Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environment?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environment? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/6/2011 4:16:19 PM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Popeye, many corporations have more resources than a lot of states.  Expecting individual states to regulate and protect themselves from the likes of WR Grace is impractical, and is definitely putting the needs of the corporation before the needs of individuals.



_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/6/2011 5:08:43 PM   
Hippiekinkster


Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Now republicans want to dismantle the EPA, which would open the country up to more pollution.



One is the Iron Law from Pournelle:

...in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representatives who work to protect any teacher including the most incompetent. The Iron Law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.

And Two:

Why can't the EPA go out of business and leave all that environment and pollution stuff to the states and the local communities?
Because history repeatedly shows that when state and local officials have the opportunity to suck corporate dick for money or other thing of value, they will do so.


< Message edited by Hippiekinkster -- 11/6/2011 5:14:25 PM >


_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/6/2011 6:45:11 PM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
Well said, and true Hippie.  Especially when they can push the water and air pollution off on a neighboring state.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/6/2011 10:14:18 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
Jeeze Joether, let me guess, you have a life sized poster of Al  Gore in your bedroom.
"Lackeys too dumb to think for themselves." Oh sure, you'll get *plenty* of converts to your cause talking about people like that!


No to the first question, although that might be an idea to scare religious people away. The chances that you would honestly be converted over to my way of thinking is equal to the Powerball Jackpot odds to the 19th power....

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
And as for that oil rig, if you remember the news footage it was the U.S. Coast Guard, BP and various volunteers (paid and otherwise) who were cleaning  up the oil not the EPA.
What is the EPA going to do about offshore oil spills? They call for volunteers in their offices in D.C. to go down to Alabama, don exposure suits and rent some power boats and go out and "document" it?
How much oil do you think they're going to clean up?
How many people sitting at desks in offices do they have in comparison to "oil shovelers?"


And WHY were those people removing oil from the beach? What event came BEFORE the oil showed up on the beach? Since oil, in the amounts we saw last summer do not occur naturally. And if one had enough ability they would trace it to the source: A busted oil pipeline. Why was the oil pipeline busted, popeye? Oh that's right, ignore the reality of events when making your 'arguement'. The answer is the pipeline was put under pressure well above what it was rated for and bursted. It effectively started a chain reaction of events that brought the whole of the rig in harms way through explosions and fire. The result, was the rig itself fell into the Gulf of Mexico and sank to the bottom.

Now (and follow along, cus this part is CHALLENGING apparently for you) where does the EPA come into all this? A set of regulations were set up years previous to the rig exploding that explained the upper limits those on a rig can operate under. Those controls (i.e. regulations) were removed during the Bush Administration (how did the Bush family make its money, popyeye?). SO....if the EPA's regulations were STILL in place, chances are the rig would never have been placed at risked because the rig operators would know that such careless actions would cause heavy damages to their parent company (of the financial kind). Thus, saving the coast line from many hardships created by the disaster, and saving the goverment hundreds of millions if not a few billion from the clean up. But than, conservatives are know to spend 'high on the hog' of the taxpayer's dime....

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
The closest they come to "doing anything" is to hire "outside contractors." So you might have 60,000 people sitting in offices and a contractor with 500 employees actually doing the work! "We don't have that expertise" they say. Well why not? We're paying for those 60,000 or however many people they have sitting in offices don't you think they could designate say 10,000 of them to suit up and go clean up oil spills? Maybe they'd try to hand it off to another agency.


Maybe you should get an education on the exact nature, concept, and REALITY of the EPA instead of making it up as you go. Your numbers are purely bogus, your knowledge base being drawn from is totally laughable, and your ability to hold yourself to the same level of accountibility and responsibility as you slam the EPA of is simply silly. Your attempt to a counter-arguement is a total failure. You didn't even try countering the history/information readily available of China and Russia's enviroments thanks to lax enviromental protections.

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250
Joether, you (or anyone) should never put yourself in the position of trying to defend a govt. buearocracy.
There's so much sloth, waste, and and duplicity that you'll be on a fool's errand.


The goverment is made up of my fellow Americans (its shocking I know). I know that's difficult for you to handle or think on. You seem to have this totally insane image that the US Goverment is composed of space aliens from Alpha Centauri bent on world domination through the NWO by using ground water to plant mind controlling microbots that will rewire all of our brains to keep us obedient to their eventual takeover. But your on to them! Dude...

....There is ALWAYS going to be waste, sloth and duplicity. It happens in the military and the private sector all the time. I dont see you bashing either of those groups even a billionth as often as you rail against the goverment. Companies routinely have waste in many forms, and simply 'past those costs/expenses' off to the customer ('i.e. 'raid the supplies room during layoffs'). Likewise, one person's defination of 'waste' is anothers 'needed system'. Health Care is an easy example of this. The EPA has its share of waste and such, no doubt about that. But it also does alot of good for the nation. I can understand that you do not think that way, but then, you also think the President was born in another country (which further undermines your chances of being 'rational' in a discussion). And you are unable to accept as a rational adult that there are plenty of Americans that have had bad experiences when companies were allowed freedom to do what ever they pleased towards Americans. I think the movies Erin Brockovich and A Civil Action were based closely on real life events....

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/7/2011 12:17:50 AM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Since oil, in the amounts we saw last summer do not occur naturally.


Liar.

I did not bother reading the rest. You have a lack of scientific information and thinking just like the EPA.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/7/2011 8:11:16 AM   
Iamsemisweet


Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline
I think what he was referring to is oil washing up on the beaches in that quantity is not natural, aylee. Obviously oil is naturally occurring.
So do you have an example of lack of scientific information and thinking on the part of the EPA?

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/7/2011 4:05:06 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
[On Receiving Harvard Medical School's Global Environment Citizen Award by Bill Moyers On Wednesday, December 1, 2004, the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School presented its fourth annual Global Environment Citizen Award to Bill Moyers. In presenting the award, Meryl Streep, a member of the Center board, said, "Through resourceful, intrepid reportage and perceptive voices from the forward edge of the debate, Moyers has examined an environment under siege with the aim of engaging citizens." Here is the text of his response to Ms. Streep's presentation of the award.]

...Remember James Watt, President Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior? My favorite online environmental journal, the ever engaging Grist, reminded us recently of how James Watt told the U.S. Congress that protecting natural resources was unimportant in light of the imminent return of Jesus Christ. In public testimony he said, 'after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back.'

Beltway elites snickered. The press corps didn't know what he was talking about. But James Watt was serious. So were his compatriots out across the country. They are the people who believe the Bible is literally true - one-third of the American electorate, if a recent Gallup poll is accurate. In this past election several million good and decent citizens went to the polls believing in the rapture index.

...A 2002 TIME/CNN poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in the Book of Revelation are going to come true. Nearly one-quarter think the Bible predicted the 9/11 attacks. Drive across the country with your radio tuned to the more than 1,600 Christian radio stations or in the motel turn some of the 250 Christian TV stations and you can hear some of this end-time gospel. And you will come to understand why people under the spell of such potent prophecies cannot be expected, as Grist puts it, "to worry about the environment. Why care about the earth when the droughts, floods, famine and pestilence brought by ecological collapse are signs of the apocalypse foretold in the Bible? Why care about global climate change when you and yours will be rescued in the rapture? And why care about converting from oil to solar when the same God who performed the miracle of the loaves and fishes can whip up a few billion barrels of light crude with a word?"



(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/7/2011 5:22:20 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
I think it is hard economic times...Many Republicans see the EPA and environmental groups costing jobs here in America because our industry is unable to compete with other parts of the world not burdened with these type of regulations.

There may be some truth to these worries but some things are just more important...They are wrong and their children and grandchildren will suffer if they get their way.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/7/2011 8:15:01 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I think it is hard economic times...Many Republicans see the EPA and environmental groups costing jobs here in America because our industry is unable to compete with other parts of the world not burdened with these type of regulations.

There may be some truth to these worries but some things are just more important...They are wrong and their children and grandchildren will suffer if they get their way.

Butch

Have any of the pro oil people figured out yet that abolishing the EPA will not only hurt the environment but put a hell of a lot of Americans out of work?

Has anyone else figured out that if not for the EPA, our national symbol would be extinct in the lower 48 and in probably in Alaska as well?

The Bald Eagle. Symbol of the US. Killed by American Industry.

It was a close thing.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environm... - 11/7/2011 8:18:11 PM   
Hillwilliam


Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline
Abolish the EPA if you want this http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/06/nigeria-the-cost-of-oil/100082/ in our country.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)
Profile   Post #: 30
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: What does the Republicans have against the Environment? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094