U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-15-2011, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Central Illinois -
21,559 posts, read 14,358,004 times
Reputation: 14692

Advertisements

The Chamber Of Commerce, Koch Bros., etc, etc, have spent ginormous amounts of money in attacking the relatively powerless Environmental Protection Agency, and it's no surprise, considering how they destroy the environment and don't want to be responsible for destroying the environment to make all those dolla's......$$$$$$$$

Quote:
The Wall Street Journal editorial page is effectively a lobbying arm of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, so it's no big shock to find it inveighing against EPA's upcoming toxics rule. Nor, this being the WSJ, is it much of a surprise to find the editorial packed with faulty reasoning and errors of fact. (Their evidence of high costs? "The power industry estimates that the true costs of the utility rule will far exceed the EPA estimates." Well then!) If you have the stomach for it, Media Matters plods through about a dozen of the mistakes, debunking as they go.
EPA bashers aren’t protecting ‘jobs,’ they’re protecting polluters | Grist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-15-2011, 01:57 PM
 
32,460 posts, read 26,325,155 times
Reputation: 19088
i dont advocate completely eliminating the EPA, however i DO advocate that we reign them in. as for the article you linked to, what they fail to show is that while individual regulations dont cost much, when you add up the total cost of ALL the regulations put out by the EPA, it gets quite expensive indeed. unnecessary regulation only costs business money to comply with and does NOTHING to improve the environment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:01 PM
 
12,439 posts, read 10,307,277 times
Reputation: 3137
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
i dont advocate completely eliminating the EPA, however i DO advocate that we reign them in. as for the article you linked to, what they fail to show is that while individual regulations dont cost much, when you add up the total cost of ALL the regulations put out by the EPA, it gets quite expensive indeed. unnecessary regulation only costs business money to comply with and does NOTHING to improve the environment.


Of course we are all fine in living in this environment as long as the Koch brothers are happy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,895,248 times
Reputation: 12178
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
i dont advocate completely eliminating the EPA, however i DO advocate that we reign them in.
Have an agency for namesake?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:24 PM
 
12,439 posts, read 10,307,277 times
Reputation: 3137
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Have an agency for namesake?
To give the illusion that they actually are doing something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:28 PM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,995 posts, read 11,674,905 times
Reputation: 5580
Social conservative pitbulls are all worked up because their corporate overlords have told their army of spin doctors to tell them to be. It is that simple. No rational person is for degrading environmental quality. But the easily duped are doomed to repeat history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:32 PM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,995 posts, read 11,674,905 times
Reputation: 5580
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
To give the illusion that they actually are doing something.
I see we have an expert. I know a lot of people in EPA, and they are exceptionally competent and hardworking. PhD level experts on atmospheric chemistry, toxicology, water quality, hydrology, ecology,etc. How many do you know?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:44 PM
 
12,439 posts, read 10,307,277 times
Reputation: 3137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
I see we have an expert. I know a lot of people in EPA, and they are exceptionally competent and hardworking. PhD level experts on atmospheric chemistry, toxicology, water quality, hydrology, ecology,etc. How many do you know?
Maybe I was not clear. I support having the EPA with the power to regulate and enforce. Please reread what I was responding to on the thread and actually see my thread on the same issue.

Not an expert. Just someone who has to breath the air and drink the water.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:51 PM
 
2,944 posts, read 3,005,657 times
Reputation: 1109
EPA need to be eliminated.

This is the problem with government. The left hand cannot agree with right hand.

For example. I know Obama and Bush, etc has promoted green energy. Solar and Wind are green energy. But in order to build these a solar plant in a dessert, the EPA must approved it. Good like getting them approve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-15-2011, 02:54 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,895,248 times
Reputation: 12178
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
To give the illusion that they actually are doing something.
Consider the premise they operate upon, they are bound to need something "government run" so they can push the blame onto.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top