Get government out of the way to rebuild after Sandy

[del]

They shouldn't have to grant a waiver. EPA is a fucked up joke. This is exactly why, this kind of communist bureaucracy, it's what crushes a countries industries, ......

So, no more pollution controls? Dump what you want in the waterways? Let the rivers catch fire?

How many people are going to continue doing business with a company that blatantly pollutes waterways and catches rivers on fire?

as long as they're the cheapest source of whatever they're making, plenty

 

[Rozman]

Obama had to jump in and play his Mr.President card
and run interference just to get action quickly for NJ.
Who knows how long it would have taken normally.

Doesn't that tell the Libs that Government interference is part of our
economy's problem...And they want more of it.

 

[konradv]

Now YOU'RE going with the "CO2 is pollution" meme?!?! You CONS get more desperate everyday. Just because the Mittster is taking a dive doesn't mean you have to go off the deep end.

You have not addressed my op. Is government getting out of the way better for new jersey and if so new jersey, why not the entire country.

The entire country wasn't hit by Sandy. I'm sure if some other hard hit area asked for one they'd get it, but that's hardly a reason to get rid of the EPA.

 

[Paulie]

So, no more pollution controls? Dump what you want in the waterways? Let the rivers catch fire?

How many people are going to continue doing business with a company that blatantly pollutes waterways and catches rivers on fire?

as long as they're the cheapest source of whatever they're making, plenty

For sure. That's why normal people still venture into Wal mart.

But would enough boycott to force a change? That's the big question. How much loss in profit is the company willing to endure before it changes the way it does business.

 

[Misty]

And then when that Solar Flare cooks a good chunk of the United States... Man, I bet there will still be people talking about getting stuff like the EPA out of the way.

You've been scared by propaganda.
Think about the earth, it's fire it's water it's gold diamond oil it's more than the EPA can ever understand so instead they make up a government agency to Control it. Probably by scamming people and making tons of money. Donate to EPA lolol
hey are the evil evil protection agency.

who came up with this evil, scamming agency?

liberal democrats?

I don't care who came up with it, I'm addressing government interference with america's ability to thrive.

I know both sides are shit. That's why I want less shit.

 

[del]

How many people are going to continue doing business with a company that blatantly pollutes waterways and catches rivers on fire?

as long as they're the cheapest source of whatever they're making, plenty

For sure. That's why normal people still venture into Wal mart.

But would enough boycott to force a change? That's the big question. How much loss in profit is the company willing to endure before it changes the way it does business.

how much deterioration of the environment are you willing to tolerate while you wait?

 

[del]

You've been scared by propaganda.
Think about the earth, it's fire it's water it's gold diamond oil it's more than the EPA can ever understand so instead they make up a government agency to Control it. Probably by scamming people and making tons of money. Donate to EPA lolol
hey are the evil evil protection agency.

who came up with this evil, scamming agency?

liberal democrats?

I don't care who came up with it, I'm addressing government interference with america's ability to thrive.

I know both sides are shit. That's why I want less shit.

with all due respect, you should just put on your big boy pants and shut the fuck up.

maybe you enjoy breathing sulphur fumes, most people don't

 

[Paulie]

as long as they're the cheapest source of whatever they're making, plenty

For sure. That's why normal people still venture into Wal mart.

But would enough boycott to force a change? That's the big question. How much loss in profit is the company willing to endure before it changes the way it does business.

how much deterioration of the environment are you willing to tolerate while you wait?

Consumers have banded together and used their Dollar to get companies to change the way they do business pretty quickly.

Plus, you would expect the "left wing media" to be all over those stories like flies on shit and get the boycott going viral pretty quickly.

If Chik fil a wasn't a good example of how quick the market can react, I don't know what is.

 

[del]

For sure. That's why normal people still venture into Wal mart.

But would enough boycott to force a change? That's the big question. How much loss in profit is the company willing to endure before it changes the way it does business.

how much deterioration of the environment are you willing to tolerate while you wait?

Consumers have banded together and used their Dollar to get companies to change the way they do business pretty quickly.

Plus, you would expect the "left wing media" to be all over those stories like flies on shit and get the boycott going viral pretty quickly.

If Chik fil a wasn't a good example of how quick the market can react, I don't know what is.

chik fil a is a pretty visible company that does business directly with consumers.

what about companies that supply parts to electronics manufacturers, for example?

do you think the manufacturers are going to do something that will ultimately cost them more to make their products or ignore it?

i don't.

 

[Paulie]

how much deterioration of the environment are you willing to tolerate while you wait?

Consumers have banded together and used their Dollar to get companies to change the way they do business pretty quickly.

Plus, you would expect the "left wing media" to be all over those stories like flies on shit and get the boycott going viral pretty quickly.

If Chik fil a wasn't a good example of how quick the market can react, I don't know what is.

chik fil a is a pretty visible company that does business directly with consumers.

what about companies that supply parts to electronics manufacturers, for example?

do you think the manufacturers are going to do something that will ultimately cost them more to make their products or ignore it?

i don't.

That's where I would expect the media to be the mouthpiece. If the media is so left wing, then they would love nothing more than to expose the companies who are dangerously polluting.

At that point in time the pressure would be put on the manufacturers to make a choice.

Social responsibility is implied in business. It's only ignored when business knows it can get away with it. Do you lose a little money in paying higher costs for your raw materials because you changed suppliers, or do you lose a LOT of money because people refuse to do business with you at all.

 

[Clementine]

"NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday granted New Jersey a temporary waiver on Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) requirements to help counter a shortfall in fuel supplies in parts of the state following Hurricane Sandy.

The waiver allows for the sale of diesel fuel that exceeds standards of 15 parts per million of sulfur under limited conditions effective immediately, according to a letter from EPA administrator Lisa Jackson to Governor Chris Christie."

Wires Feed Automatic News Feed (Domestic) - 1070 WINA

Another thing I've heard repeatedly over the last few days is how Obama is "cutting through the red tape" to get aid to the people. I have to wonder why there is so much red tape to begin with.

Some in the media are acting as if Obama's visit made the sun come up again and all is fine. Many people are still trapped in their homes and there is much to do. That made it all the more creepy for Obama and Christie to travel around and look at the disaster areas. Why take away needed personnel for security when those folks could be continuing the search for victims?

 

[del]

Consumers have banded together and used their Dollar to get companies to change the way they do business pretty quickly.

Plus, you would expect the "left wing media" to be all over those stories like flies on shit and get the boycott going viral pretty quickly.

If Chik fil a wasn't a good example of how quick the market can react, I don't know what is.

chik fil a is a pretty visible company that does business directly with consumers.

what about companies that supply parts to electronics manufacturers, for example?

do you think the manufacturers are going to do something that will ultimately cost them more to make their products or ignore it?

i don't.

That's where I would expect the media to be the mouthpiece. If the media is so left wing, then they would love nothing more than to expose the companies who are dangerously polluting.

At that point in time the pressure would be put on the manufacturers to make a choice.

Social responsibility is implied in business. It's only ignored when business knows it can get away with it. Do you lose a little money in paying higher costs for your raw materials because you changed suppliers, or do you lose a LOT of money because people refuse to do business with you at all.

that's a good point but first, they'd have to find the companies that are polluting, then they'd have to expose them.

this has already been done, which is why we have the epa.

i don't really want to go backwards with this; i think it's an area that govt needs to be involved in.

 

[Paulie]

chik fil a is a pretty visible company that does business directly with consumers.

what about companies that supply parts to electronics manufacturers, for example?

do you think the manufacturers are going to do something that will ultimately cost them more to make their products or ignore it?

i don't.

That's where I would expect the media to be the mouthpiece. If the media is so left wing, then they would love nothing more than to expose the companies who are dangerously polluting.

At that point in time the pressure would be put on the manufacturers to make a choice.

Social responsibility is implied in business. It's only ignored when business knows it can get away with it. Do you lose a little money in paying higher costs for your raw materials because you changed suppliers, or do you lose a LOT of money because people refuse to do business with you at all.

that's a good point but first, they'd have to find the companies that are polluting, then they'd have to expose them.

this has already been done, which is why we have the epa.

i don't really want to go backwards with this; i think it's an area that govt needs to be involved in.

I do too. Just like I think food and medicine safety is as well. But the EPA and the FDA are doing it wrong.

 

[Misty]

as long as they're the cheapest source of whatever they're making, plenty

For sure. That's why normal people still venture into Wal mart.

But would enough boycott to force a change? That's the big question. How much loss in profit is the company willing to endure before it changes the way it does business.

how much deterioration of the environment are you willing to tolerate while you wait?

Everything is a deterioration. The earth lives, it regenerates.

All things come from the earth. Even it's detritus.

 

[Misty]

Did less government be requested.? Yes. Why? To fix natural damage from the storm. What created the storm? The earth. I think holding the earth back, by regulation, is causing it to compensate.

 

[del]

That's where I would expect the media to be the mouthpiece. If the media is so left wing, then they would love nothing more than to expose the companies who are dangerously polluting.

At that point in time the pressure would be put on the manufacturers to make a choice.

Social responsibility is implied in business. It's only ignored when business knows it can get away with it. Do you lose a little money in paying higher costs for your raw materials because you changed suppliers, or do you lose a LOT of money because people refuse to do business with you at all.

that's a good point but first, they'd have to find the companies that are polluting, then they'd have to expose them.

this has already been done, which is why we have the epa.

i don't really want to go backwards with this; i think it's an area that govt needs to be involved in.

I do too. Just like I think food and medicine safety is as well. But the EPA and the FDA are doing it wrong.

how would you do it?

 

[kiwiman127]

For sure. That's why normal people still venture into Wal mart.

But would enough boycott to force a change? That's the big question. How much loss in profit is the company willing to endure before it changes the way it does business.

how much deterioration of the environment are you willing to tolerate while you wait?

Everything is a deterioration. The earth lives, it regenerates.

All things come from the earth. Even it's detritus.

So I take it you're ignorant about the effects sulfur has on the earth. It isn't good at all.
Please look it up before you continue your rant.

 

[Paulie]

that's a good point but first, they'd have to find the companies that are polluting, then they'd have to expose them.

this has already been done, which is why we have the epa.

i don't really want to go backwards with this; i think it's an area that govt needs to be involved in.

I do too. Just like I think food and medicine safety is as well. But the EPA and the FDA are doing it wrong.

how would you do it?

I haven't put too much thought into the EPA but with FDA I would definitely loosen the regs on OTC medical devices for starters. And I would cancel any regulation that simply requiring label disclosure on foods would be sufficient for. I'm in total support of truth in labeling. It's a simple regulation with a very cheap compliance cost.

That's just a couple rough ideas really. But it's a start.

 

[Old Rocks]

Did less government be requested.? Yes. Why? To fix natural damage from the storm. What created the storm? The earth. I think holding the earth back, by regulation, is causing it to compensate.

Oh, wow! Ever get past third grade science?

 

[336thF15E]

You've been scared by propaganda.

The changes we see in weather patterns globally - not just here in the United States - is not a propaganda scare. It is real science detecting real changes in our environment that real human beings created: CO2 and Toxic Water.

Think about the earth, it's fire it's water it's gold diamond oil it's more than the EPA can ever understand so instead they make up a government agency to Control it.

Is the real issue Control, or Personal Responsibility?

Let's do what you want. Let's remove the NHTSA to save some money for the tax payer. The NHTSA requested 2013 budget is $981 million. We can put $981 million back into the pockets of tax payers - not much, but its a start towards building that smaller government that you want. About $188 million goes to Vehicle Safety.

In 2020, as a direct result of killing off all the airbag safety feature requirements (which made you vehicle less expensive by the way - so you get a benefit there), the absence of NHTSA also killed off other safety requirements as well. Whether or not your seat belts work properly, will be at the sole discretion of the automaker. Whether or not you seat locks into position when you apply your breaks, is also at the sole discretion of the automaker.

Whether or not your climate control system is properly delivering ducted outside air, or air from near your exhaust system - is again, a matter for the automaker to decide. Of course, all of those pesky and unnecessary crumple zones and A-Frame structural components of your vehicle are no longer required to satisfy any regulations or protocols, so whatever standard your automaker decides to deploy, is pretty much what you get at the time of purchase. If the automaker decides to fabricate the frame of your vehicle with a hard plastic, instead of a tensile strength metal, then that's up for the manufacturer to decide as well.

Now, the auto manufacturers are in love with you, because you just lowered their R&D, Testing, Production and Manufacturing costs by 100% and you've boosted their stock price through the roof. And, since there are no more Vehicle Safety Regulations to contend with, there is also no more Disclosure of Safety Features at the time of purchase. No more airbags, side-curtains, emission standards and environmental cabin standards to content with. No more standards of brakes, brake pads or braking force. Anti-lock breaks are a thing of the past because, well, they just cost the manufacturer too much money and they eat away at profits. There's also no more standards on cabin material off-gases, so manufacturers are free to use any materials to outfit the interior of your vehicle that they decide. All electrical wiring standards that relate to maximum temperature & sheathing before burn-through, are also no longer required.

We have not even scratched the tip of the iceberg on the manufacturing process of the automobiles people put on the roads every day, but you should get the picture by now and you should be able to see just how extremely volatile such an Free Market Industry would be, if it were not for reasonable and common sense regulatory controls for the public good - which includes the environment.

They are the evil evil protection agency.

Maybe they are actually doing what they can reasonably be done to help save lives. What's left? Going back to the Dark Ages?

Do you fly? Good! Let's completely get rid of the nation's Air Traffic Control System - who needs those stinking FAA flight rules and procedures. No more FAA and no more NTSB. You are now free to depart from any airport, on-board any aircraft having any maintenance record you deem appropriate and you may freely fly the course of your selection and at the altitude you think is best for you. You don't need to follow any regulations or flight rules - you can simply take-off and land at any time you decide. In fact, this will also save you money, because you no longer have any need for two-way comms. So, you don't have any need for expensive radio equipment, since there won't be any ATC to communicate with. Just buy a hand-held VHF radio, so you can chit-chat with other pilots in other aircraft as they punch holes in the sky with a mere 20 feet of vertical separation from your Right Wing in passing.

How long do you think such an air traffic "system" will last? More importantly - how long do you think you would last in such an air traffic system? Ah, yes! The Wild Wild Unregulated World. I think I'm starting to like the concept.

Now, let's talk Banking and Finance....... hmmmmm.