I said I don't believe the
MAJORITY of things they say, not
EVERYTHING, slight difference. Plus, those where the newest stats I could find on the subject. If my facts are wrong why don't you challenge them, or did you even go to the link I provided. If you can find something valid that proves me wrong please show it to me, I would love see them. 45% of mining operations do hire 3 workers or less, also 80% of mining operations hire less than 20 workers, although these stats do include other forms of mining besides coal. I tried to find the number of surface mines in Ky or West Virginia, but I couldn't find anything, If I did I would have posted it. From what I could gather no one really knows, they also don't know exactly how many acres have been mined by MTR, the EPA and the MSHA does a horrible job keeping track of these things, so the stats I gave where the best I could find. ( I guess it would be more accurate to say that no stats on the number of miners hired by MTR sites, or the number of mining permits is really accurate)
And why did you change your question, you asked why jobs decreased from 1923 - 1963, and my opinion was that it was the depression. I dont think my simple answer is as amusing as the question you asked, If you knew the depression happened, why ask the question?
My opinion on why jobs where lost during your new time period (1943 - 1963) was answered in my last post, during world war 2 there was a huge demand for coal to power the "war machine". After world war 2, the demand for coal lightened up, and mechanization started to enter the mines, also oil and natural gas was beginning to be used over coal in many utility and industrial boilers. Also during that time children worked in the mines, the formations of unions, and child labor laws probably had a lot to due with the decline in jobs also.
A simple look at the recent trend
The price of coal stayed pretty stable for around the $20 per ton range for 2 decades starting in the 80's. This caused a lot of the small mines, who weren't really productive to shut down. Coal companies needed CHEAPER ways to produce coal, so MTR became the method of choice, fewer workers, more coal produced equals more profit, it's not really that hard to figure out.
Thats why I believe my opinion on the RECENT decline in coal jobs, not declines in the 40's, is due to mtr (since it seems that you cant get anything out of something you read unless it's says yes or no, YES I BELIEVE THE RECENT DECLINE IN MINING JOBS IS DUE TO MTR, although the decline in mining jobs from that point on is largely due to mechanization.
?
I don't know exactly what you where trying to say in the post I labeled 1, but I think you meant that the slip in the economy is NOT due to mining. I never said that the coal industry is to blame for the downturn in the economy, I just said that I thought some miners may lose their jobs due to the slowdown in the economy.
