patrick.net

joeyjojojunior says

Companies exist for one reason--to make profit. If polluting is more profitable, they will pollute 100 times out of 100.

Spoken like a true Lefty. The customer tells the companies what to build with their spending. Government meddles this process

"Spoken like a true Lefty. The customer tells the companies what to build with their spending. Government meddles this process"

And how does that have anything to do with the fact that companies exist only to make profit?

joeyjojojunior says

You're an idiot. No company would EVER spend a dime on new cleaner technology if it wasn't mandated by the EPA or similar government agency.

Yeah, what an economic boon that's been. How many "green" companies where started and went under the past 8 years? How many had execs with direct ties to feds? Although that does lead perfectly into...
joeyjojojunior says

Companies exist for one reason--to make profit.

And they do, at our expense. Or did you think the government somehow earned that money they're giving away?

Tim Aurora says

All type of companies go under.

At the rate of 80% for the industry? Why not when the CEO is guaranteed to come out in the black thanks to our tax dollars.

Tim Aurora says

If you are not so worried about pollution try living next to a nuclear or a coal power plant.

Maybe you didn't see my picture of what the EPA does. Maybe YOU should go drink some of that kool.. er water.
NuttBoxer says

"Yeah, what an economic boon that's been. How many "green" companies where started and went under the past 8 years? How many had execs with direct ties to feds? Although that does lead perfectly into..."

Who cares? The issue of government funding of green initiatives is completely separate from the EPA.

"And they do, at our expense. Or did you think the government somehow earned that money they're giving away?"

What are you talking about? We're talking about the EPA--not government grants.

"Maybe you didn't see my picture of what the EPA does. Maybe YOU should go drink some of that kool.. er water"

Great--what actions did the EPA take to do that?

I'm assuming they issued a regulation requiring pollution of the river?

Let's get the cards on the table here. All of you support the EPA because your a bunch of fat lazy fucks, who want someone else to do their job of keeping the earth clean. Far be it from you to ever start a compost pile, recycle anything without being told to, or consume less.

Tim Aurora says

Remember the dot com boom. That was even the worse survival rate

Who was throwing the money into that? You aren't comparing apples with apples...

"Let's get the cards on the table here. All of you support the EPA because your a bunch of fat lazy fucks, who want someone else to do their job of keeping the earth clean. Far be it from you to ever start a compost pile, recycle anything without being told to, or consume less."

Yep. Let's do it. I want the EPA because I know that fat lazy fucks like you won't do jack shit because you'd rather earn an extra $0.50 instead of changing a process to become more environmentally friendly. And the only language you understand is $$ so we need a government agency with the ability to levy large fines.

joeyjojojunior says

Who cares? The issue of government funding of green initiatives is completely separate from the EPA.

Really, so the EPA exists on who's dime? If you can't make the connection between backdoor deals and government agencies, then you'll never understand why the EPA doesn't give a shit about pollution.

"Really, so the EPA exists on who's dime? If you can't make the connection between backdoor deals and government agencies, then you'll never understand why the EPA doesn't give a shit about pollution."

OK, educate me. Show me the backdoor deals that connect the EPA to the government funding from completely separate agencies.

joeyjojojunior says

Yep. Let's do it. I want the EPA because I know that fat lazy fucks like you won't do jack shit because you'd rather earn an extra $0.50 instead of changing a process to become more environmentally friendly. And the only language you understand is $$ so we need a government agency with the ability to levy large fines.

Instead of proving me wrong by stating how YOU protect the environment, you just parroted my post. I don't need the EPA to keep my yard clean, turn off my lights when I'm not using them, install energy saving bulbs, compost, eat organic, garden, pick up garbage around my house(even next to my property). But then again, I'm not a...
NuttBoxer says

fat lazy fuck

"Instead of proving me wrong by stating how YOU protect the environment, you just parroted my post. I don't need the EPA to keep my yard clean, turn off my lights when I'm not using them, install energy saving bulbs, compost, eat organic, garden, pick up garbage around my house(even next to my property). But then again, I'm not a..."

You think the EPA exists to keep your lawn clean?? What the hell is wrong with you??

You think they go around looking for Sanford and Son?

joeyjojojunior says

You think the EPA exists to keep your lawn clean?? What the hell is wrong with you??

You haven't responded back with a single thing that you do that shows you care about the environment, I've responded with multiple. You are the person I meant to insult in every post here, glad I drew your hypocritical, do nothing, wasteful ass.

JJJ the EPA exists to regulate the competition out of business and limit our land rights, they don't do shit else. Follow the money, or just look at the Colorado river again.
NuttBoxer says

"When is the last time a tree did you any favors?"

Ceffer says

"When is the last time a tree did you any favors?"

This morning when dropped a deuce

"You haven't responded back with a single thing that you do that shows you care about the environment, I've responded with multiple. You are the person I meant to insult in every post here, glad I drew your hypocritical, do nothing, wasteful ass."

Of course not, you idiot. Me composting isn't going to stop WR Grace from creating environmental wastelands. Or the Cuyahoga river from becoming flammable from pollution from industry. The EPA isn't about individuals. It's about corporations. How do you not know that???

"JJJ the EPA exists to regulate the competition out of business and limit our land rights, they don't do shit else. Follow the money, or just look at the Colorado river again."

So, how does the government benefit when companies go out of business? How is that in their best interest?

The EPA is exactly like the police force: it has power to enforce necessary laws and regulations, and it is made up of people who are often greedy, venal, corrupt, and avaricious. We don't abolish the police because a cop committed a crime or abuse of power, we appoint a regulatory agency to police the police. That's what is missing with the EPA, and that's how we fix (not abolish!) that agency.

indigenous says

bob2356 says

How does an individual hire lawyers to take on a huge multinational corporation.

Yes who will build the roads blah blah

Here is one, didn't even have to go back a decade, is the Burlington Northern big enough for you?

http://wildfiretoday.com/2013/11/06/burlington-northern-railroad-settles-million-dollar-lawsuit-for-burning-homes/

Maybe you should go read the case. The settlement was 23 families and 2 large corporations that were suing BN. Not exaclty a single individual taking on exxon, ge, or the koch bros.

No burlington northern isn't very big at all. The big multinationals could buy and sell BN out of petty cash.

"You are the person I meant to insult in every post here, glad I drew your hypocritical, do nothing, wasteful ass."

Just curious--why do you think this?

bob2356 says

Maybe you should go read the case. The settlement was 23 families and 2 large corporations that were suing BN. Not exaclty a single individual taking on exxon, ge, or the koch bros.

No burlington northern isn't very big at all. The big multinationals could buy and sell BN out of petty cash.

Class Actions is most likely the answer as with the Stringfellow Acid Pits.

Short of that just tort law or even small claims court.

Either way the law was used.

If this was done instead of useless agencies the taxpayer would save money.

Not to say that tort law does not need reform. Which would further enhance this very effective solution to the problem.

This is very interesting about how the bureaucracy is created and how it works. How the government is run by people nobody knows.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?414716-4/bureaucrat-kings

Quigley says

we appoint a regulatory agency to police the police. That's what is missing with the EPA, and that's how we fix (not abolish!) that agency.

Yes, how's that working out again...

joeyjojojunior says

Just curious--why do you think this?

Because I'm actively engaged in making my planet healthier, and you only get upset when someone who is doing your job for you is threatened with annihilation, leaving you on the hook to actually do something.

This is something I saw the other day that has a lot to do with this and it's pernicious nature.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?414716-4/bureaucrat-kings

joeyjojojunior says

So, how does the government benefit when companies go out of business? How is that in their best interest?

People from government regulatory agencies have a long history of being in bed with the biggest companies they are supposed to regulate. One back scratches the other, and fuck the government grants being wasted, because WE fund them. Again, government makes no goods, and sells no services that add value to society, economic or otherwise.

To that point the reason don't change it because we are only dealing with the tip of the iceberg in elections.

What doesn't change are the people within the regulatory agencies and the political staffers.

NuttBoxer says

Because I'm actively engaged in making my planet healthier, and you only get upset when someone who is doing your job for you is threatened with annihilation, leaving you on the hook to actually do something.

That's my point. What makes you think I'm not doing more than you? It's completely logical for me to do my part but also understand that doing my part isn't all that's needed.

I get upset when people think that the actions of individuals is all that is needed. Would you composting stop:

1. Hooker Chemical from dumping industrial waste in the Love Canal?
2. WR Grace from spewing asbestos into the atmosphere for decades?
3. PG and E from contaminating the water supply?

Not too mention air regulations cleaning up smog, acid rain, etc.

NuttBoxer says

People from government regulatory agencies have a long history of being in bed with the biggest companies they are supposed to regulate. One back scratches the other, and fuck the government grants being wasted, because WE fund them. Again, government makes no goods, and sells no services that add value to society, economic or otherwise.

Sure--it's called regulatory capture. It's a well known phenomena. Like others have said--understanding this problem and fixing it is what is needed. Getting rid of all regulation certainly isn't the cure.

Government absolutely provides services that are beneficial to society, however. You are dead wrong on this front.

indigenous says

Class Actions is most likely the answer as with the Stringfellow Acid Pits.

Short of that just tort law or even small claims court.

Either way the law was used.

If this was done instead of useless agencies the taxpayer would save money.

So after millions of people have been poisoned then litigating every single person's damage claim against an entire industry through the court system is somehow cheaper and easier than regulating the industry and not polluting in the first place? You just get weirder every day.

Class action is a joke. It's about lawyers mining money, nothing else. Litigants rarely get substantial compensation.

How can you be libertarian and support class action. Lawsuits go against everything libertarians stand for.

bob2356 says

So after millions of people have been poisoned then litigating every single person's damage claim against an entire industry through the court system is somehow cheaper and easier than regulating the industry and not polluting in the first place?

ONE of the idiocies of government is that they want to fix problems before they are problems they invent shit to fix to justify the agency that fixes the imaginary problem. So all of the agencies' actors view things through the narrative of finding something that justifies their paycheck. The money would be vastly better spent on violators of someones private property. bob2356 says

You just get weirder every day.

I am the benchmark, you are the one getting weirder.

bob2356 says

Lawsuits go against everything libertarians stand for.

Bullshit a rule of law is part of the libertarian tenet, they even have Xerces law in Somalia.

joeyjojojunior says

I get upset when people think that the actions of individuals is all that is needed. Would you composting stop:

1. Hooker Chemical from dumping industrial waste in the Love Canal?

2. WR Grace from spewing asbestos into the atmosphere for decades?

3. PG and E from contaminating the water supply?

Not too mention air regulations cleaning up smog, acid rain, etc.

My actions, no, my mentality, yes. Example... A few years back a company called BP dumped a bazillion gallons of oil into the gulf. Now regulations didn't stop it, and neither did my composting. But since that day my family has never once bought gas at an ARCO station. Why? After the spill I noticed their branding referenced their parent company, British Petroleum. ARCO is still owned by BP today, but you won't see it anywhere on their sign. There's a reason for that as I believe like minded people decided to stop frequenting their station.

If I find out someone is polluting they'll never get another cent from me. If it's in my town, I will do something about it. In the form of protest, and fines and legislation at the local level, where it needs to happen.

Washington doesn't know dick about my town, nor do they care to. So Fuck the EPA, I can handle my part just fine without them.

joeyjojojunior says

Sure--it's called regulatory capture. It's a well known phenomena. Like others have said--understanding this problem and fixing it is what is needed. Getting rid of all regulation certainly isn't the cure.

You don't fix a broken system, you through it out and start over. Or are you also a Trump believer?

"My actions, no, my mentality, yes. Example... A few years back a company called BP dumped a bazillion gallons of oil into the gulf. Now regulations didn't stop it, and neither did my composting. But since that day my family has never once bought gas at an ARCO station. Why? After the spill I noticed their branding referenced their parent company, British Petroleum. ARCO is still owned by BP today, but you won't see it anywhere on their sign. There's a reason for that as I believe like minded people decided to stop frequenting their station.

If I find out someone is polluting they'll never get another cent from me. If it's in my town, I will do something about it. In the form of protest, and fines and legislation at the local level, where it needs to happen.

Washington doesn't know dick about my town, nor do they care to. So Fuck the EPA, I can handle my part just fine without them."

Great--has your boycott caused them to pay for the cleanup? Or changed their behavior?

"You don't fix a broken system, you through it out and start over. Or are you also a Trump believer?"

OK--propose your new system then. Start over with what exactly?

joeyjojojunior says

Great--has your boycott caused them to pay for the cleanup? Or changed their behavior?

Has regulation...

I'll posit that my mindset has been more of a factor than the EPA's existence. Otherwise, why change the ARCO sign?

joeyjojojunior says

OK--propose your new system then. Start over with what exactly?

Already stated, locals take care of their own problems, big government butts out. Have some belief in yourself, your neighbors, and your town. If you can't trust those people, what makes you think a bunch of suits, who are still just people, but are not from your town, and don't care how the water use to look, or how the air used to smell, will be more effective at combating pollution?