Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Page / 4
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:54:04 AM EDT
Just cut the EPAs budget by 2/3rds the rest will take care of itself.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:54:58 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By diehippy:
Who the fuck cares at this point?
View Quote

60-70% of voters in the US that will vote on the 8th?

or 1-2% of people that will actually decide the election?
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:56:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2016 11:57:08 AM EDT by jlficken]
The EPA is out of control but despite that they are a necessary evil in our country or else we will end up like China/India/etc.

They need to be reigned in but I don't think that we could get rid of 70% of what they do and remain where we are at today. Anything that has been enacted by them that isn't part of the law can go away though.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:56:53 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By deschutes541:
I need to educate myself on EPA laws. I enjoy spending time outdoors so my immediate reaction, albeit an uneducated one, is that cutting 80% of laws protecting the places I enjoy may be extreme.
View Quote


hmmmm something fucky
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:57:05 AM EDT
The EPA is directly responsible for hampering the building of new nuclear power plants and for that reason alone I want them dismantled. I want more thorium nuclear power to be developed.

Also, thank the EPA for increasingly bullshit mileage claims by car manufacturers these days. Pretty soon any new vehicle sold will have to get at least 40mpg. How do they claim stuff like that? Soon you'll have 10-speed automatic transmission and 0W-5 motor oil.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:57:26 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bagofcrabs65:

He is a nevertrumper.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bagofcrabs65:
Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
Originally Posted By gym007:
Vote for Hillary then


this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton.

why do you keep doing that????

He is a nevertrumper.

I wouldn't be surprised. He has switched his views on Trump so many times people have asked him if he is bipolar
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:58:13 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TexasSmooth:
The EPA is directly responsible for hampering the building of new nuclear power plants and for that reason alone I want them dismantled. I want more thorium nuclear power to be developed.

Also, thank the EPA for increasingly bullshit mileage claims by car manufacturers these days. Pretty soon any new vehicle sold will have to get at least 40mpg. How do they claim stuff like that? Soon you'll have 10-speed automatic transmission and 0W-5 motor oil.
View Quote
Welcome to the party pal.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:59:05 AM EDT
Needs to happen. I don't know about 70-80% though.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 11:59:13 AM EDT
Fuck the epa, between waters of the usa, bullshit regs on semi's that ruin the fuel mileage and general fuckup caused on all diesels. Fuck them. Defund that organization.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:00:46 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:

Who the fuck duck hunts on Capitol Hill?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By TruckinAR:
Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN:
is that a good idea?

70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage.

Who the fuck duck hunts on Capitol Hill?


Speaking of sewage on Capitol Hill...

We live maybe 10 minutes out, but we rarely get into DC for what are likely obvious reasons.

Last time we were there, I took the kids to the Botanical Gardens to see the corpse flower. Yes, it smells like a bloated animal corpse. Anyhow...

We're walking back to the car, and my 3 year old little girl is enamored with the ducks in the Capitol reflecting pool. I said, don't get too close. You don't want to fall in.

Why?

Because it's full of poop.

Why?

Do you see the ducks?

Yes.

Where do the ducks poop?

I don't know.

Guess.

In little duck toilets?

You're adorable, but no, they poop in the water.

Why?

And right about here, a duck standing at the edge takes a massive rocket-squirt into the pool.

She goes, "DAD, HE POOPED!"

I was like, toldya.

So for weeks, she was telling everyone that would listen, "Dad took me to see the government, and there was just poop everywhere!"
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:04:49 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
Oh bullshit.

I am a tree hugger by education and professional experience anyway. The EPA fuckin blows but to say 98% of what they do isn't protecting the environment is just making you look silly.

It's more accurate to say that most of what they do is good, but some is utter and complete bullshit political hackery. Clean air and clean water are good things, cleaning up old waste sites that threaten public health is good. We are, up until recently, far better off with some form of the EPA than without. If you really knew the history of the environment prior to 1970 things were kinda fucked up.

All that being said they are completely out of control and need to get the ever loving bitch slapped out of them by congress and the courts. The environment has become the favorite excuse of the left to implement economy destroying wealth redistribution and massive bureaucratic overreach.

My vision for the EPA and DEC in my state is for it to be more of NASA type organization. You want to reduce XYZ? Ok take your budget and go engineer a solution, then share it with business...solve the problems don't just mandate something and let the Heconomy decide it's cheaper to make it overseas. If they actually gave a shit about the planet the would want to keep things being made in the western world where the regulation do protect the environment. Again, I'd rather have an EPA than not...but much like the rest of washington is needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt with the benefit of hindsight.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
Originally Posted By Kingpin38506:
Originally Posted By BCV:
95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways.

I would push that number up to the 98% range.

There's very little the EPA does that actually protects the environment. They are on par with the BATFE with their effectiveness.

Oh bullshit.

I am a tree hugger by education and professional experience anyway. The EPA fuckin blows but to say 98% of what they do isn't protecting the environment is just making you look silly.

It's more accurate to say that most of what they do is good, but some is utter and complete bullshit political hackery. Clean air and clean water are good things, cleaning up old waste sites that threaten public health is good. We are, up until recently, far better off with some form of the EPA than without. If you really knew the history of the environment prior to 1970 things were kinda fucked up.

All that being said they are completely out of control and need to get the ever loving bitch slapped out of them by congress and the courts. The environment has become the favorite excuse of the left to implement economy destroying wealth redistribution and massive bureaucratic overreach.

My vision for the EPA and DEC in my state is for it to be more of NASA type organization. You want to reduce XYZ? Ok take your budget and go engineer a solution, then share it with business...solve the problems don't just mandate something and let the Heconomy decide it's cheaper to make it overseas. If they actually gave a shit about the planet the would want to keep things being made in the western world where the regulation do protect the environment. Again, I'd rather have an EPA than not...but much like the rest of washington is needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt with the benefit of hindsight.

Let's say I'm an ignorant layman talking out of my ass, and you're an all knowing expert.

How much of their yearly budget and operations directly go to keeping the air and water clean? I'm not talking mission statements or philosophies, but actual cleaning of the water, air, and land.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:05:45 PM EDT
EPA is BAD for our country and a fucking joke.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:06:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mike_Miller:


hmmmm something fucky
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Mike_Miller:
Originally Posted By deschutes541:
I need to educate myself on EPA laws. I enjoy spending time outdoors so my immediate reaction, albeit an uneducated one, is that cutting 80% of laws protecting the places I enjoy may be extreme.


hmmmm something fucky


Nothings fucky. I admitted I don't know shit on the subject and need to do some research to form an opinion. Whats fucky with that?
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:08:26 PM EDT
Dumb statements to make right before the election. It isn't going to win you any more votes and only serves to ostracize others that may have been thinking about you. I don't know why they haven't muzzled this moron yet.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:09:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN:
is that a good idea?

70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage.
View Quote

there are something like 25,000 pages of regulations on importing a head of lettuce/cabbage/some other vegetable alone. i think hes right
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:10:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2016 12:11:40 PM EDT by DeltaElite777]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By StewartTR:
Needs to happen. I don't know about 70-80% though.
View Quote


You're right.

85-90% would be better. And apply the same percentage of elimination to the employees.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:14:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN:
is that a good idea?

70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage.
View Quote


The EPA is a radical left wing terrorist organization with the sole goal of economically damaging the United States by destroying manufacturing, energy, and any other business it can get its hooks in.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:28:17 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rcav8r:
Do you think the government owns the rainwater as the EPA insists? Or that they should be in charge of cleaning up gold mines?

Yeah, the EPA is mostly BS, and should be cut drastically, and their duties more tightly defined. And no rulemaking powers. Make their shit go through congress or presidential orders or something.
View Quote


Don't forget about declaring people's yards as wetlands when it rains and there are puddles.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:32:54 PM EDT
We have trouble enforcing 2% of the Rules and Regulations right now. Yeah. I think that we can do away with 80% of them.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:33:48 PM EDT
Yep. Most people only think of the major clean air and water rules which were completed decades ago. Now EPA has nothing of real value left to accomplish so most of their regulations are simple left wing harrassment. Occaisionally a few of the more egregious get reported on. For example-- about a month ago it was reported that Whole Foods Stores was fined several million dollars by EPA because a few of their stores did not fill out EPA paperwork on how they disposed of expired vitamins. Supposedly expired vitamins are a hazardous waste.

Then if you may remember a few years ago EPA banned thrift stores, Goodwill, etc. from selling used old childrens books because they supposedly had lead in the ink. Also were going to prohibit chidren from riding ATVs because of the lead-acid batteries. I think those may have been overturned but not sure. There are thousands of rules like that in existence, which as has been previously mentioned is one of the primary reasons manufacturing businesses leave the US for other countries.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:37:12 PM EDT
I hope they still protect the speckled-dick-vagina-face-desert-octopus-frog-rat.

They need to shut down more farms to protect its habitat.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:38:13 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kingpin38506:

Let's say I'm an ignorant layman talking out of my ass, and you're an all knowing expert.

How much of their yearly budget and operations directly go to keeping the air and water clean? I'm not talking mission statements or philosophies, but actual cleaning of the water, air, and land.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Kingpin38506:
Originally Posted By xd341:
Originally Posted By Kingpin38506:
Originally Posted By BCV:
95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways.

I would push that number up to the 98% range.

There's very little the EPA does that actually protects the environment. They are on par with the BATFE with their effectiveness.

Oh bullshit.

I am a tree hugger by education and professional experience anyway. The EPA fuckin blows but to say 98% of what they do isn't protecting the environment is just making you look silly.

It's more accurate to say that most of what they do is good, but some is utter and complete bullshit political hackery. Clean air and clean water are good things, cleaning up old waste sites that threaten public health is good. We are, up until recently, far better off with some form of the EPA than without. If you really knew the history of the environment prior to 1970 things were kinda fucked up.

All that being said they are completely out of control and need to get the ever loving bitch slapped out of them by congress and the courts. The environment has become the favorite excuse of the left to implement economy destroying wealth redistribution and massive bureaucratic overreach.

My vision for the EPA and DEC in my state is for it to be more of NASA type organization. You want to reduce XYZ? Ok take your budget and go engineer a solution, then share it with business...solve the problems don't just mandate something and let the Heconomy decide it's cheaper to make it overseas. If they actually gave a shit about the planet the would want to keep things being made in the western world where the regulation do protect the environment. Again, I'd rather have an EPA than not...but much like the rest of washington is needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt with the benefit of hindsight.

Let's say I'm an ignorant layman talking out of my ass, and you're an all knowing expert.

How much of their yearly budget and operations directly go to keeping the air and water clean? I'm not talking mission statements or philosophies, but actual cleaning of the water, air, and land.
I have no fucking idea. I'm not arguing that it's a well run organization, just that the mission is beneficial to the country. If I had to take a WAG I'd say that less than 10% is used for actual clean ups....but that's cause I know the primary funding for actual cleanups is first sought from PRP's that get the unholy shit sued out of them by the government. Real cleanup work like what I did for years is often mandated and supervised by the EPA ( or NYSDEC in my state) but actually conducted by private parties. Only when no viable PRP can be sued does real government money get spent and then it comes out of RCRA/CERCLA/SUPERFUND which are authorized separately from EPA budgets anyway.

I didn't like dealing with DEC, although they never went out of their way to be dickheads, the hazwaste division was picky but fair and the engineers I worked with on cleanups where decent, smart and reasonable people. The real work of taking care of the environment doesn't need to be detrimental to business or freedom, it is, only because of politics and therefor the EPA should be shit canned en mass and repopulated with engineers that give a shit about the environment and aren't political about it.

I don't want to hunt in a sewer, or eat fish filled with mercury or have my dirt road oiled with dioxin..good ol' Russel Bliss didn't want to do that either. I always told people that all the fun toxic shit that got used...got used for a reason...cause it worked really well! Take the EPA, turn it over to engineers and scientist and go find shit that works really well that doesn't cause problems....make it affordable and it will be the preferred solution.

You do not want to live in a country with no EPA like function, it absolutely can be done better with 98% less political influence and freedom killing overreach. I'll agree with that statement.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:39:21 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CuyahogaBill:
How about retarded CAFE standards for vehicles? Those need to go.
View Quote

Please?
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:39:23 PM EDT
He should get rid of the lead contamination and clean up BS.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:40:26 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN:
is that a good idea?

70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage.
View Quote



Where do you think ducks shit?

It's a good START, if anything.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:41:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN:
is that a good idea?

70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage.
View Quote


Go look up some regulations.

Report back with findings.

Hint: lead ammo use in California, shutting down public land over some bullshit endangered INVASIVE species.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:43:42 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
Welcome to the party pal.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
Originally Posted By TexasSmooth:
The EPA is directly responsible for hampering the building of new nuclear power plants and for that reason alone I want them dismantled. I want more thorium nuclear power to be developed.

Also, thank the EPA for increasingly bullshit mileage claims by car manufacturers these days. Pretty soon any new vehicle sold will have to get at least 40mpg. How do they claim stuff like that? Soon you'll have 10-speed automatic transmission and 0W-5 motor oil.
Welcome to the party pal.



Like catalytic converters on your boat, chainsaw, and lawn mower? Do away with the EPA. Unlike China and India, we have (mostly) fair courts and can settle egregious stuff through torts. Maybe someone didn't notice that China and India have LOTS of government control - and their environment is shit! Things that make you go, "hmmm ..."
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:43:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2016 12:44:21 PM EDT by GlockZen]
This is typical Lib misstatement.

http://fortune.com/2016/10/07/donald-trump-business-regulations/

Trump said 70% of Federal Regulation, he did not say EPA.

.S. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said as many as 70% of federal agency regulations could be eliminated if he is elected in November, just hours after an adviser said the candidate would seek to cut 10%.

Trump, who blamed regulations for stifling business, told a crowd at a town hall event in New Hampshire on Thursday night that regulations for the environment and safety would remain.

“We are cutting the regulation at a tremendous clip. I would say 70% of regulations can go,” Trump said. “It’s just stopping businesses from growing.”
View Quote



Yes. Its another braggart statement, that his campaign walked back to 10%.

But still to characterize it as the EPA, specifically made for independent voters to go holy shit, thats just crazy. Just like the 2nd post.

DO NOT GET SHILLED.

Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:44:17 PM EDT
EPA is just another strong-arm of the US gov't that has very little to do with protecting the env.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:44:39 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
I have no fucking idea. I'm not arguing that it's a well run organization, just that the mission is beneficial to the country. If I had to take a WAG I'd say that less than 10% is used for actual clean ups....but that's cause I know the primary funding for actual cleanups is first sought from PRP's that get the unholy shit sued out of them by the government. Real cleanup work like what I did for years is often mandated and supervised by the EPA ( or NYSDEC in my state) but actually conducted by private parties. Only when no viable PRP can be sued does real government money get spent and then it comes out of RCRA/CERCLA/SUPERFUND which are authorized separately from EPA budgets anyway.

I didn't like dealing with DEC, although they never went out of their way to be dickheads, the hazwaste division was picky but fair and the engineers I worked with on cleanups where decent, smart and reasonable people. The real work of taking care of the environment doesn't need to be detrimental to business or freedom, it is, only because of politics and therefor the EPA should be shit canned en mass and repopulated with engineers that give a shit about the environment and aren't political about it.

I don't want to hunt in a sewer, or eat fish filled with mercury or have my dirt road oiled with dioxin..good ol' Russel Bliss didn't want to do that either. I always told people that all the fun toxic shit that got used...got used for a reason...cause it worked really well! Take the EPA, turn it over to engineers and scientist and go find shit that works really well that doesn't cause problems....make it affordable and it will be the preferred solution.

You do not want to live in a country with no EPA like function, it absolutely can be done better with 98% less political influence and freedom killing overreach. I'll agree with that statement.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
Originally Posted By Kingpin38506:
Originally Posted By xd341:
Originally Posted By Kingpin38506:
Originally Posted By BCV:
95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways.

I would push that number up to the 98% range.

There's very little the EPA does that actually protects the environment. They are on par with the BATFE with their effectiveness.

Oh bullshit.

I am a tree hugger by education and professional experience anyway. The EPA fuckin blows but to say 98% of what they do isn't protecting the environment is just making you look silly.

It's more accurate to say that most of what they do is good, but some is utter and complete bullshit political hackery. Clean air and clean water are good things, cleaning up old waste sites that threaten public health is good. We are, up until recently, far better off with some form of the EPA than without. If you really knew the history of the environment prior to 1970 things were kinda fucked up.

All that being said they are completely out of control and need to get the ever loving bitch slapped out of them by congress and the courts. The environment has become the favorite excuse of the left to implement economy destroying wealth redistribution and massive bureaucratic overreach.

My vision for the EPA and DEC in my state is for it to be more of NASA type organization. You want to reduce XYZ? Ok take your budget and go engineer a solution, then share it with business...solve the problems don't just mandate something and let the Heconomy decide it's cheaper to make it overseas. If they actually gave a shit about the planet the would want to keep things being made in the western world where the regulation do protect the environment. Again, I'd rather have an EPA than not...but much like the rest of washington is needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt with the benefit of hindsight.

Let's say I'm an ignorant layman talking out of my ass, and you're an all knowing expert.

How much of their yearly budget and operations directly go to keeping the air and water clean? I'm not talking mission statements or philosophies, but actual cleaning of the water, air, and land.
I have no fucking idea. I'm not arguing that it's a well run organization, just that the mission is beneficial to the country. If I had to take a WAG I'd say that less than 10% is used for actual clean ups....but that's cause I know the primary funding for actual cleanups is first sought from PRP's that get the unholy shit sued out of them by the government. Real cleanup work like what I did for years is often mandated and supervised by the EPA ( or NYSDEC in my state) but actually conducted by private parties. Only when no viable PRP can be sued does real government money get spent and then it comes out of RCRA/CERCLA/SUPERFUND which are authorized separately from EPA budgets anyway.

I didn't like dealing with DEC, although they never went out of their way to be dickheads, the hazwaste division was picky but fair and the engineers I worked with on cleanups where decent, smart and reasonable people. The real work of taking care of the environment doesn't need to be detrimental to business or freedom, it is, only because of politics and therefor the EPA should be shit canned en mass and repopulated with engineers that give a shit about the environment and aren't political about it.

I don't want to hunt in a sewer, or eat fish filled with mercury or have my dirt road oiled with dioxin..good ol' Russel Bliss didn't want to do that either. I always told people that all the fun toxic shit that got used...got used for a reason...cause it worked really well! Take the EPA, turn it over to engineers and scientist and go find shit that works really well that doesn't cause problems....make it affordable and it will be the preferred solution.

You do not want to live in a country with no EPA like function, it absolutely can be done better with 98% less political influence and freedom killing overreach. I'll agree with that statement.



Were you the one that released all of the contaminated water into the Colorado?

Or was that an EPA employee?
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:49:05 PM EDT
You have no idea how in depth the EPA's tentacles go into every day life.



I highly doubt he could cut 70-80% to begin with. But just giving it a trim job would be a huge relief to anyone in the energy sector.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:54:16 PM EDT
Regulations should dictate outcomes rather than processes. Or better, just tax stuff and let the market make it go away from there.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:54:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2016 12:56:30 PM EDT by Rick-OShay]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By xd341:
I have no fucking idea. I'm not arguing that it's a well run organization, just that the mission is beneficial to the country. If I had to take a WAG I'd say that less than 10% is used for actual clean ups....but that's cause I know the primary funding for actual cleanups is first sought from PRP's that get the unholy shit sued out of them by the government. Real cleanup work like what I did for years is often mandated and supervised by the EPA ( or NYSDEC in my state) but actually conducted by private parties. Only when no viable PRP can be sued does real government money get spent and then it comes out of RCRA/CERCLA/SUPERFUND which are authorized separately from EPA budgets anyway.

I didn't like dealing with DEC, although they never went out of their way to be dickheads, the hazwaste division was picky but fair and the engineers I worked with on cleanups where decent, smart and reasonable people. The real work of taking care of the environment doesn't need to be detrimental to business or freedom, it is, only because of politics and therefor the EPA should be shit canned en mass and repopulated with engineers that give a shit about the environment and aren't political about it.

I don't want to hunt in a sewer, or eat fish filled with mercury or have my dirt road oiled with dioxin..good ol' Russel Bliss didn't want to do that either. I always told people that all the fun toxic shit that got used...got used for a reason...cause it worked really well! Take the EPA, turn it over to engineers and scientist and go find shit that works really well that doesn't cause problems....make it affordable and it will be the preferred solution.

You do not want to live in a country with no EPA like function, it absolutely can be done better with 98% less political influence and freedom killing overreach. I'll agree with that statement.
View Quote


Part in bold? That old lie again? They were hollering about that in the 70's - blamed colored dye in toilet paper and paper towels for raising the mercury level in fish. At the time the book I reference, "The Disaster Lobby", was printed, al the mercury ever processed and used by mankind would have fit into 21 box cars. For all of history.


Ever seen the ocean? Imagine all the oceans of the world. Now imaging how much 21 box cars of ANYTHING is going to raise the levels in the fish.


The icing on the cake was an archeological discovery, including remains of fish - anchovies, I think it was. 10,000 year old settlement. Fish remains had EXACTLY THE SAME MERCURY LEVEL as modern fish.

EPA has to have a crisis to get power. Mercury in fish was a fake crisis, just like DDT, ozone hole, climate change, tris, alar. EPA is making us buy toilets that don't flush enough water to actually flush, and to put expensive squiggle bulbs in our houses, that release (TA-DA!) mercury when they break. Bad for fish, OK for us I guess.

Get rid of it.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 12:56:22 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chadjetlag:
The EPA has little to do with environmental protection and everything to do with people/company/financial control. 80% would be a good start.
View Quote

Yep, it's all about keeping your pockets lined and your cronies in business.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:05:51 PM EDT
I do support some regulations. I don't want people dumping nuclear waste into the ocean. I also think we can cut the epa budget by 70%.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:09:45 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chadjetlag:
The EPA has little to do with environmental protection and everything to do with people/company/financial control. 80% would be a good start.
View Quote




This.

Much of it has been lobbied by certain forms of big business to hurt other businesses and has NOTHING to do with the environment.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:12:41 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chadjetlag:
The EPA has little to do with environmental protection and everything to do with people/company/financial control. 80% would be a good start.
View Quote


The ABOVE can not be emphasized enough
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:13:23 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BCV:
95% of the EPA is bullshit anyways.
View Quote


This....
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:15:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/24/2016 1:16:38 PM EDT by whollyshite]
70% Is a nice number to shoot for, but if he just gets rid of 30%, you'll watch industry boom in this country.

ETA: The best part of this would be that the main corporations don't have a stranglehold on markets. This would make entry much easier for smaller companies.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:18:50 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Reservist:


I remember when arfcom wasn't full of whiney old women.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Reservist:
Originally Posted By bagofcrabs65:
He won't cut anything.

Originally Posted By METT-T:
I wouldn't be too concerned about him following through with anything he said he was going to do, anyway.

I remember when arfcom wasn't full of whiney old women.


No, you don't.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:25:33 PM EDT
95% of the EPA is regulating what people can do on their own property, so it's a good start.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:26:51 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bagofcrabs65:

So, you think he will cut the EPA? If he doesn't, what is your excuse?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By bagofcrabs65:
Originally Posted By chadjetlag:
Originally Posted By bagofcrabs65:
He won't cut anything.



oh look another pathetic arfcom defeatist.

So, you think he will cut the EPA? If he doesn't, what is your excuse?


Unlike the whiny nevertrump defeatist cunts here, I will cross that bridge if or when we get to it
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:28:56 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By chadjetlag:
The EPA has little to do with environmental protection and everything to do with people/company/financial control. 80% would be a good start.
View Quote


This




Treehugger
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:30:00 PM EDT
Do eet!

I want my old type gas can nozzles back.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:31:08 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By redfish86:


As with most Government programs and regulations, I'd say that 70-80% is BS waste anyways so I think he's on to something.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By redfish86:
Originally Posted By deschutes541:
Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN:
is that a good idea?

70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage.


I support Trump 100% but I agree with you. Inb4 you get called a treehugger.


As with most Government programs and regulations, I'd say that 70-80% is BS waste anyways so I think he's on to something.



I agree, but he shouldn't bring it up right now. It's not a vote-winning position. Anyone who realizes the negatives of the EPA and would support something like hat are already voting for him. Dumbass, he just scared 5% of undeciders because clean water and baby ducks are good.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:33:24 PM EDT
Considering how bloated and out of control the EPA is, I think you could reasonably cut 70 % of their regulations. and we'd be just fine.
Does the EPA need to concern itself with seasonal creeks in the back of farmer johns pasture? Should they be involved in every aspect of how you manage your dairy farm or other 20 acre parcel of land?
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:35:09 PM EDT
The EPA has been an overall good thing for our country. Without them we'd have cities that look like places in China or India with pollution and garbage everywhere. With that said, they're a bit out of control lately. Things like trying to regulate CO2, fleet fuel economy standards, oppressive diesel vehicle regulations and of course the infamous EPA gas cans. The EPA needs to be significantly reigned in.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:35:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By CPT_CAVEMAN:
is that a good idea?

70-80% seems kinda extreme. I'm not a TreeHugger, but I also don't want to go duck hunting in sewage.
View Quote

Ya..like your state is going to let that happen.....EVERY state has their own DNR or EPA type of office. Their is NO Power given by the states or the people for a FEDERAL EPA office to even exist.
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:35:36 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CuyahogaBill:
How about retarded CAFE standards for vehicles? Those need to go.
View Quote



yes please
Link Posted: 10/24/2016 1:38:27 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NoVaGator:


this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton.

why do you keep doing that????


apologies... that was actually Cobalty2004 that did that yesterday.

regardless, why would you - one of Trump's OG pumpers - suggest (even jokingly) that someone vote for Clinton?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NoVaGator:
Originally Posted By gym007:
Vote for Hillary then


this is the 2nd time in 2 days that you've encouraged someone to vote for Clinton.

why do you keep doing that????


apologies... that was actually Cobalty2004 that did that yesterday.

regardless, why would you - one of Trump's OG pumpers - suggest (even jokingly) that someone vote for Clinton?
If it walks like a cuck, talks like a cuck......I tell that person to vote Hillary.
Page / 4
Top Top