Getting Rid of the EPA

[Pete7469]

Then it requires fixing, not scrapping.

You can't fix stupid.

 

[NightFox]

But let's be real . The GOP wants the EPA out of the way so that their big biz masters can earn more money at the expense of our national environment.

Ummm yeah.... apparently you're also not aware that the EPA is one of the best friends "big biz" has, if you got the lobbying budget you get to write the EPA regulations that leave your operations largely untouched (and legally protected) while screwing your smaller, less wealthy competitors.

Not to mention the fact that the EPA actively impedes efforts by private organizations to protect and clean up the environment, government bureaucracies don't like competition and thus impose all kinds of red tape and costs on private organizations that want to infringe on their turf.

The EPA is a gigantic, money sucking, corrupt, pay for play bureaucracy not a choir of angels, it needs to get got and damn quick before it does any more damage to the economy, the environment and the liberty of the citizenry.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Water issues standards in Florida are not anywhere near on a par with those in Wyoming. Centralized one-size-fits-all is one of the chief reasons the EPA is a shit show.

The ACE and state DORs can handle the entirety of the very few legit functions of the EPA.

You can have minimum standards that are tailored enough for various environments.

Examples include wastewater treatment levels based on discharge locations, Bay, Ocean, River, river upstream of a drinking water source, etc.

States can make requirements more stringent, but not less.

Asking bureaucracies to have limitations on controlling the people is like telling an alcoholic they can only have one drink a night.

They've gotten too large and too powerful. Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile.

There has to be some national level policy on pollution control, and I'm not talking about Greenhouse gases and saving river smelts. I'm talking about basic standards of treatment for wastewater, gas stacks, run-off, and other point and gross sources of pollution that can impact multiple states.

The agency has to be gutted, but not removed. If it is a hard task, well then that's what we elected Trump for.

Our Congress takes vacation half of the year. I think they have plenty of time to create necessary regulations while at the same time, not creating regulations that only harm businesses that won't do our environment any good.

Here in Ohio the EPA said they didn't like our air quality. Fine, then don't come to our city! Nope, they forced us into this E-check system. Now every other year, you have to take your car to this station, and they test it to see if your car meets the EPA standards.

After ten years of this expensive nonsense, they tested the air quality again. No difference than from ten years earlier. So what did they do? They extended the program.

We could have used all that money for better projects in our state. But we were forced to waste millions and millions of dollars to produce nothing. That's what's wrong with having an EPA.

Then it requires fixing, not scrapping.

Fix it how? It doesn't work. You can't fix something that doesn't work.

Even if they found a way to fix it, how many more millions would that cost us?

The problem with all this environmental crap is that it's an bottomless money pit. There isn't enough cash to fill that pit even if you took every dollar away from every American today. That's because no matter how many trillions you throw at it, there will always be room for more improvement.

Try this: ask any environmentalist what it would take before they would back down? How much money would they need and what would their satisfactory standards be? You'll be met with a blank stare.

We've been trying to improve the environment my entire life. And after the trillions of dollars we spent on the environment, the environmentalists are unhappier today than they were 40 years ago. It's what I call Ray from Cleveland's environmental rule: You can't make an environmentalist happy--it's just not possible.

 

[martybegan]

Then it requires fixing, not scrapping.

You can't fix stupid.

But you can replace it with less stupid.

First thing, get it out of the AGW business, 2nd thing get it out of local enforcement and delegate that to the States. 3rd thing, get it out of the "sue and settle" business.

 

[martybegan]

You can have minimum standards that are tailored enough for various environments.

Examples include wastewater treatment levels based on discharge locations, Bay, Ocean, River, river upstream of a drinking water source, etc.

States can make requirements more stringent, but not less.

Asking bureaucracies to have limitations on controlling the people is like telling an alcoholic they can only have one drink a night.

They've gotten too large and too powerful. Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile.

There has to be some national level policy on pollution control, and I'm not talking about Greenhouse gases and saving river smelts. I'm talking about basic standards of treatment for wastewater, gas stacks, run-off, and other point and gross sources of pollution that can impact multiple states.

The agency has to be gutted, but not removed. If it is a hard task, well then that's what we elected Trump for.

Our Congress takes vacation half of the year. I think they have plenty of time to create necessary regulations while at the same time, not creating regulations that only harm businesses that won't do our environment any good.

Here in Ohio the EPA said they didn't like our air quality. Fine, then don't come to our city! Nope, they forced us into this E-check system. Now every other year, you have to take your car to this station, and they test it to see if your car meets the EPA standards.

After ten years of this expensive nonsense, they tested the air quality again. No difference than from ten years earlier. So what did they do? They extended the program.

We could have used all that money for better projects in our state. But we were forced to waste millions and millions of dollars to produce nothing. That's what's wrong with having an EPA.

Then it requires fixing, not scrapping.

Fix it how? It doesn't work. You can't fix something that doesn't work.

Even if they found a way to fix it, how many more millions would that cost us?

The problem with all this environmental crap is that it's an bottomless money pit. There isn't enough cash to fill that pit even if you took every dollar away from every American today. That's because no matter how many trillions you throw at it, there will always be room for more improvement.

Try this: ask any environmentalist what it would take before they would back down? How much money would they need and what would their satisfactory standards be? You'll be met with a blank stare.

We've been trying to improve the environment my entire life. And after the trillions of dollars we spent on the environment, the environmentalists are unhappier today than they were 40 years ago. It's what I call Ray from Cleveland's environmental rule: You can't make an environmentalist happy--it's just not possible.

Then get the EPA out of the hands of the Environmentalists, and into the hands of Engineers, who you know, actually are trained to implement things like water, air and soil treatments.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Asking bureaucracies to have limitations on controlling the people is like telling an alcoholic they can only have one drink a night.

They've gotten too large and too powerful. Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile.

There has to be some national level policy on pollution control, and I'm not talking about Greenhouse gases and saving river smelts. I'm talking about basic standards of treatment for wastewater, gas stacks, run-off, and other point and gross sources of pollution that can impact multiple states.

The agency has to be gutted, but not removed. If it is a hard task, well then that's what we elected Trump for.

Our Congress takes vacation half of the year. I think they have plenty of time to create necessary regulations while at the same time, not creating regulations that only harm businesses that won't do our environment any good.

Here in Ohio the EPA said they didn't like our air quality. Fine, then don't come to our city! Nope, they forced us into this E-check system. Now every other year, you have to take your car to this station, and they test it to see if your car meets the EPA standards.

After ten years of this expensive nonsense, they tested the air quality again. No difference than from ten years earlier. So what did they do? They extended the program.

We could have used all that money for better projects in our state. But we were forced to waste millions and millions of dollars to produce nothing. That's what's wrong with having an EPA.

Then it requires fixing, not scrapping.

Fix it how? It doesn't work. You can't fix something that doesn't work.

Even if they found a way to fix it, how many more millions would that cost us?

The problem with all this environmental crap is that it's an bottomless money pit. There isn't enough cash to fill that pit even if you took every dollar away from every American today. That's because no matter how many trillions you throw at it, there will always be room for more improvement.

Try this: ask any environmentalist what it would take before they would back down? How much money would they need and what would their satisfactory standards be? You'll be met with a blank stare.

We've been trying to improve the environment my entire life. And after the trillions of dollars we spent on the environment, the environmentalists are unhappier today than they were 40 years ago. It's what I call Ray from Cleveland's environmental rule: You can't make an environmentalist happy--it's just not possible.

Then get the EPA out of the hands of the Environmentalists, and into the hands of Engineers, who you know, actually are trained to implement things like water, air and soil treatments.

If we get it out of the hands of the EPA, then what do we need an EPA for?

Let those engineers testify before Congress, and then Congress decides if new legislation is needed--not a bunch of bureaucrats.

 

[Mr Natural]

You can't fix stupid.

You're a perfect example of that.

 

[yiostheoy]

This article deals with Trump's nominee to head up the agency in order to do away with it. It's written by someone who went to work for the agency with a scientific background and desire to “clean things up.” Here is just one quote:

During the two decades since I left government service, I’ve continued to watch the EPA’s shenanigans with a mixture of awe and vexation. Policy by policy and decision by decision, the EPA has decimated the nation’s competitiveness, ability to innovate, and capacity to create wealth. Its policies and decisions have single-handedly killed off entire once-promising sectors of biotechnology, including bioremediation (the use of microorganisms to clean up toxic wastes, including oil spills) and microorganisms that when sprayed on plants could prevent frost damage.

Read more at: Scott Pruitt Abolish EPA? He Might — and Should | National Review

I don't think Trump will try to close down the EPA but I do think he will try to weed out all those who are on the Global Warming bandwagon.

Good riddance then.

 

[Pete7469]

But you can replace it with less stupid.

First thing, get it out of the AGW business, 2nd thing get it out of local enforcement and delegate that to the States. 3rd thing, get it out of the "sue and settle" business.

I don't normally disagree with you, but I do on this.

Get rid of it.

FIRE EVERYONE. Destroy the goddamned building with everything inside and incinerate the rubble before stuffing it into the Yucca Mountain cave.

It is a malignancy, it can not be redeemed. The concept behind it was an effort by marxists to undermine US industry.

Go ahead and replace it, but sow salt into the earth so that nothing ever grows there again.

 

[imawhosure]

The EPA has devolved into a fascist democrat cult.....and must be destroyed...

Great! Then we can be like China . Where the air is so polluted , they have shut down cities and planes can't even land !

View attachment 103117

How is that a strawman? You want to eliminate the EPA , which protects the environment.

China is a glaring example of what happens when big biz can pollute all they want in the mane of making money .

States do, idiot.....

Our air and water are not confined to state borders . In fact by its nature the environment literally will spill across state lines .

It's rediculous to say this is a state issue .

Timmy, every state as far as I know, has it's own EPA. That is why there is no fracking in New York, but in bordering states, there is. It is a states issue! Or would you rather have Trump say, "ok, it is a fed issue, every state has to allow whatever I say. Fracking in New York tomorrow!" Wake up, and if you want to line your streets in gold and lib policies, we have no problem with it. You PAY FOR IT!

 

[imawhosure]

Then it requires fixing, not scrapping.

You can't fix stupid.

But you can replace it with less stupid.

First thing, get it out of the AGW business, 2nd thing get it out of local enforcement and delegate that to the States. 3rd thing, get it out of the "sue and settle" business.

No! We have state EPA. If we keep the Fed EPA, the next leftist will do the same thing all over again. How are we going to convince business to expand, when the regulatory break they get leaves when Trump is defeated, or the Repubs lose the Whitehouse! We must be smarter than this, because if we aren't, Trump is going to fail and the Dems will get it all back rather quickly!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Gee, why would we need the government to protect the environment?

New round of Flint indictments could test Michigan's emergency manager law

 

[NYcarbineer]

Then it requires fixing, not scrapping.

You can't fix stupid.

But you can replace it with less stupid.

First thing, get it out of the AGW business, 2nd thing get it out of local enforcement and delegate that to the States. 3rd thing, get it out of the "sue and settle" business.

No! We have state EPA. If we keep the Fed EPA, the next leftist will do the same thing all over again. How are we going to convince business to expand, when the regulatory break they get leaves when Trump is defeated, or the Repubs lose the Whitehouse! We must be smarter than this, because if we aren't, Trump is going to fail and the Dems will get it all back rather quickly!

Does air pollution in your state stop at the border?

 

[Dot Com]

We need to get rid of rw short bus OP

 

[OKTexas]

And under the while you were sleeping category. The Fish and Wildlife service used the endangered species act not only to regulate areas where these species exist, but anywhere they traditionally existed or areas where they may migrate. The Feds are trying to gain supremacy over every inch of land in the country.

Also the dear leader just used a 63 year old law designed to narrowly protect feeding areas of the walrus to put three large areas of ocean off limits for offshore energy exploration.

Nevada Joins Challenge of Endangered Species Act Rule Changes - Mineral County Independent News

Obama saves Arctic Ocean, Atlantic waters from oil leasing


Between the EPA and other bureaucracies all private property rights are being destroyed.

 

[Dot Com]

The EPA is a gigantic, money sucking, corrupt, pay for play bureaucracy not a choir of angels, it needs to get got and damn quick before it does any more damage to the economy, the environment and the liberty of the citizenry.

rw hyperbole much

 

[NightFox]

The EPA is a gigantic, money sucking, corrupt, pay for play bureaucracy not a choir of angels, it needs to get got and damn quick before it does any more damage to the economy, the environment and the liberty of the citizenry.

rw hyperbole much

Deny reality much?

... on second thought; never mind I already know the answer to that question.

 

[Flash]

Gee, why would we need the government to protect the environment?

New round of Flint indictments could test Michigan's emergency manager law

Gee, why would we need the filthy ass government to destroy our economy?

 

[Dot Com]

The EPA is a gigantic, money sucking, corrupt, pay for play bureaucracy not a choir of angels, it needs to get got and damn quick before it does any more damage to the economy, the environment and the liberty of the citizenry.

rw hyperbole much

Deny reality much?

... on second thought; never mind I already know the answer to that question.

don't answer a question w/ a question Sugar Tits.

 

[yiostheoy]

The most corrupt Federal agency is HUD.

So hopefully Dr. Dumbazz will shut it down.