Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hard to believe you had the stones to reply! You obviously have no clue what you're talking about and are clearly intimidated about talking to someone who happens to know a lot about this.An assumption you did not deny.....thanks....Who can blame you for making such an assumption. You're a flame thrower. A grenade tossed. You make an outlandish claim, refuse to explain it and call me a name! You and your leader share the same small intellect, massive ego, casual acquaintance with the truth and the same refusal to engage. You're well suited for the next four years. Just try a little harder to be taken seriously.I take it you are a hoaxer....therein lies one answer to your fucked up environazi fascism.....What manner of hoax do you suppose I'd commit? Just tell me specifically how the EPA is destroying our environment. You said it, now explain it.You a hoaxer?No. I'm an environmental engineer.
So tell me specifically how the EPA is destroying our environment.
Now, there is your answer, child....
You understood my answer....and you just keep doubling down on your liberal ignorance.....we get it.....Hard to believe you had the stones to reply! You obviously have no clue what you're talking about and are clearly intimidated about talking to someone who happens to know a lot about this.An assumption you did not deny.....thanks....Who can blame you for making such an assumption. You're a flame thrower. A grenade tossed. You make an outlandish claim, refuse to explain it and call me a name! You and your leader share the same small intellect, massive ego, casual acquaintance with the truth and the same refusal to engage. You're well suited for the next four years. Just try a little harder to be taken seriously.I take it you are a hoaxer....therein lies one answer to your fucked up environazi fascism.....What manner of hoax do you suppose I'd commit? Just tell me specifically how the EPA is destroying our environment. You said it, now explain it.You a hoaxer?
Now, there is your answer, child....
What's life like in your folk's basement on a Saturday night?
What kind of parallel universe are you in? You said the EPA was out to destroy our environment and LEFT IT AT THAT!You understood my answer....and you just keep doubling down on your liberal ignorance.....we get it.....Hard to believe you had the stones to reply! You obviously have no clue what you're talking about and are clearly intimidated about talking to someone who happens to know a lot about this.An assumption you did not deny.....thanks....Who can blame you for making such an assumption. You're a flame thrower. A grenade tossed. You make an outlandish claim, refuse to explain it and call me a name! You and your leader share the same small intellect, massive ego, casual acquaintance with the truth and the same refusal to engage. You're well suited for the next four years. Just try a little harder to be taken seriously.I take it you are a hoaxer....therein lies one answer to your fucked up environazi fascism.....What manner of hoax do you suppose I'd commit? Just tell me specifically how the EPA is destroying our environment. You said it, now explain it.
Now, there is your answer, child....
What's life like in your folk's basement on a Saturday night?
Having grown up around lakes and rivers too polluted to fish or swim in, I appreciate what the EPA has done in the past to clean up our environment. Nixon began the EPA after the Cuyahoga River caught fire....still hard to fathom but industry had always sent it's chemicals downstream for somebody else to deal with. DDT was banned after eagle chicks were born with beaks too deformed to eat. Acid rain from coal furnaces without scrubbers almost decimated New England's forests not to mention the paint jobs on cars up there. So a lot had to be done and they did it. But then they turned into something else and considered industry the enemy instead of a partner in cooperation. In the last 10 years they've operated like the IRS....to the point they now conduct armed raids. Nobody intended that to happen but leave an agency with no oversight and that's what can happen. One of their senior management said the other day they would "resist Trump". Really?
About 15 years ago or so, the EPA said they didn't like our pollution levels here in Ohio. Okay, then stay the hell out of Ohio! Nope, they had to stick their nose in our business and force us to use E-Check in some of our counties.
Ten years and tens of millions of dollars later, the EPA tested our air again, and found no change in the pollution levels. So what did they make us do? Extend the program for another ten years.
THIS is one of the many reasons to eliminate bureaucracies like the EPA. Why should they give a damn about wasting money on something that doesn't work. It isn't their money!
Ohio is not forced to use E-check. They can ditch the program, they will just lose millions of dollars in highway funding. And it is only in seven counties who's air did not meet EPA quality standards. Those standards are LAWS passed by an elected legislature. Meet those standards, no more e-check.
Your solution is not to attempt to meet the standards. Not even to pass LAWS that change the standards. Your solution is to just do away with the enforcement mechanism behind the standards. From where I come from we call that being a CHICKEN SHIT.
Correct, they can only FORCE us to do the will of the feds by cutting off federal funding; something you on the left are currently complaining about when Trump plans to do the same with sanctuary cities.
Even if we met those standards, I would be willing to bet that they wouldn't allow us to stop the program anyway. But you know how we can stop it eventually? Get rid of the EPA.
Look. If you don't like it you can move to one of the counties that is not subject to E-check. OK, couldn't resist throwing out the old conservative "just move" meme.
But tell me. Is the problem the standards? From the brief little looking I did to get the details, well E-check is credited with removing over 72 tons of toxic materials from the air. But maybe you prefer this,
That was in Cleveland, 1973. And if that is what you prefer. Fine, then do away with the standards. But refusing to enforce them, that is the action of tyrants and despots, the action of cowards.
Cleveland hasn't been like that in many years, and even when it was, it was during very humid days which we do get here in the summer. Since the time of that picture, most of our steel industry (the background in the photo) closed up. Our population is about half of what it was back then as well. Cars burn much cleaner than the 70's and these new EPA regulations didn't start until the 90's I believe.
About 15 years ago or so, the EPA said they didn't like our pollution levels here in Ohio. Okay, then stay the hell out of Ohio! Nope, they had to stick their nose in our business and force us to use E-Check in some of our counties.
Ten years and tens of millions of dollars later, the EPA tested our air again, and found no change in the pollution levels. So what did they make us do? Extend the program for another ten years.
THIS is one of the many reasons to eliminate bureaucracies like the EPA. Why should they give a damn about wasting money on something that doesn't work. It isn't their money!
Ohio is not forced to use E-check. They can ditch the program, they will just lose millions of dollars in highway funding. And it is only in seven counties who's air did not meet EPA quality standards. Those standards are LAWS passed by an elected legislature. Meet those standards, no more e-check.
Your solution is not to attempt to meet the standards. Not even to pass LAWS that change the standards. Your solution is to just do away with the enforcement mechanism behind the standards. From where I come from we call that being a CHICKEN SHIT.
Correct, they can only FORCE us to do the will of the feds by cutting off federal funding; something you on the left are currently complaining about when Trump plans to do the same with sanctuary cities.
Even if we met those standards, I would be willing to bet that they wouldn't allow us to stop the program anyway. But you know how we can stop it eventually? Get rid of the EPA.
Look. If you don't like it you can move to one of the counties that is not subject to E-check. OK, couldn't resist throwing out the old conservative "just move" meme.
But tell me. Is the problem the standards? From the brief little looking I did to get the details, well E-check is credited with removing over 72 tons of toxic materials from the air. But maybe you prefer this,
That was in Cleveland, 1973. And if that is what you prefer. Fine, then do away with the standards. But refusing to enforce them, that is the action of tyrants and despots, the action of cowards.
Cleveland hasn't been like that in many years, and even when it was, it was during very humid days which we do get here in the summer. Since the time of that picture, most of our steel industry (the background in the photo) closed up. Our population is about half of what it was back then as well. Cars burn much cleaner than the 70's and these new EPA regulations didn't start until the 90's I believe.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Ohio is not forced to use E-check. They can ditch the program, they will just lose millions of dollars in highway funding. And it is only in seven counties who's air did not meet EPA quality standards. Those standards are LAWS passed by an elected legislature. Meet those standards, no more e-check.
Your solution is not to attempt to meet the standards. Not even to pass LAWS that change the standards. Your solution is to just do away with the enforcement mechanism behind the standards. From where I come from we call that being a CHICKEN SHIT.
Correct, they can only FORCE us to do the will of the feds by cutting off federal funding; something you on the left are currently complaining about when Trump plans to do the same with sanctuary cities.
Even if we met those standards, I would be willing to bet that they wouldn't allow us to stop the program anyway. But you know how we can stop it eventually? Get rid of the EPA.
Look. If you don't like it you can move to one of the counties that is not subject to E-check. OK, couldn't resist throwing out the old conservative "just move" meme.
But tell me. Is the problem the standards? From the brief little looking I did to get the details, well E-check is credited with removing over 72 tons of toxic materials from the air. But maybe you prefer this,
That was in Cleveland, 1973. And if that is what you prefer. Fine, then do away with the standards. But refusing to enforce them, that is the action of tyrants and despots, the action of cowards.
Cleveland hasn't been like that in many years, and even when it was, it was during very humid days which we do get here in the summer. Since the time of that picture, most of our steel industry (the background in the photo) closed up. Our population is about half of what it was back then as well. Cars burn much cleaner than the 70's and these new EPA regulations didn't start until the 90's I believe.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
. I would buy the $15.99 dollar stand, and this was because I would be after the lights that last 20 years instead of 2 years, but the options are going away because historic American companies found themselves in a situation where they could no longer compete against cheap goods that the beat down low wage Americans could only afford. It was all by design these things have taken place Ray. Not sure how old you are, but I have lived long enough to have seen it all go down. I am a realist Ray, and I know what has happened over time.. Consumers can't do anything or choose anything without the rich providing the platform, goods and services recieved. If the rich have created some kind of get filthy rich system that no one can escape, then how does the consumer get blamed for that ?? The whole dam system of things we all have been experiencing was by design. Think tanks created this bull crap, and then it was slowly and precisely implemented over the years. Have to have lived through when America was better, products was better, and then watched as it all went down.It's not just labor. Labor is only part of the reason. A company won't move halfway across the world to pay workers $6.00 less per hour. Shipping costs would exceed such savings.
It's a lot of things that move jobs out of the country. We keep putting more straws on the camels back month by month, year by year, until the camel finally collapses. Then we blame rich people for the problem.
Why would we blame rich people, we bailed out Wall Street with socialism, we love the wealthy.
You're missing something, american wealth generation is no longer tied to work or production, it is created fictionally in the financial services sector. Growing wealth in this society is merely a growing of debt. And it is utterly unsustainable.
You people blame the rich for everything. You don't want to look at the big picture. Trump has the right message: buy American. How can you have a society with good paying jobs and cheap products? You can't. You have to choose one or the other.
In recent years, we chose cheap products. The cheaper, the better. None of those Walmart shoppers give a rats ass if they are putting Americans out of work through their purchases.
Since the US consumers demand cheap products, American manufacturers have to provide. They do that by getting rid of humans and replacing us with automation, they do that by keeping wages as low as possible, they do that by moving out of a state where they are trapped by a union and go to another state or even another country.
Manufacturers don't call the shots--consumers do. It's not a plot by any stretch of the imagination.
If we consumers decided we wanted more expensive American made products, that's what Walmart and their suppliers will provide. But Walmart became number one because they did sell cheap imported products, and the consumers responded.
Why can't you find many American made products in stores today? Because very few if any shoppers will buy them. Americans don't look at where the product is made, Americans look at price.
You see two 50 foot stands of Christmas lights; one is $5.99 made in China, and the other is $15.99 made in the USA, which strands do you think will sell the most?
Correct, they can only FORCE us to do the will of the feds by cutting off federal funding; something you on the left are currently complaining about when Trump plans to do the same with sanctuary cities.
Even if we met those standards, I would be willing to bet that they wouldn't allow us to stop the program anyway. But you know how we can stop it eventually? Get rid of the EPA.
Look. If you don't like it you can move to one of the counties that is not subject to E-check. OK, couldn't resist throwing out the old conservative "just move" meme.
But tell me. Is the problem the standards? From the brief little looking I did to get the details, well E-check is credited with removing over 72 tons of toxic materials from the air. But maybe you prefer this,
That was in Cleveland, 1973. And if that is what you prefer. Fine, then do away with the standards. But refusing to enforce them, that is the action of tyrants and despots, the action of cowards.
Cleveland hasn't been like that in many years, and even when it was, it was during very humid days which we do get here in the summer. Since the time of that picture, most of our steel industry (the background in the photo) closed up. Our population is about half of what it was back then as well. Cars burn much cleaner than the 70's and these new EPA regulations didn't start until the 90's I believe.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
. I would buy the $15.99 dollar stand, and this was because I would be after the lights that last 20 years instead of 2 years, but the options are going away because historic American companies found themselves in a situation where they could no longer compete against cheap goods that the beat down low wage Americans could only afford. It was all by design these things have taken place Ray. Not sure how old you are, but I have lived long enough to have seen it all go down. I am a realist Ray, and I know what has happened over time.. Consumers can't do anything or choose anything without the rich providing the platform, goods and services recieved. If the rich have created some kind of get filthy rich system that no one can escape, then how does the consumer get blamed for that ?? The whole dam system of things we all have been experiencing was by design. Think tanks created this bull crap, and then it was slowly and precisely implemented over the years. Have to have lived through when America was better, products was better, and then watched as it all went down.Why would we blame rich people, we bailed out Wall Street with socialism, we love the wealthy.
You're missing something, american wealth generation is no longer tied to work or production, it is created fictionally in the financial services sector. Growing wealth in this society is merely a growing of debt. And it is utterly unsustainable.
You people blame the rich for everything. You don't want to look at the big picture. Trump has the right message: buy American. How can you have a society with good paying jobs and cheap products? You can't. You have to choose one or the other.
In recent years, we chose cheap products. The cheaper, the better. None of those Walmart shoppers give a rats ass if they are putting Americans out of work through their purchases.
Since the US consumers demand cheap products, American manufacturers have to provide. They do that by getting rid of humans and replacing us with automation, they do that by keeping wages as low as possible, they do that by moving out of a state where they are trapped by a union and go to another state or even another country.
Manufacturers don't call the shots--consumers do. It's not a plot by any stretch of the imagination.
If we consumers decided we wanted more expensive American made products, that's what Walmart and their suppliers will provide. But Walmart became number one because they did sell cheap imported products, and the consumers responded.
Why can't you find many American made products in stores today? Because very few if any shoppers will buy them. Americans don't look at where the product is made, Americans look at price.
You see two 50 foot stands of Christmas lights; one is $5.99 made in China, and the other is $15.99 made in the USA, which strands do you think will sell the most?
So have I, and that's why I'm telling you (like always) it's a consumer controlled market.
If you are around my age, then certainly you remember full service gasoline stations. They guy came out, pumped your gas, checked your oil, checked the tire pressure, filled your windshield washer fluid, took your cash or credit card into the station, and brought back your change or receipt with green stamps.
So why have they disappeared? Well it started out slow. Gas station owners found it more profitable to keep their mechanics working on the cars instead of pumping gas. So they opened up one island that offered cheaper gasoline if you pumped it yourself. After a while, there were waiting lines at the self-serve pump so they opened up another, then another. Before you know it, all gas stations were self-serve because nobody used the full-service island any longer. Everybody wanted cheaper gas.
Self-service gasoline was not a conspiracy. It was totally consumer driven. It's the same reason discount stores are popping up all over the place. We will buy in bulk if it saves us money. Even today, internet sales are taking over brick and mortar stores and that is a threat. Why? Because of cheaper prices and convenience.
A couple of years ago I went to my KFC store only to find it padlocked. So I traveled to the next nearest one only to find the same thing. Suspicious, I went to the internet to find out what was going on. What I found was that my experience was not just local, it was happening all across the country. KFC's were closing down all over the place. Why? Because KFC never changed. They kept the same quality all these years, but that costs money. Customers were driven to places like Church''s or Popeye's because their chicken is cheaper. Nobody cared about the cheaper quality, only cheaper prices.
It's only been a few days and I am already feeling sick of the winning. As a pro-environment person, this is great news! I doubt that anyone except the far left communists would oppose it. 50% of the organization seems to only be devoted to spreading that ideology, rather than on... actual environmental issues.
Look. If you don't like it you can move to one of the counties that is not subject to E-check. OK, couldn't resist throwing out the old conservative "just move" meme.
But tell me. Is the problem the standards? From the brief little looking I did to get the details, well E-check is credited with removing over 72 tons of toxic materials from the air. But maybe you prefer this,
That was in Cleveland, 1973. And if that is what you prefer. Fine, then do away with the standards. But refusing to enforce them, that is the action of tyrants and despots, the action of cowards.
Cleveland hasn't been like that in many years, and even when it was, it was during very humid days which we do get here in the summer. Since the time of that picture, most of our steel industry (the background in the photo) closed up. Our population is about half of what it was back then as well. Cars burn much cleaner than the 70's and these new EPA regulations didn't start until the 90's I believe.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
Cleveland hasn't been like that in many years, and even when it was, it was during very humid days which we do get here in the summer. Since the time of that picture, most of our steel industry (the background in the photo) closed up. Our population is about half of what it was back then as well. Cars burn much cleaner than the 70's and these new EPA regulations didn't start until the 90's I believe.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
The problem is the EPA doesn't have the budget to cut. It already has been cut. Staffing for enforcement are now at levels they were during, wait for it, Ronald Reagan. The Republican disconnect here is as bad as it is with immigration. Illegal immigration is at levels not seen in years, much lower than under Bush, and deportations are way up. The EPA budget is way down from what it was when Obama took office. In fact, in adjusted dollars, it has remained under 2006 levels his entire administration, outside the first year.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
That was BEFORE the Trump cuts.
Cleveland hasn't been like that in many years, and even when it was, it was during very humid days which we do get here in the summer. Since the time of that picture, most of our steel industry (the background in the photo) closed up. Our population is about half of what it was back then as well. Cars burn much cleaner than the 70's and these new EPA regulations didn't start until the 90's I believe.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
The problem is the EPA doesn't have the budget to cut. It already has been cut. Staffing for enforcement are now at levels they were during, wait for it, Ronald Reagan. The Republican disconnect here is as bad as it is with immigration. Illegal immigration is at levels not seen in years, much lower than under Bush, and deportations are way up. The EPA budget is way down from what it was when Obama took office. In fact, in adjusted dollars, it has remained under 2006 levels his entire administration, outside the first year.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
That was BEFORE the Trump cuts.
Do it in all the Red states......easy solution. Everyone happy.
Couldn't happen to a nicer group of communist scumbags
Way past time. You watch, as the EPA is brought in line with reality, jobs will increase, money will flow and the Environment won't be any worse off.
The EPA is less about the environment than it is about crushing Capitalism. That's just the way it is
Via Daily Caller:
The former leader of President Donald Trump’s EPA transition team said Thursday he expects the president to slash the agency’s budget and staff.
Myron Ebell, the director of the Center for Energy at free market group Competitive Enterprise Institute, told reporters that Trump is considering reducing by magnitudes the agency’s workforce. It currently stands at 15,000 employees nationwide.
“Let’s aim for half and see how it works out, and then maybe we’ll want to go further,” Ebell said, referring to his wish to see the EPA slashed by at least half. He left Trump’s transition team last week, but was at one time on the president’s short list to head the agency.
Half of the EPA’s budget is transferred to state and local areas to update infrastructure projects and environmental cleanup efforts. Ebell, who is a long-time EPA critic and climate skeptic, said the cuts would likely fall on the remaining half of the agency’s budget, which supports a portion of federal employees.
“President Trump said during the campaign that he would like to abolish the EPA, or ‘leave a little bit,’” he said. “I think the administration is likely to start proposing cuts to the 15,000 staff, because the fact is that a huge amount of the work of the EPA is actually done by state agencies.”
Keep reading…
Wrong-
Rep. Morgan Griffith says EPA job growth outstips that of U.S. government
We wondered whether Griffith’s figures are correct. His spokeswoman, Andrea Pivarunas, sent us sources for the numbers.
The EPA had a staff of 8,358 in 1972 and it grew to 17,359 in 2011, according to data from the agency. That’s an increase of 107.7 percent -- matching what Griffith said.
We should note that EPA dropped to 15,913 employees last year as many cashed in on an early retirement incentive offered to federal workers. So if Griffith had used the the most current data available, the increase since 1972 would have translated to 90.4 percent.
The total number of federal employees was 5.2 million in 1972 and 4.4 million in 2011, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management. That’s a decrease of 15.4 percent -- again, what Griffith said.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
The problem is the EPA doesn't have the budget to cut. It already has been cut. Staffing for enforcement are now at levels they were during, wait for it, Ronald Reagan. The Republican disconnect here is as bad as it is with immigration. Illegal immigration is at levels not seen in years, much lower than under Bush, and deportations are way up. The EPA budget is way down from what it was when Obama took office. In fact, in adjusted dollars, it has remained under 2006 levels his entire administration, outside the first year.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
That was BEFORE the Trump cuts.
Wrong-
Rep. Morgan Griffith says EPA job growth outstips that of U.S. government
We wondered whether Griffith’s figures are correct. His spokeswoman, Andrea Pivarunas, sent us sources for the numbers.
The EPA had a staff of 8,358 in 1972 and it grew to 17,359 in 2011, according to data from the agency. That’s an increase of 107.7 percent -- matching what Griffith said.
We should note that EPA dropped to 15,913 employees last year as many cashed in on an early retirement incentive offered to federal workers. So if Griffith had used the the most current data available, the increase since 1972 would have translated to 90.4 percent.
The total number of federal employees was 5.2 million in 1972 and 4.4 million in 2011, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management. That’s a decrease of 15.4 percent -- again, what Griffith said.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
The problem is the EPA doesn't have the budget to cut. It already has been cut. Staffing for enforcement are now at levels they were during, wait for it, Ronald Reagan. The Republican disconnect here is as bad as it is with immigration. Illegal immigration is at levels not seen in years, much lower than under Bush, and deportations are way up. The EPA budget is way down from what it was when Obama took office. In fact, in adjusted dollars, it has remained under 2006 levels his entire administration, outside the first year.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
That was BEFORE the Trump cuts.
Actually, the Clean Air Act originated back in the 60's. But it was the creation of the enforcement mechanism, the EPA, along with increased standards implemented in 1970 that started delivering results.
And it is clean air act that has the right all riled up with the EPA. The Obama administration proposed standards for CO2 from power generating facilities and all hell broke loose. And it was only a proposed "goal", of CO2 produced per megawatt hour. States even had the ability to design their own plan to meet those goals.
And here is the scoop. They weren't that big a deal. Hell, the replacement of aging facilities with more modern and efficient ones would almost do the trick. Responsible members of the power generation community had fully anticipated the move and have been planning accordingly. It is all a smoke screen to get you guys to start railing against the EPA and accept draconian cuts to enforcement mechanisms.
With no enforcement companies can dump toxins into the water, spew poison into out atmosphere, and bury chemicals into our land. Those residues, and their impact on the environment, are the responsibility of those companies, but who pays? You and I pay, that is who pays. We pay when we can't get potable water, we pay when our children and grandchildren suffer asthma, we pay when we lose friends and family members to cancer from exposure.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
The problem is the EPA doesn't have the budget to cut. It already has been cut. Staffing for enforcement are now at levels they were during, wait for it, Ronald Reagan. The Republican disconnect here is as bad as it is with immigration. Illegal immigration is at levels not seen in years, much lower than under Bush, and deportations are way up. The EPA budget is way down from what it was when Obama took office. In fact, in adjusted dollars, it has remained under 2006 levels his entire administration, outside the first year.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
That was BEFORE the Trump cuts.
Can you confirm those numbers with - oh, say --- a reference?
No. I'm an environmental engineer.Do you work for the EPA?How? The NESHAP regulations? CERCLA? Safe Work Practice guidelines? Specifically how?The EPA is destroying our environment....,So we have a pristine environment here. That must follow, using you own argument, we have a weak and ineffective federal government.And the liar steps in...the country is filled with pipelines and industry and we have the cleanest environment you can find...all because we are a rich country and we like clean things........the countries with strong central governments, have the worst environments...
What will your logic tell you when you begun railing against our strong and overreaching federal government? That's a spiky narrow fence you're sitting on there!
So tell me specifically how the EPA is destroying our environment.
Wrong-
Rep. Morgan Griffith says EPA job growth outstips that of U.S. government
We wondered whether Griffith’s figures are correct. His spokeswoman, Andrea Pivarunas, sent us sources for the numbers.
The EPA had a staff of 8,358 in 1972 and it grew to 17,359 in 2011, according to data from the agency. That’s an increase of 107.7 percent -- matching what Griffith said.
We should note that EPA dropped to 15,913 employees last year as many cashed in on an early retirement incentive offered to federal workers. So if Griffith had used the the most current data available, the increase since 1972 would have translated to 90.4 percent.
The total number of federal employees was 5.2 million in 1972 and 4.4 million in 2011, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management. That’s a decrease of 15.4 percent -- again, what Griffith said.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
The problem is the EPA doesn't have the budget to cut. It already has been cut. Staffing for enforcement are now at levels they were during, wait for it, Ronald Reagan. The Republican disconnect here is as bad as it is with immigration. Illegal immigration is at levels not seen in years, much lower than under Bush, and deportations are way up. The EPA budget is way down from what it was when Obama took office. In fact, in adjusted dollars, it has remained under 2006 levels his entire administration, outside the first year.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
That was BEFORE the Trump cuts.
Starting the number in 1972 when the EPA was just getting off the ground is disingenuous. My numbers are from 1989 to present and are documented. But thanks for playing.
Oh please, here we go with that leftist extremism again.
You people act like those of us on the right want all these dangers to take place. What do you think, that we on the right breathe different air and drink different water than you on the left do????
Like I said, the problem with leftist environmentalists is that there is no end to this; there is no stopping point. For those of us on the right, the stopping point happened several years back. The air is fine and the water is great. Enough is enough.
Right now we have more important things to worry about such as healthcare, borders, illegals and better paying jobs. No matter what we do or how much we spend, the air and water could always be better. The real question is at what cost and what we are willing to give up for it such as jobs and corporations.
Great, declare a moratorium on new regulations. No problems with me. Again, don't pretend that is what this is about. But don't cut enforcement. To be honest, it is a protection for the industries as much as the people. Look back at OSHA and the Reagan era. I believe it was about a fifty percent cut. Accidents went up, workers compensation went up, wrongful death claims went up. Who paid for that?
So what regulations did he cut that caused all this? What has the last two-term Democrat Presidents done about it?
Trump is cutting EPA by half. That doesn't mean less enforcement. It means less people sitting around a coffee pot discussing what bar they like the most and what more regulations and fines they can come up with to destroy more businesses.
The problem is the EPA doesn't have the budget to cut. It already has been cut. Staffing for enforcement are now at levels they were during, wait for it, Ronald Reagan. The Republican disconnect here is as bad as it is with immigration. Illegal immigration is at levels not seen in years, much lower than under Bush, and deportations are way up. The EPA budget is way down from what it was when Obama took office. In fact, in adjusted dollars, it has remained under 2006 levels his entire administration, outside the first year.
“Cuts to the EPA budget mean the agency’s ability to enforce existing public protection standards will diminish,” continued White. “EPA’s strategic plan for the next five years anticipates a 40 to 50 percent reduction in inspections and enforcement cases,
EPA Staff Cut to Smallest Number in 25 Years
That was BEFORE the Trump cuts.
Can you confirm those numbers with - oh, say --- a reference?
You not see the link?
