Republicans scrap clean water regulation

[Sun Devil 92]

Why do you ass clowns vote for these scum bags?

Senate Passes Resolution To Scrap EPA Clean Water Rules

Liberals Unite? Considering the source, FAIL....
This EPA proposal was nothing more than an outrageous attempt at a federal land grab....Had nothing...ZIP ZERO NADA to do with limiting pollution...

Okay so your entire argument is that this is simply a case of "federal land grab"? You are 100% convinced this bill was NOT proposed to protect the interests of private companies over regular citizens? Why is that exactly? You do know these there are politicians right?

The same dicks you put in charge of our health care.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why do you ass clowns vote for these scum bags?

Senate Passes Resolution To Scrap EPA Clean Water Rules

Liberals Unite? Considering the source, FAIL....
This EPA proposal was nothing more than an outrageous attempt at a federal land grab....Had nothing...ZIP ZERO NADA to do with limiting pollution...

Okay so your entire argument is that this is simply a case of "federal land grab"? You are 100% convinced this bill was NOT proposed to protect the interests of private companies over regular citizens? Why is that exactly? You do know these there are politicians right?

Not convinced. My response is based on FACT....Private companies? From where did you come up with THAT garbage?
One of the pillars of the stability of this nation are the rights of private property owners to not be threatened by government takings.

How are you not getting this? These regulations keep the natural water clean. Without them, bad things will happen because of corporate decisions.

No...They don't.....Why do you believe this?....And you can stop with the use of these lib buzz terms "corporate" for example....
Go do some homework. Read the fine print of the proposal. In there you'll see nothing about pollution controls or corporations.
There is already an all encompassing federal law. It was passed into law years ago....It's called the Clean Water Act.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Liberals Unite? Considering the source, FAIL....
This EPA proposal was nothing more than an outrageous attempt at a federal land grab....Had nothing...ZIP ZERO NADA to do with limiting pollution...

Okay so your entire argument is that this is simply a case of "federal land grab"? You are 100% convinced this bill was NOT proposed to protect the interests of private companies over regular citizens? Why is that exactly? You do know these there are politicians right?

The people who would be harmed the most by the bill are farmers and ranchers - regular citizens, in other words.

Most harmed? Are you kidding me?! Not even close.

Of course they are. They both have lots of land with "waters of the United States" on them. The EPA would just love to tell farmers they can't spay chemicals on their crops.

No one gives a shit about a farmer whose water supply only affects him. People give a shit if said farmer's water supply affects the general public. That's the difference.

There we have it. "I don't give a shit about farmers".....

 

[Billy000]

Okay so your entire argument is that this is simply a case of "federal land grab"? You are 100% convinced this bill was NOT proposed to protect the interests of private companies over regular citizens? Why is that exactly? You do know these there are politicians right?

The people who would be harmed the most by the bill are farmers and ranchers - regular citizens, in other words.

Most harmed? Are you kidding me?! Not even close.

Of course they are. They both have lots of land with "waters of the United States" on them. The EPA would just love to tell farmers they can't spay chemicals on their crops.

No one gives a shit about a farmer whose water supply only affects him. People give a shit if said farmer's water supply affects the general public. That's the difference.

There we have it. "I don't give a shit about farmers".....

Lol what a perfect example of a strawman.

 

[Arianrhod]

The water up here is as clean as the pure driven snow, without the help of the federal government...

So it runs all the way from the source to your fishing hole without any runoff from a factory or a mine or nitrates from agriculture or any other source? Remarkable. What about your groundwater? Well water? Absolutely pure? And you know this without any testing whatsoever? Extraordinary.

 

[Rustic]

The water up here is as clean as the pure driven snow, without the help of the federal government...

So it runs all the way from the source to your fishing hole without any runoff from a factory or a mine or nitrates from agriculture or any other source? Remarkable. What about your groundwater? Well water? Absolutely pure? And you know this without any testing whatsoever? Extraordinary.

I'm still alive...

 

[tinydancer]

What began as an excellent agency to be a centralized watch dog to monitor how we affect the environment around us has now morphed into this powerful entity that is truly frightening.

The case that really got me was the EPA fining this poor welder for building a stock pond on his property.

Wyoming welder faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property

Wyoming welder faces $75,000 a day in EPA fines for building pond on his property

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Why do you ass clowns vote for these scum bags?

Senate Passes Resolution To Scrap EPA Clean Water Rules

Might as well, not like anyone needs water.

 

[bripat9643]

regulations are always after the fact. If they prevent someone from dying, that means someone already died from the thing the regulation prevents. In other words, regulations are no more proactive than lawsuits.

Next stupid argument.

What the ****?

Okay sure, maybe a lot regulations have been inspired by people dying from something and then the fed gov steps in and prevents it from happening again? Lol why is that a bad thing? Of cokes they are proactive.

Man your brain is fried. Maybe it was Fox News that did it. Maybe it was your family dinner table growing up. Either way, you need a serious wake up call.

You were just whining that lawsuits are filed only after someone is harmed. The same goes for regulations. Furthermore, how are regulations enforced? With fines. In other words, they do the same thing lawsuits do: impose a cost on the perpetrator for the harm he causes.

Lol the obvious difference between regulations and lawsuits is that regulations keep illegal behavior from happening in the first place.

hmmm, no they don't, tard. First, you've already conceded the point that regulations are imposed after the fact. Second, before the regulation was enacted, the behavior wasn't illegal, so your argument begs the question. And third, regulations are enforced by imposing fines on corporations and local governments. If they prevented illegal behavior, then no one would ever be fined. Since that obviously isn't the case, they obviously don't prevent illegal behavior.

SOME regulations are in place after the fact. Again, I don't understand why this is a bad thing. It prevents future incidents. It prevents needless lawsuits from happening again. So what if everything isn't perceived to be a bad thing right away?

Begs the question? Um okay so it's common sense that toxic waste harms the water supply. The obvious solution is a government regulation that keeps it from happening don't you think? Why waste your time on David Vs Goliath lawsuits if we can prevent that shit from ever happening?

So needless and economically damaging regulations replace "needless lawsuits?" Where's the gain? Your lame attempts to denigrate the tort process only show that you have nothing of substance to offer.

No, that isn't the obvious solution. It's the liberal big government solution. As I already explained, regulations are a ham fisted way of solving the problem. They impose a government designed solution rather than allowing people to devise their own solutions. They also allow people to decide themselves which problems need to be solved and which don't instead of leaving the decision to politicians and bureaucrats.

It would take a large book to explain all the reasons that regulations are bad. Many such books have been written. Why don't you read one of them instead of that left wing propaganda you have pickled your brain with.

 

[bripat9643]

Liberals Unite? Considering the source, FAIL....
This EPA proposal was nothing more than an outrageous attempt at a federal land grab....Had nothing...ZIP ZERO NADA to do with limiting pollution...

Okay so your entire argument is that this is simply a case of "federal land grab"? You are 100% convinced this bill was NOT proposed to protect the interests of private companies over regular citizens? Why is that exactly? You do know these there are politicians right?

The people who would be harmed the most by the bill are farmers and ranchers - regular citizens, in other words.

Most harmed? Are you kidding me?! Not even close.

Of course they are. They both have lots of land with "waters of the United States" on them. The EPA would just love to tell farmers they can't spay chemicals on their crops.

No one gives a shit about a farmer whose water supply only affects him. People give a shit if said farmer's water supply affects the general public. That's the difference.

If no one gives a shit, then why is the EPA trying to bankrupt people for are bothering no one? If a farmer is put toxins into the water supply, then the people affected can sue him. We don't need some massive Gestapo like agency running around imposing multi-million dollar fines on people because they built a stock pond on their property. If you think the EPA limits itself to only imposing reasonable restrictions, you're incredibly naive. The EPA is infested with anti-capitalist apparatchiks who are bent on destroying the American institution of private property and our industrial economy. Their recent endeavors have no legitimate purpose other than to destroy American industry.

 

[Billy000]

Okay so your entire argument is that this is simply a case of "federal land grab"? You are 100% convinced this bill was NOT proposed to protect the interests of private companies over regular citizens? Why is that exactly? You do know these there are politicians right?

The people who would be harmed the most by the bill are farmers and ranchers - regular citizens, in other words.

Most harmed? Are you kidding me?! Not even close.

Of course they are. They both have lots of land with "waters of the United States" on them. The EPA would just love to tell farmers they can't spay chemicals on their crops.

No one gives a shit about a farmer whose water supply only affects him. People give a shit if said farmer's water supply affects the general public. That's the difference.

If no one gives a shit, then why is the EPA trying to bankrupt people for are bothering no one? If a farmer is put toxins into the water supply, then the people affected can sue him. We don't need some massive Gestapo like agency running around imposing multi-million dollar fines on people because they built a stock pond on their property. If you think the EPA limits itself to only imposing reasonable restrictions, you're incredibly naive. The EPA is infested with anti-capitalist apparatchiks who are bent on destroying the American institution of private property and our industrial economy. Their recent endeavors have no legitimate purpose other than to destroy American industry.

Tell me, why are you so convinced the people of the EPA are such evil anticapitalists? WHY do they want to rid the government of capitalism? What do they get out of it? How would these individuals benefit from ridding the world of capitalism? What would happen next for them? Whats the next step in their evil plan? It's not like this would cause some kind of ripple effect in the gov and create a totalitarian regime and they would take over as dictators lol. I mean realistically, without capitalism, these people would lose their jobs because the revenue generated to pay for their middle class income would no longer be coming in. Having a middle class job in the capitalist nation of the US is a pretty great realized dream wouldn't you say?

 

[Billy000]

What the ****?

Okay sure, maybe a lot regulations have been inspired by people dying from something and then the fed gov steps in and prevents it from happening again? Lol why is that a bad thing? Of cokes they are proactive.

Man your brain is fried. Maybe it was Fox News that did it. Maybe it was your family dinner table growing up. Either way, you need a serious wake up call.

You were just whining that lawsuits are filed only after someone is harmed. The same goes for regulations. Furthermore, how are regulations enforced? With fines. In other words, they do the same thing lawsuits do: impose a cost on the perpetrator for the harm he causes.

Lol the obvious difference between regulations and lawsuits is that regulations keep illegal behavior from happening in the first place.

hmmm, no they don't, tard. First, you've already conceded the point that regulations are imposed after the fact. Second, before the regulation was enacted, the behavior wasn't illegal, so your argument begs the question. And third, regulations are enforced by imposing fines on corporations and local governments. If they prevented illegal behavior, then no one would ever be fined. Since that obviously isn't the case, they obviously don't prevent illegal behavior.

SOME regulations are in place after the fact. Again, I don't understand why this is a bad thing. It prevents future incidents. It prevents needless lawsuits from happening again. So what if everything isn't perceived to be a bad thing right away?

Begs the question? Um okay so it's common sense that toxic waste harms the water supply. The obvious solution is a government regulation that keeps it from happening don't you think? Why waste your time on David Vs Goliath lawsuits if we can prevent that shit from ever happening?

So needless and economically damaging regulations replace "needless lawsuits?" Where's the gain? Your lame attempts to denigrate the tort process only show that you have nothing of substance to offer.

No, that isn't the obvious solution. It's the liberal big government solution. As I already explained, regulations are a ham fisted way of solving the problem. They impose a government designed solution rather than allowing people to devise their own solutions. They also allow people to decide themselves which problems need to be solved and which don't instead of leaving the decision to politicians and bureaucrats.

It would take a large book to explain all the reasons that regulations are bad. Many such books have been written. Why don't you read one of them instead of that left wing propaganda you have pickled your brain with.

Lol what does it matter to you in the context of the "nanny state" philosophy if the government imposes regulations or the government facilitates lawsuits after the fact? Either way, a lot of paper work is involved and you are still relying on a government service.

Of course once again you ignore the David vs Goliath nature of lawsuits between small time individuals and big corporations. To suggest lawsuits alone will somehow protect the public better than preventive regulations is completely ridiculous and you know it. People die before lawsuits are placed. Regulations keep people dying from the first place.

Your philosophy of government regulation is an entirely emotional one. You see it as evil and oppressive which is non sense. I mean sure, SOME govnernment regulations can do more harm than good, but that doesn't mean the concept itself is inherently bad. Replace the bad ones with good ones. End of story.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Without the EPA Democrats would drink ditch water

 

[Deleted member 53821]

Why do you ass clowns vote for these scum bags?

Senate Passes Resolution To Scrap EPA Clean Water Rules

How about just scrap the eps all together?