Are Environmental Regulations Unnecessary?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Are Environmental Regulations Unnecessary?"

On the contrary, they're necessary, proper, and Constitutional.

There are far too many businesses, large and small, willing to pollute the environment and endanger human life in an effort to maximize profits.

And the conservative notion that absent environmental protection businesses that pollute would eventually be 'put out of business' by 'outraged consumers' is naïve, unfounded, and utterly ridiculous.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

It was real. Guess you didn't know either the Cuyahoga river in Ohio spontaneous burst into flames one time from all the pollution.

 

[skookerasbil]

Nough said...

Orangeman FINALLY makes a thread that makes sense!!! Good point s0n. But as usual, you've ended up pwning yourself.


Of course, new EPA regs aren't going to make that picture any more clear. In 2015, EPA regulations are largely about destroying small business and advancing a socialist agenda...........[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html'] ......only the perpetually duped don't get it. Notice something...........all progressives love regulations but it has nothing to do with the environment. Make no mistake......if the air were 99.9 percent pollution free, these dolts would still be pushing for more crushing regulations.[/URL]

An idiot like C Clayton doesn't give a flying fuck that these insignificant small regulations crush these businesses and their families. These fucks consider ANY small business evil..........the thinking is so fucked.

 

[martybegan]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

You would have to have been born after the 1970s, or else be willfully ignorant not to know how bad the pollution was back then. Take your pick.

It still doesn't excuse using a photograph that has no verification or possibly even bearing on the topic.

Like most progressives, to you the Narrative is more important than the truth.

 

[martybegan]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

Either you are a completely ignorant fuck or a purposeful liar. I was born in '43, and I saw the brown air in the cities on the West Coast. Our air and water is far cleaner than than it was from the time I was a child until the regulations began to take effect in the '80's.

No, I am saying that yes the air was bad, but this photograph isn't evidence of it. and good work 40 years ago does not allow over regulation in the current time period.

 

[martybegan]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

It was real. Guess you didn't know either the Cuyahoga river in Ohio spontaneous burst into flames one time from all the pollution.

If you showed a picture of the that it would be more accurate. Who knows if that picture is of smog, or just fog. Yet its being used to make a point that implies that haze is smog.

Facts matter, unless you are a progressive who needs to dumb down his/her message.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

It was real. Guess you didn't know either the Cuyahoga river in Ohio spontaneous burst into flames one time from all the pollution.

If you showed a picture of the that it would be more accurate. Who knows if that picture is of smog, or just fog. Yet its being used to make a point that implies that haze is smog.

Facts matter, unless you are a progressive who needs to dumb down his/her message.

I remember in the second grade how bad it was still in LA and New York and that was around 72, not good at posting memes on this board but found a you tube post, btw I AM a con

 

[martybegan]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

It was real. Guess you didn't know either the Cuyahoga river in Ohio spontaneous burst into flames one time from all the pollution.

If you showed a picture of the that it would be more accurate. Who knows if that picture is of smog, or just fog. Yet its being used to make a point that implies that haze is smog.

Facts matter, unless you are a progressive who needs to dumb down his/her message.

I remember in the second grade how bad it was still in LA and New York and that was around 72, not good at posting memes on this board but found a you tube post, btw I AM a con

Not disputing the river burned.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

It was real. Guess you didn't know either the Cuyahoga river in Ohio spontaneous burst into flames one time from all the pollution.

If you showed a picture of the that it would be more accurate. Who knows if that picture is of smog, or just fog. Yet its being used to make a point that implies that haze is smog.

Facts matter, unless you are a progressive who needs to dumb down his/her message.

I remember in the second grade how bad it was still in LA and New York and that was around 72, not good at posting memes on this board but found a you tube post, btw I AM a con

Not disputing the river burned.

Not disputing either, Obama is over reaching with the 1990? EPA clean water act because I know what you are thinking and the OP is being a drama queen. But the fact remains it was kind of bad back then.

But now today it's just being used for fear mongering by the left, just like MW laws we are not going back to the 60'S if left unregulated or not going back to the 1900s if we get rid of MW.

 

[orogenicman]

They are very necessary but it should not be overregulated either.

Define 'overregulated'?

Requiring a pool cleaning company to spend 25,000 to clean up a one gallon spill of hydrochloric acid that dropped off of their truck. They had to scrape up several yards of dirt and ship it cross country to a hazardous waste dump. That is the definition of insanity.

Now, you claim to be educated. Why did CA require that level of idiocy?

If they did that, they were just plain stupid. They could have simply neutralized the acidic soil with lime and disposed of it at a sanitary landfill for about $35 per cubic yard. All the landfill would need to know is if it is within the acceptable ranges for reactivity, corrosivity, and ignitability (RCI). If it was, they would have been good to go. RCI defines whether or not material is hazardous.

Well, it looks like you don't know all that much do you. All that was required was to pour water on it. What happens when you pour water on HCl?

Landfills don't accept saturated soils, dude. It has to be dry. Guess you don't know that much after all, do you?

 

[orogenicman]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

It was real. Guess you didn't know either the Cuyahoga river in Ohio spontaneous burst into flames one time from all the pollution.

It used to be a local pastime for teens to drive down to the Monongahela River, In Pittsburg to watch it burn.

 

[orogenicman]

Nough said...

Orangeman FINALLY makes a thread that makes sense!!! Good point s0n. But as usual, you've ended up pwning yourself.


Of course, new EPA regs aren't going to make that picture any more clear. In 2015, EPA regulations are largely about destroying small business and advancing a socialist agenda...........[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html'] ......only the perpetually duped don't get it. Notice something...........all progressives love regulations but it has nothing to do with the environment. Make no mistake......if the air were 99.9 percent pollution free, these dolts would still be pushing for more crushing regulations.[/URL]
[URL='http://[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html][IMG]http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/duh.gif[/IMG][/URL]'][URL='http://[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html][IMG]http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/duh.gif[/IMG][/URL]']

[/URL]'][URL='http://[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html][IMG]http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/duh.gif[/IMG][/URL]']']An idiot like C Clayton doesn't give a flying fuck that these insignificant small regulations crush these businesses and their families. These fucks consider ANY small business evil..........the thinking is so fucked.[/URL][/URL]

[URL='http://[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/duh.gif.html][IMG]http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e305/baldaltima/duh.gif[/IMG][/URL]']
']
You seem to believe that regulations are only meant to apply to conservatives. Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. They apply to everyone, even "evil socialists".[/URL][/URL][/URL]

 

[Carla_Danger]

They are very necessary but it should not be overregulated either.

Give us an example of over-regulation concerning our environment, and the corporations that pollute it.

 

[orogenicman]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

You would have to have been born after the 1970s, or else be willfully ignorant not to know how bad the pollution was back then. Take your pick.

It still doesn't excuse using a photograph that has no verification or possibly even bearing on the topic.

Like most progressives, to you the Narrative is more important than the truth.

Midtown and Lower Manhattan covered in smog. 1966

L.A. Civic Center masked by smog on January 6, 1948. Courtesy of UCLA Library

New York in the 1940s

For you to deny what everyone born prior to 1980 knows first hand is simply moronic.

 

[orogenicman]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

Either you are a completely ignorant fuck or a purposeful liar. I was born in '43, and I saw the brown air in the cities on the West Coast. Our air and water is far cleaner than than it was from the time I was a child until the regulations began to take effect in the '80's.

No, I am saying that yes the air was bad, but this photograph isn't evidence of it. and good work 40 years ago does not allow over regulation in the current time period.

All of you overregulation whiners have yet to produce a single example of the overregulation you whiners are whining about. Gee, I wonder why that is? The crooks (some of whom saw jail time) who were forced to clean up their hazardous waste sites made the exact same whiny arguments. You didn't know this? Huh.

 

[westwall]

They are very necessary but it should not be overregulated either.

Define 'overregulated'?

Requiring a pool cleaning company to spend 25,000 to clean up a one gallon spill of hydrochloric acid that dropped off of their truck. They had to scrape up several yards of dirt and ship it cross country to a hazardous waste dump. That is the definition of insanity.

Now, you claim to be educated. Why did CA require that level of idiocy?

If they did that, they were just plain stupid. They could have simply neutralized the acidic soil with lime and disposed of it at a sanitary landfill for about $35 per cubic yard. All the landfill would need to know is if it is within the acceptable ranges for reactivity, corrosivity, and ignitability (RCI). If it was, they would have been good to go. RCI defines whether or not material is hazardous.

Well, it looks like you don't know all that much do you. All that was required was to pour water on it. What happens when you pour water on HCl?

Landfills don't accept saturated soils, dude. It has to be dry. Guess you don't know that much after all, do you?

Water poured on HCl results in hydronium (H3O) and Cl-. What is the next step in the process?

 

[orogenicman]

Define 'overregulated'?

Requiring a pool cleaning company to spend 25,000 to clean up a one gallon spill of hydrochloric acid that dropped off of their truck. They had to scrape up several yards of dirt and ship it cross country to a hazardous waste dump. That is the definition of insanity.

Now, you claim to be educated. Why did CA require that level of idiocy?

If they did that, they were just plain stupid. They could have simply neutralized the acidic soil with lime and disposed of it at a sanitary landfill for about $35 per cubic yard. All the landfill would need to know is if it is within the acceptable ranges for reactivity, corrosivity, and ignitability (RCI). If it was, they would have been good to go. RCI defines whether or not material is hazardous.

Well, it looks like you don't know all that much do you. All that was required was to pour water on it. What happens when you pour water on HCl?

Landfills don't accept saturated soils, dude. It has to be dry. Guess you don't know that much after all, do you?

Water poured on HCl results in hydronium (H3O) and Cl-. What is the next step in the process?

HCL dumped into soil reacts with that soil, but not completely. The result is that the soil becomes acidic (and meets the reactivity requirements of hazardous waste). You either have to send it to a hazardous waste landfill, or else neutralize it then sent it to a sanitary landfill. It cannot be simply neutralized with water because landfills don't take wet soils. So you use lime and churn up the soil to neutralize the acid. By the way, even if you had to send it to a hazardous waste landfill, according to your own account we are only talking about "several yards of dirt", so even that little amount going to a hazardous waste landfill is not going to break the bank. Isn't it funny how conservatives rant on about taking personal responsibility in every venue - except when it comes to cleaning up their own messes impacting the environment. End of story.

 

[martybegan]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

You would have to have been born after the 1970s, or else be willfully ignorant not to know how bad the pollution was back then. Take your pick.

It still doesn't excuse using a photograph that has no verification or possibly even bearing on the topic.

Like most progressives, to you the Narrative is more important than the truth.

Midtown and Lower Manhattan covered in smog. 1966

L.A. Civic Center masked by smog on January 6, 1948. Courtesy of UCLA Library

New York in the 1940s

For you to deny what everyone born prior to 1980 knows first hand is simply moronic.

Not denying it happened, I am questioning the veracity of the photograph.

 

[martybegan]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

Either you are a completely ignorant fuck or a purposeful liar. I was born in '43, and I saw the brown air in the cities on the West Coast. Our air and water is far cleaner than than it was from the time I was a child until the regulations began to take effect in the '80's.

No, I am saying that yes the air was bad, but this photograph isn't evidence of it. and good work 40 years ago does not allow over regulation in the current time period.

All of you overregulation whiners have yet to produce a single example of the overregulation you whiners are whining about. Gee, I wonder why that is? The crooks (some of whom saw jail time) who were forced to clean up their hazardous waste sites made the exact same whiny arguments. You didn't know this? Huh.

The high cost of delaying infrastructure repairs - The Washington Post

Red tape can consume nearly a decade on major projects. For example, raising the roadway of the Bayonne Bridge near the Port of Newark, a project with virtually no environmental impact (it uses existing foundations and right of way), required 47 permits from 19 agencies, and a 5,000-page environmental assessment. The approval process took five years. In San Diego, permitting for a desalination plant began in 2003 and was completed, after 14 legal challenges, in 2012. It will start producing fresh water this year — 12 years later.

 

[orogenicman]

Nough said...

The photograph means nothing, and you know it. For all we know that can be fog at dusk or dawn.

Fluff, nothing but.

Either you are a completely ignorant fuck or a purposeful liar. I was born in '43, and I saw the brown air in the cities on the West Coast. Our air and water is far cleaner than than it was from the time I was a child until the regulations began to take effect in the '80's.

No, I am saying that yes the air was bad, but this photograph isn't evidence of it. and good work 40 years ago does not allow over regulation in the current time period.

All of you overregulation whiners have yet to produce a single example of the overregulation you whiners are whining about. Gee, I wonder why that is? The crooks (some of whom saw jail time) who were forced to clean up their hazardous waste sites made the exact same whiny arguments. You didn't know this? Huh.

The high cost of delaying infrastructure repairs - The Washington Post

Red tape can consume nearly a decade on major projects. For example, raising the roadway of the Bayonne Bridge near the Port of Newark, a project with virtually no environmental impact (it uses existing foundations and right of way), required 47 permits from 19 agencies, and a 5,000-page environmental assessment. The approval process took five years. In San Diego, permitting for a desalination plant began in 2003 and was completed, after 14 legal challenges, in 2012. It will start producing fresh water this year — 12 years later.

So now you are promoting infrastructure projects? Considering that it is conservatives who have been holding up vast numbers of infrastructure projects for years, I find your alleged concern disingenuous.