copsnrobbers
I call it as I see it
- Feb 27, 2012
- 3,020
- 281
- 48
- Thread starter
- #41
I think both side make valid points. A somewhere in between is needed. It can't be one or the other and for many years its been the EPA wearing the crown.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The EPA
- Thread starter copsnrobbers
- Start date
I think both side make valid points. A somewhere in between is needed. It can't be one or the other and for many years its been the EPA wearing the crown.
copsnrobbers
I call it as I see it
- Feb 27, 2012
- 3,020
- 281
- 48
- Thread starter
- #42
An absolute MUST read for people who really want to know what the EPA is all about.................
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/interference-at-the-epa.pdf
If you are stupid enough to think that the EPA is all about the environment, then you are among the hoplessly duped of our society...........dont bother reading it.
Billion dollar industry!
copsnrobbers
I call it as I see it
- Feb 27, 2012
- 3,020
- 281
- 48
- Thread starter
- #43
A little mercury never hurt anyone.
Everyone remember that Nixon signed the EPA into existence.
Now that's an ugly reminder. R. Nixon, the infamous asshole with a big nose and a vision not worth fighting for.
starcraftzzz
Senior Member
- Feb 14, 2012
- 2,263
- 121
- 48
The combined effect of the Obama EPA rules | Economic Policy Institute
^EPA ruels under Obama have a 2-1-201- benfit cost ratio
'Job-Killing' EPA Regulations for Chesapeake Bay Will Create 35 Times as Many Jobs as Keystone XL Pipeline | ThinkProgress
^EPA rules requiring a 25% reduction in pollution in the Chesapeake Bay has so far created 40 thousand jobs
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly
Login to access the Oil & Gas Journal Subscriber Premium features.
^EPA regulations limiting benzene content in gasoline will save 5 billion a year by 2030.
To the Point, copyright 1999-2012 by Apple Pie Alliance and Senator John Marty
^EPA regulations limiting emissions from engines used for recreational non-road purposes saves a net of 3 billion dollars each year. Through lowered health care costs and higher mpg efficiency.
Epa Mercury | EPA limits mercury and other pollutants from cement plants - Los Angeles Times
^EPA regulations reducing mercury emissions and other major pollutants from power plants (excluding Nox and So2) save 10 billion a year; due to lower health care costs.
Train Pollution | Train, ship pollution targeted by EPA - Los Angeles Times
^--EPA Regulations limiting ship and train emissions such as Nitrogen and soot save 300 lives and a net of 300 million dollars a year.
http://mainstreetalliance.org/wordp...of-CAA-literature-review-final-10-04-2010.pdf
^The Clean air act amendments of 1990 saved the country a net of 510 billion dollars over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act used regulations to reduce 5 pollutants by 41%
^The stratospheric Ozone protection act saved the country a net of 510 billion over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act reduced emissions of CFC's.
^Major new regulations starting in 1992-2002 are estimated to have saved the economy a total of 50 billion dollars in ten years. (or 15 billion a year).
1^Environmental regulations lead to the creation 1.3million jobs over ten years.
^Costs of regulations were exaggerated estimates for
Acid and rain cap and trade said that the costs would be between 2-4 billion when in reality it was 800 million, or 60-120% less.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpres...5ea39929f1ac1c42852574ba005c95ec!OpenDocument
^--EPA regulations limiting Hydrocarbons and NOx emissions from lawn mowers, and personal watercraft save 300 lives and 80 million dollars a year.
07/06/2010: EPA Proposal Cuts Pollution from Power Plants in 31 States and D.C. / Rule would reduce smog- and soot-forming emissions contributing to unhealthy air
^EPA regulations reducing SO2 and NOx emissions in 2010 from power plants estimated to save thousands of lives and tens of billions of dollars a year.
American Electric Power Takes Workers Hostage to Stop Pollution Controls | ThinkProgress
^EPA regulations requiring energy companies to reduce poisons pollution such as arsenic, mercury and lead would create over 350,000 jobs over a period of 5 years.
Pawlenty Stands Against Clean Air: "I Will Require Sunsetting of all Federal Regulations" | ThinkProgress
^New EPA regulations under Obama have a 4-1 to 22-1 benefit cost ration.
^Two new air quality rules made by the EPA will create 1.5 million jobs over the course of 5 years.
Power Companies: 'The Time Is Now' for Air Toxics Rule | ThinkProgress
^New EPA standards that reduce Mercury emissions by 91% and SO2 emissions by 55% will save 17,000 lives a year prevent 12,000 heart attacks and 120,000 asthma attacks each year and will provide 140 billion in health benefits. These new regulations and the Clean Air transport rule will create 1.4 million jobs over the next 5 years
Attacks By GOP Candidates On The EPA Threaten Iowa Families | ThinkProgress
^In total EPA regulations save over 160,000 lives each year.
Daily Kos: EPA regulations create jobs, save lives
^New EPA regulations would save 12,000 lives a year and create a net of jobs. Also since the economy has a low capita utilization rate, high unemployment, large corporate profits/idle money and is at the zero bound investments that occur due to new EPA regulations are simulative given that the without the new regulations the money paying for the investments would be sitting idle and going to waste.
Peter Lehner: New Smog Standards Will Prevent Respiratory Illness, but Polluters Don't Want to Clean Up Their Mess
Let's Save Thousands of Lives - Support Stronger Smog Standards | Pete Altman's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC
^Proposed EPA smog/ozone standards would save a net of 17 billion dollars yearly
^It could also save 12,000 people a year reduce asthma attacks by 58,000, and reduce hospital visits by 21,000.
Memo to Right-Wing Anti-EPA Job-Killers: Sick and Dead People Aren't Very Productive | ThinkProgress
^The clean air act has prevented 230,000 deaths, 3.2 million lost school days and 13 million lost work days each year. The benefits of the act are 30 times higher than the costs
BBC News - Low carbon companies outperform, says CDP
September 14 News: Low-Carbon Businesses Deliver Double the Profits of Their Rivals, Report Finds | ThinkProgress
^Business that took measures to reduce Carbon emissions performed better in the stock markets, also 60% of actions to reduce Carbon emissions were paid back in 3 or less years.
^Companies that emit less Carbon and who took more measures to reduce Carbon emissions returned double of what other companies returned.
----Lead
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
^Regulations banning and limiting lead in paint, toys, gasoline and other materials save provide net savings of 181-269 billion. Each dollar invested in lead paint hazard control/keeping lead out of products produces more than 17 dollars in return.
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
Government Spending in the United States - Download All Years
Homicide Rate (per 100,000), 1950–2007 — Infoplease.com
^Government bans and regulations limiting lead content results in 5,360 less homicide per year.
http://w3.epi-data.org/temp2011/BriefingPaper311.pdf
^New EPA regulations issued under Obama have a benefit-cost ratio of 4-1-22-1
^EPA ruels under Obama have a 2-1-201- benfit cost ratio
'Job-Killing' EPA Regulations for Chesapeake Bay Will Create 35 Times as Many Jobs as Keystone XL Pipeline | ThinkProgress
^EPA rules requiring a 25% reduction in pollution in the Chesapeake Bay has so far created 40 thousand jobs
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly
Login to access the Oil & Gas Journal Subscriber Premium features.
^EPA regulations limiting benzene content in gasoline will save 5 billion a year by 2030.
To the Point, copyright 1999-2012 by Apple Pie Alliance and Senator John Marty
^EPA regulations limiting emissions from engines used for recreational non-road purposes saves a net of 3 billion dollars each year. Through lowered health care costs and higher mpg efficiency.
Epa Mercury | EPA limits mercury and other pollutants from cement plants - Los Angeles Times
^EPA regulations reducing mercury emissions and other major pollutants from power plants (excluding Nox and So2) save 10 billion a year; due to lower health care costs.
Train Pollution | Train, ship pollution targeted by EPA - Los Angeles Times
^--EPA Regulations limiting ship and train emissions such as Nitrogen and soot save 300 lives and a net of 300 million dollars a year.
http://mainstreetalliance.org/wordp...of-CAA-literature-review-final-10-04-2010.pdf
^The Clean air act amendments of 1990 saved the country a net of 510 billion dollars over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act used regulations to reduce 5 pollutants by 41%
^The stratospheric Ozone protection act saved the country a net of 510 billion over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act reduced emissions of CFC's.
^Major new regulations starting in 1992-2002 are estimated to have saved the economy a total of 50 billion dollars in ten years. (or 15 billion a year).
1^Environmental regulations lead to the creation 1.3million jobs over ten years.
^Costs of regulations were exaggerated estimates for
Acid and rain cap and trade said that the costs would be between 2-4 billion when in reality it was 800 million, or 60-120% less.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpres...5ea39929f1ac1c42852574ba005c95ec!OpenDocument
^--EPA regulations limiting Hydrocarbons and NOx emissions from lawn mowers, and personal watercraft save 300 lives and 80 million dollars a year.
07/06/2010: EPA Proposal Cuts Pollution from Power Plants in 31 States and D.C. / Rule would reduce smog- and soot-forming emissions contributing to unhealthy air
^EPA regulations reducing SO2 and NOx emissions in 2010 from power plants estimated to save thousands of lives and tens of billions of dollars a year.
American Electric Power Takes Workers Hostage to Stop Pollution Controls | ThinkProgress
^EPA regulations requiring energy companies to reduce poisons pollution such as arsenic, mercury and lead would create over 350,000 jobs over a period of 5 years.
Pawlenty Stands Against Clean Air: "I Will Require Sunsetting of all Federal Regulations" | ThinkProgress
^New EPA regulations under Obama have a 4-1 to 22-1 benefit cost ration.
^Two new air quality rules made by the EPA will create 1.5 million jobs over the course of 5 years.
Power Companies: 'The Time Is Now' for Air Toxics Rule | ThinkProgress
^New EPA standards that reduce Mercury emissions by 91% and SO2 emissions by 55% will save 17,000 lives a year prevent 12,000 heart attacks and 120,000 asthma attacks each year and will provide 140 billion in health benefits. These new regulations and the Clean Air transport rule will create 1.4 million jobs over the next 5 years
Attacks By GOP Candidates On The EPA Threaten Iowa Families | ThinkProgress
^In total EPA regulations save over 160,000 lives each year.
Daily Kos: EPA regulations create jobs, save lives
^New EPA regulations would save 12,000 lives a year and create a net of jobs. Also since the economy has a low capita utilization rate, high unemployment, large corporate profits/idle money and is at the zero bound investments that occur due to new EPA regulations are simulative given that the without the new regulations the money paying for the investments would be sitting idle and going to waste.
Peter Lehner: New Smog Standards Will Prevent Respiratory Illness, but Polluters Don't Want to Clean Up Their Mess
Let's Save Thousands of Lives - Support Stronger Smog Standards | Pete Altman's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC
^Proposed EPA smog/ozone standards would save a net of 17 billion dollars yearly
^It could also save 12,000 people a year reduce asthma attacks by 58,000, and reduce hospital visits by 21,000.
Memo to Right-Wing Anti-EPA Job-Killers: Sick and Dead People Aren't Very Productive | ThinkProgress
^The clean air act has prevented 230,000 deaths, 3.2 million lost school days and 13 million lost work days each year. The benefits of the act are 30 times higher than the costs
BBC News - Low carbon companies outperform, says CDP
September 14 News: Low-Carbon Businesses Deliver Double the Profits of Their Rivals, Report Finds | ThinkProgress
^Business that took measures to reduce Carbon emissions performed better in the stock markets, also 60% of actions to reduce Carbon emissions were paid back in 3 or less years.
^Companies that emit less Carbon and who took more measures to reduce Carbon emissions returned double of what other companies returned.
----Lead
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
^Regulations banning and limiting lead in paint, toys, gasoline and other materials save provide net savings of 181-269 billion. Each dollar invested in lead paint hazard control/keeping lead out of products produces more than 17 dollars in return.
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
Government Spending in the United States - Download All Years
Homicide Rate (per 100,000), 1950–2007 — Infoplease.com
^Government bans and regulations limiting lead content results in 5,360 less homicide per year.
http://w3.epi-data.org/temp2011/BriefingPaper311.pdf
^New EPA regulations issued under Obama have a benefit-cost ratio of 4-1-22-1
starcraftzzz
Senior Member
- Feb 14, 2012
- 2,263
- 121
- 48
The combined effect of the Obama EPA rules | Economic Policy Institute
^EPA ruels under Obama have a 2-1-201- benfit cost ratio
'Job-Killing' EPA Regulations for Chesapeake Bay Will Create 35 Times as Many Jobs as Keystone XL Pipeline | ThinkProgress
^EPA rules requiring a 25% reduction in pollution in the Chesapeake Bay has so far created 40 thousand jobs
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly
Login to access the Oil & Gas Journal Subscriber Premium features.
^EPA regulations limiting benzene content in gasoline will save 5 billion a year by 2030.
To the Point, copyright 1999-2012 by Apple Pie Alliance and Senator John Marty
^EPA regulations limiting emissions from engines used for recreational non-road purposes saves a net of 3 billion dollars each year. Through lowered health care costs and higher mpg efficiency.
Epa Mercury | EPA limits mercury and other pollutants from cement plants - Los Angeles Times
^EPA regulations reducing mercury emissions and other major pollutants from power plants (excluding Nox and So2) save 10 billion a year; due to lower health care costs.
Train Pollution | Train, ship pollution targeted by EPA - Los Angeles Times
^--EPA Regulations limiting ship and train emissions such as Nitrogen and soot save 300 lives and a net of 300 million dollars a year.
http://mainstreetalliance.org/wordp...of-CAA-literature-review-final-10-04-2010.pdf
^The Clean air act amendments of 1990 saved the country a net of 510 billion dollars over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act used regulations to reduce 5 pollutants by 41%
^The stratospheric Ozone protection act saved the country a net of 510 billion over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act reduced emissions of CFC's.
^Major new regulations starting in 1992-2002 are estimated to have saved the economy a total of 50 billion dollars in ten years. (or 15 billion a year).
1^Environmental regulations lead to the creation 1.3million jobs over ten years.
^Costs of regulations were exaggerated estimates for
Acid and rain cap and trade said that the costs would be between 2-4 billion when in reality it was 800 million, or 60-120% less.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpres...5ea39929f1ac1c42852574ba005c95ec!OpenDocument
^--EPA regulations limiting Hydrocarbons and NOx emissions from lawn mowers, and personal watercraft save 300 lives and 80 million dollars a year.
07/06/2010: EPA Proposal Cuts Pollution from Power Plants in 31 States and D.C. / Rule would reduce smog- and soot-forming emissions contributing to unhealthy air
^EPA regulations reducing SO2 and NOx emissions in 2010 from power plants estimated to save thousands of lives and tens of billions of dollars a year.
American Electric Power Takes Workers Hostage to Stop Pollution Controls | ThinkProgress
^EPA regulations requiring energy companies to reduce poisons pollution such as arsenic, mercury and lead would create over 350,000 jobs over a period of 5 years.
Pawlenty Stands Against Clean Air: "I Will Require Sunsetting of all Federal Regulations" | ThinkProgress
^New EPA regulations under Obama have a 4-1 to 22-1 benefit cost ration.
^Two new air quality rules made by the EPA will create 1.5 million jobs over the course of 5 years.
Power Companies: 'The Time Is Now' for Air Toxics Rule | ThinkProgress
^New EPA standards that reduce Mercury emissions by 91% and SO2 emissions by 55% will save 17,000 lives a year prevent 12,000 heart attacks and 120,000 asthma attacks each year and will provide 140 billion in health benefits. These new regulations and the Clean Air transport rule will create 1.4 million jobs over the next 5 years
Attacks By GOP Candidates On The EPA Threaten Iowa Families | ThinkProgress
^In total EPA regulations save over 160,000 lives each year.
Daily Kos: EPA regulations create jobs, save lives
^New EPA regulations would save 12,000 lives a year and create a net of jobs. Also since the economy has a low capita utilization rate, high unemployment, large corporate profits/idle money and is at the zero bound investments that occur due to new EPA regulations are simulative given that the without the new regulations the money paying for the investments would be sitting idle and going to waste.
Peter Lehner: New Smog Standards Will Prevent Respiratory Illness, but Polluters Don't Want to Clean Up Their Mess
Let's Save Thousands of Lives - Support Stronger Smog Standards | Pete Altman's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC
^Proposed EPA smog/ozone standards would save a net of 17 billion dollars yearly
^It could also save 12,000 people a year reduce asthma attacks by 58,000, and reduce hospital visits by 21,000.
Memo to Right-Wing Anti-EPA Job-Killers: Sick and Dead People Aren't Very Productive | ThinkProgress
^The clean air act has prevented 230,000 deaths, 3.2 million lost school days and 13 million lost work days each year. The benefits of the act are 30 times higher than the costs
BBC News - Low carbon companies outperform, says CDP
September 14 News: Low-Carbon Businesses Deliver Double the Profits of Their Rivals, Report Finds | ThinkProgress
^Business that took measures to reduce Carbon emissions performed better in the stock markets, also 60% of actions to reduce Carbon emissions were paid back in 3 or less years.
^Companies that emit less Carbon and who took more measures to reduce Carbon emissions returned double of what other companies returned.
----Lead
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
^Regulations banning and limiting lead in paint, toys, gasoline and other materials save provide net savings of 181-269 billion. Each dollar invested in lead paint hazard control/keeping lead out of products produces more than 17 dollars in return.
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
Government Spending in the United States - Download All Years
Homicide Rate (per 100,000), 1950–2007 — Infoplease.com
^Government bans and regulations limiting lead content results in 5,360 less homicide per year.
http://w3.epi-data.org/temp2011/BriefingPaper311.pdf
^New EPA regulations issued under Obama have a benefit-cost ratio of 4-1-22-1
^EPA ruels under Obama have a 2-1-201- benfit cost ratio
'Job-Killing' EPA Regulations for Chesapeake Bay Will Create 35 Times as Many Jobs as Keystone XL Pipeline | ThinkProgress
^EPA rules requiring a 25% reduction in pollution in the Chesapeake Bay has so far created 40 thousand jobs
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly
Login to access the Oil & Gas Journal Subscriber Premium features.
^EPA regulations limiting benzene content in gasoline will save 5 billion a year by 2030.
To the Point, copyright 1999-2012 by Apple Pie Alliance and Senator John Marty
^EPA regulations limiting emissions from engines used for recreational non-road purposes saves a net of 3 billion dollars each year. Through lowered health care costs and higher mpg efficiency.
Epa Mercury | EPA limits mercury and other pollutants from cement plants - Los Angeles Times
^EPA regulations reducing mercury emissions and other major pollutants from power plants (excluding Nox and So2) save 10 billion a year; due to lower health care costs.
Train Pollution | Train, ship pollution targeted by EPA - Los Angeles Times
^--EPA Regulations limiting ship and train emissions such as Nitrogen and soot save 300 lives and a net of 300 million dollars a year.
http://mainstreetalliance.org/wordp...of-CAA-literature-review-final-10-04-2010.pdf
^The Clean air act amendments of 1990 saved the country a net of 510 billion dollars over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act used regulations to reduce 5 pollutants by 41%
^The stratospheric Ozone protection act saved the country a net of 510 billion over 20 years (or around 25 billion a year).
The act reduced emissions of CFC's.
^Major new regulations starting in 1992-2002 are estimated to have saved the economy a total of 50 billion dollars in ten years. (or 15 billion a year).
1^Environmental regulations lead to the creation 1.3million jobs over ten years.
^Costs of regulations were exaggerated estimates for
Acid and rain cap and trade said that the costs would be between 2-4 billion when in reality it was 800 million, or 60-120% less.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpres...5ea39929f1ac1c42852574ba005c95ec!OpenDocument
^--EPA regulations limiting Hydrocarbons and NOx emissions from lawn mowers, and personal watercraft save 300 lives and 80 million dollars a year.
07/06/2010: EPA Proposal Cuts Pollution from Power Plants in 31 States and D.C. / Rule would reduce smog- and soot-forming emissions contributing to unhealthy air
^EPA regulations reducing SO2 and NOx emissions in 2010 from power plants estimated to save thousands of lives and tens of billions of dollars a year.
American Electric Power Takes Workers Hostage to Stop Pollution Controls | ThinkProgress
^EPA regulations requiring energy companies to reduce poisons pollution such as arsenic, mercury and lead would create over 350,000 jobs over a period of 5 years.
Pawlenty Stands Against Clean Air: "I Will Require Sunsetting of all Federal Regulations" | ThinkProgress
^New EPA regulations under Obama have a 4-1 to 22-1 benefit cost ration.
^Two new air quality rules made by the EPA will create 1.5 million jobs over the course of 5 years.
Power Companies: 'The Time Is Now' for Air Toxics Rule | ThinkProgress
^New EPA standards that reduce Mercury emissions by 91% and SO2 emissions by 55% will save 17,000 lives a year prevent 12,000 heart attacks and 120,000 asthma attacks each year and will provide 140 billion in health benefits. These new regulations and the Clean Air transport rule will create 1.4 million jobs over the next 5 years
Attacks By GOP Candidates On The EPA Threaten Iowa Families | ThinkProgress
^In total EPA regulations save over 160,000 lives each year.
Daily Kos: EPA regulations create jobs, save lives
^New EPA regulations would save 12,000 lives a year and create a net of jobs. Also since the economy has a low capita utilization rate, high unemployment, large corporate profits/idle money and is at the zero bound investments that occur due to new EPA regulations are simulative given that the without the new regulations the money paying for the investments would be sitting idle and going to waste.
Peter Lehner: New Smog Standards Will Prevent Respiratory Illness, but Polluters Don't Want to Clean Up Their Mess
Let's Save Thousands of Lives - Support Stronger Smog Standards | Pete Altman's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC
^Proposed EPA smog/ozone standards would save a net of 17 billion dollars yearly
^It could also save 12,000 people a year reduce asthma attacks by 58,000, and reduce hospital visits by 21,000.
Memo to Right-Wing Anti-EPA Job-Killers: Sick and Dead People Aren't Very Productive | ThinkProgress
^The clean air act has prevented 230,000 deaths, 3.2 million lost school days and 13 million lost work days each year. The benefits of the act are 30 times higher than the costs
BBC News - Low carbon companies outperform, says CDP
September 14 News: Low-Carbon Businesses Deliver Double the Profits of Their Rivals, Report Finds | ThinkProgress
^Business that took measures to reduce Carbon emissions performed better in the stock markets, also 60% of actions to reduce Carbon emissions were paid back in 3 or less years.
^Companies that emit less Carbon and who took more measures to reduce Carbon emissions returned double of what other companies returned.
----Lead
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
^Regulations banning and limiting lead in paint, toys, gasoline and other materials save provide net savings of 181-269 billion. Each dollar invested in lead paint hazard control/keeping lead out of products produces more than 17 dollars in return.
Environmental Health Perspectives: Childhood Lead Poisoning: Conservative Estimates of the Social and Economic Benefits of Lead Hazard Control
Government Spending in the United States - Download All Years
Homicide Rate (per 100,000), 1950–2007 — Infoplease.com
^Government bans and regulations limiting lead content results in 5,360 less homicide per year.
http://w3.epi-data.org/temp2011/BriefingPaper311.pdf
^New EPA regulations issued under Obama have a benefit-cost ratio of 4-1-22-1
Old Rocks
Diamond Member
Star, you are doing excellent work. Good material, which the wingnuts here will never read. Willfull ignorance is their credo.
No matter if it's the EPA or the ATF, the primary mission of a federal agency is to get bigger and more powerful and get more funding. Meanwhile it doesn't matter if the individual citizen gets squashed like a bug.
The AGW cultists have no concept of what the term "bureacratic inertia" refers to. I studied it until it was coming out my ass 30 years ago in college. Once a bureacracy exists, it exists for one reason: to get bigger. It must get bigger to ensure its existence.........and it will do anything to ensure future funding and lots of it. The level of naive in the minds of Americans when it comes to these governmental agencies is astounding. The American people think that these governmental organizations are actually motivated by good intentions..........and in the example of the EPA.........that the EPA has this altruistic mission of keeping the planet clean. And holy shit........millions of dolts out there in radioland actually think that!!!
Actually........the best read to get knowledge on how governmental bureaucracies work is to read AMERICAN DEFENSE POLICY.........a gigantic book with about 4 billion words. By now it must be in about its 12 edition but it has volumes and volumes of how the process of bureaucratic inertia works in Washington DC. Let eveybody else be hopelessly naive.
Heres the link for the book................
http://biblio.co.uk/details.php?dcx=126322327&aid=biblion
You read this and then you realize what a ruse agencies like the EPA, FDA, HUD, FCC, FTC and a billion others are all about. The founding fathers would shit their pants laughing their asses off if they saw the scam that these agencies have become. And lets remember.........every AGW cultist also loaths the founding fathers AND the US Constitution.
Actually........the best read to get knowledge on how governmental bureaucracies work is to read AMERICAN DEFENSE POLICY.........a gigantic book with about 4 billion words. By now it must be in about its 12 edition but it has volumes and volumes of how the process of bureaucratic inertia works in Washington DC. Let eveybody else be hopelessly naive.
Heres the link for the book................
http://biblio.co.uk/details.php?dcx=126322327&aid=biblion
You read this and then you realize what a ruse agencies like the EPA, FDA, HUD, FCC, FTC and a billion others are all about. The founding fathers would shit their pants laughing their asses off if they saw the scam that these agencies have become. And lets remember.........every AGW cultist also loaths the founding fathers AND the US Constitution.
Last edited:
- Apr 1, 2011
- 169,997
- 47,201
- 2,180
Star, you are doing excellent work. Good material, which the wingnuts here will never read. Willfull ignorance is their credo.
Why would any intelligent person read propaganda from sights like "think progress?"
R
rdean
Guest
Looks like this agency has become much to powerful. A dictatorship in fact.
We really do need to dress them down to get manufacturing back into the US.
Any thoughts one way or the other?
Yea, more birth defects aren't that bad. How many kids you willing to "give up" for more jobs. Look at China. The number one country in the world leading in birth defects. They pretty much have no EPA. Republicans say we should be more like them.
R
rdean
Guest
Looks like this agency has become much to powerful. A dictatorship in fact.
We really do need to dress them down to get manufacturing back into the US.
Any thoughts one way or the other?
Yea, more birth defects aren't that bad. How many kids you willing to "give up" for more jobs. Look at China. The number one country in the world leading in birth defects. They pretty much have no EPA. Republicans say we should be more like them.
Looking for more Republican voices calling for the destruction of the EPA.
repost..........because I can and I should............plus the k00ks think knowledge ends when we get to the "e" in science
The AGW cultists have no concept of what the term "bureacratic inertia" refers to. I studied it until it was coming out my ass 30 years ago in college. Once a bureacracy exists, it exists for one reason: to get bigger. It must get bigger to ensure its existence.........and it will do anything to ensure future funding and lots of it. The level of naive in the minds of Americans when it comes to these governmental agencies is astounding. The American people think that these governmental organizations are actually motivated by good intentions..........and in the example of the EPA.........that the EPA has this altruistic mission of keeping the planet clean. And holy shit........millions of dolts out there in radioland actually think that!!!
Actually........the best read to get knowledge on how governmental bureaucracies work is to read AMERICAN DEFENSE POLICY.........a gigantic book with about 4 billion words. By now it must be in about its 12 edition but it has volumes and volumes of how the process of bureaucratic inertia works in Washington DC. Let eveybody else be hopelessly naive.
Heres the link for the book................
Biblio.co.uk: Search Used Books, Textbooks, Rare Books, & Out of Print Books from Independent Booksellers
You read this and then you realize what a ruse agencies like the EPA, FDA, HUD, FCC, FTC and a billion others are all about. The founding fathers would shit their pants laughing their asses off if they saw the scam that these agencies have become. And lets remember.........every AGW cultist also loaths the founding fathers AND the US Constitution.
__________________
The AGW cultists have no concept of what the term "bureacratic inertia" refers to. I studied it until it was coming out my ass 30 years ago in college. Once a bureacracy exists, it exists for one reason: to get bigger. It must get bigger to ensure its existence.........and it will do anything to ensure future funding and lots of it. The level of naive in the minds of Americans when it comes to these governmental agencies is astounding. The American people think that these governmental organizations are actually motivated by good intentions..........and in the example of the EPA.........that the EPA has this altruistic mission of keeping the planet clean. And holy shit........millions of dolts out there in radioland actually think that!!!
Actually........the best read to get knowledge on how governmental bureaucracies work is to read AMERICAN DEFENSE POLICY.........a gigantic book with about 4 billion words. By now it must be in about its 12 edition but it has volumes and volumes of how the process of bureaucratic inertia works in Washington DC. Let eveybody else be hopelessly naive.
Heres the link for the book................
Biblio.co.uk: Search Used Books, Textbooks, Rare Books, & Out of Print Books from Independent Booksellers
You read this and then you realize what a ruse agencies like the EPA, FDA, HUD, FCC, FTC and a billion others are all about. The founding fathers would shit their pants laughing their asses off if they saw the scam that these agencies have become. And lets remember.........every AGW cultist also loaths the founding fathers AND the US Constitution.
__________________
Last edited:
R
rdean
Guest
repost..........because I can and I should............plus the k00ks think knowledge ends when we get to the "e" in science
The AGW cultists have no concept of what the term "bureacratic inertia" refers to. I studied it until it was coming out my ass 30 years ago in college. Once a bureacracy exists, it exists for one reason: to get bigger. It must get bigger to ensure its existence.........and it will do anything to ensure future funding and lots of it. The level of naive in the minds of Americans when it comes to these governmental agencies is astounding. The American people think that these governmental organizations are actually motivated by good intentions..........and in the example of the EPA.........that the EPA has this altruistic mission of keeping the planet clean. And holy shit........millions of dolts out there in radioland actually think that!!!
Actually........the best read to get knowledge on how governmental bureaucracies work is to read AMERICAN DEFENSE POLICY.........a gigantic book with about 4 billion words. By now it must be in about its 12 edition but it has volumes and volumes of how the process of bureaucratic inertia works in Washington DC. Let eveybody else be hopelessly naive.
Heres the link for the book................
Biblio.co.uk: Search Used Books, Textbooks, Rare Books, & Out of Print Books from Independent Booksellers
You read this and then you realize what a ruse agencies like the EPA, FDA, HUD, FCC, FTC and a billion others are all about. The founding fathers would shit their pants laughing their asses off if they saw the scam that these agencies have become. And lets remember.........every AGW cultist also loaths the founding fathers AND the US Constitution.
__________________
So you admit that birth defects aren't such a bad thing after all.
- Apr 1, 2011
- 169,997
- 47,201
- 2,180
So you admit that birth defects aren't such a bad thing after all.
When you disconnect your house from the power grid, then we'll believe you give a crap about birth defects caused by coal fired power plants. Until then, you're just an obvious lying piece of shit.
copsnrobbers
I call it as I see it
- Feb 27, 2012
- 3,020
- 281
- 48
- Thread starter
- #55
The EPA is all we have to protect us against the big corperations poisoning us and our children. The actions by US Steel are typical of all corperations. We saw the decades long coverup concerning asbestos with Monsanto and others.
Any politician that starts yapping about eliminating the EPA needs to be targeted by all sane voters, and removed from office by whatever means possible.
Those standards were met more than 30 years ago Ray.........and every environmentalist knows it too.
Anyway........after November, the EPA is going to have to take some giant steps backwards so the boot can be taken off the throats of small business in America. And I will be cheering.
No, they were not. Even today, there are numerous instances of companies evading air pollution standards by locating huge generation plants on Indian Reservations. And the plants in construction prior the 1975 have their pollution grandfathered in.
Any loosening of standards will result in huge pollution. Corperations are like adolescents, give an inch, and they take a mile.
Government is worse.
Star, you are doing excellent work. Good material, which the wingnuts here will never read. Willfull ignorance is their credo.
Why would any intelligent person read propaganda from sights like "think progress?"
how can anyone come to an intelligent and informed opinion without reading about all (or at least most) sides of the story?
how do you form an impression on how reliable a method is without reading statements both pro and con? satellite data for temps, and sea levels, and green space, and ice mass, etc must be compared other estimates of those things to make sure you are calculating correctly (or at least somewhat close).
how do you decide how much weight to give a proxy data set without looking at the source and the methodology? how do you get a feel for the accuracy and precision that is being claimed without comparing it to a bunch of other things?
it is no good to just pick a side to swear allegiance to, and then believe everything they say. look at some of the nonsense coming out of the sceptical side on radiation physics. accepting 'appeal to authority' is wrong for both sides. it is much better to compare the case for one side against the other and see which side is the more compelling, which fits more of the evidence.
AGW may have 'over-egged the pudding' but that doesnt mean that everything they say is false......but I must admit their crazy conclusions when they go far past what the science says leads me to question most of what they claim. but I still read it.
R
rdean
Guest
repost..........because I can and I should............plus the k00ks think knowledge ends when we get to the "e" in science
The AGW cultists have no concept of what the term "bureacratic inertia" refers to. I studied it until it was coming out my ass 30 years ago in college. Once a bureacracy exists, it exists for one reason: to get bigger. It must get bigger to ensure its existence.........and it will do anything to ensure future funding and lots of it. The level of naive in the minds of Americans when it comes to these governmental agencies is astounding. The American people think that these governmental organizations are actually motivated by good intentions..........and in the example of the EPA.........that the EPA has this altruistic mission of keeping the planet clean. And holy shit........millions of dolts out there in radioland actually think that!!!
Actually........the best read to get knowledge on how governmental bureaucracies work is to read AMERICAN DEFENSE POLICY.........a gigantic book with about 4 billion words. By now it must be in about its 12 edition but it has volumes and volumes of how the process of bureaucratic inertia works in Washington DC. Let eveybody else be hopelessly naive.
Heres the link for the book................
Biblio.co.uk: Search Used Books, Textbooks, Rare Books, & Out of Print Books from Independent Booksellers
You read this and then you realize what a ruse agencies like the EPA, FDA, HUD, FCC, FTC and a billion others are all about. The founding fathers would shit their pants laughing their asses off if they saw the scam that these agencies have become. And lets remember.........every AGW cultist also loaths the founding fathers AND the US Constitution.
__________________
Unlike during all of the previous 11 US recessions since 1945, the government sector has not created jobs to offset private-sector job loss during the recession. Instead, the public sector has become a major contributor to job destruction. Local governments has laid off 643,000 workers since June 2009, nearly a quarter million of whom were teachers. Public workers and teachers continue to be laid off at a rate of 20,000 a month or more. At that pace, by the end of his first term, President Obama may have presided over a loss of nearly a million public workers' jobs.
The historical record shows that $3.4 trillion in Bush-era tax cuts, given mostly to business and investors, were not associated with job creation during his term. The number of private-sector jobs when Bush came into office in January 2001 was over 111.6 million. The number of private-sector jobs when he left office in January 2009 was about 20,000 shy of 111 million. The US economy, and taxpayers, paid $3.4 trillion to lose over 650,000 jobs. Three years later, in December 2011 and after another year's extension of the Bush tax cuts, there were about 109.9 million private-sector jobs. And still, Republicans continue to beat their broken drum that "tax cuts create jobs," when, in fact, there are still 1.7 million fewer private-sector jobs in the US than there were a decade ago.
What's Next?
Not2BSubjugated
Callous Individualist
repost..........because I can and I should............plus the k00ks think knowledge ends when we get to the "e" in science
The AGW cultists have no concept of what the term "bureacratic inertia" refers to. I studied it until it was coming out my ass 30 years ago in college. Once a bureacracy exists, it exists for one reason: to get bigger. It must get bigger to ensure its existence.........and it will do anything to ensure future funding and lots of it. The level of naive in the minds of Americans when it comes to these governmental agencies is astounding. The American people think that these governmental organizations are actually motivated by good intentions..........and in the example of the EPA.........that the EPA has this altruistic mission of keeping the planet clean. And holy shit........millions of dolts out there in radioland actually think that!!!
Actually........the best read to get knowledge on how governmental bureaucracies work is to read AMERICAN DEFENSE POLICY.........a gigantic book with about 4 billion words. By now it must be in about its 12 edition but it has volumes and volumes of how the process of bureaucratic inertia works in Washington DC. Let eveybody else be hopelessly naive.
Heres the link for the book................
Biblio.co.uk: Search Used Books, Textbooks, Rare Books, & Out of Print Books from Independent Booksellers
You read this and then you realize what a ruse agencies like the EPA, FDA, HUD, FCC, FTC and a billion others are all about. The founding fathers would shit their pants laughing their asses off if they saw the scam that these agencies have become. And lets remember.........every AGW cultist also loaths the founding fathers AND the US Constitution.
__________________
Unlike during all of the previous 11 US recessions since 1945, the government sector has not created jobs to offset private-sector job loss during the recession. Instead, the public sector has become a major contributor to job destruction. Local governments has laid off 643,000 workers since June 2009, nearly a quarter million of whom were teachers. Public workers and teachers continue to be laid off at a rate of 20,000 a month or more. At that pace, by the end of his first term, President Obama may have presided over a loss of nearly a million public workers' jobs.
The historical record shows that $3.4 trillion in Bush-era tax cuts, given mostly to business and investors, were not associated with job creation during his term. The number of private-sector jobs when Bush came into office in January 2001 was over 111.6 million. The number of private-sector jobs when he left office in January 2009 was about 20,000 shy of 111 million. The US economy, and taxpayers, paid $3.4 trillion to lose over 650,000 jobs. Three years later, in December 2011 and after another year's extension of the Bush tax cuts, there were about 109.9 million private-sector jobs. And still, Republicans continue to beat their broken drum that "tax cuts create jobs," when, in fact, there are still 1.7 million fewer private-sector jobs in the US than there were a decade ago.
What's Next?
Given all of the other progressing economic factors, this is not -definitive- proof that tax cuts have nothing to do with job creation. Don't forget the economic downturn after 9/11, the fact that under G Dub deficit spending went up significantly, the steady expansion of trade deficits and the steady increase in our hemorrhaging of industries since a few of the effects of the free trade agreements passed under Clinton and Gingrich back in the '90's manifested (China getting MFN status didn't help. Thank you GATT. That one also had a hand in the banking regulation relaxation that set up the pins for the banking crisis to bowl over. . . different issue). Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming definitive knowledge that tax cuts do create significant job growth. Just saying you don't know either. Not definitively. Not if that's your evidence.
Last edited:
Well the right may have a point here. Government should get out of the way of industry. On both ends.
Like if an industry poisons a community..and the community rips the factory owners to shreds..it's all good.
Right?
Like if an industry poisons a community..and the community rips the factory owners to shreds..it's all good.
Right?
the EPA was a very important agency in getting us pointed in the right direction. unfortunately bureaucracies expand and make work to defend their existence. the law of diminishing returns has hit the EPA hard, and the expense of ever more stringent regulations is counter productive. there are many cases where spending a dollar to get rid of most of the problem (and 99.99% of the danger) has turned into spending 10 dollars for no extra benefit (99.9999% instead of 99.99).
Similar threads
- Replies
- 45
- Views
- 435
- Replies
- 105
- Views
- 946
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 451
- Views
- 4K
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 66
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8040
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-