It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Cuts EPA Funding: Unable to Cope, TOP EPA OFFICIAL RESIGNS

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Shamrock6

I like it too !!

You are not alone !!



I know!! For somebody who likes to scream fake news you sure never have a problem pushing your own fake news!!





posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: TrueBrit

Looks like you are easily 'led'.

(get it? nudge nudge)



I like that you never actually deny your extreme partisanship or your distortion of facts or deny just plain making stuff up when somebody calls you out on it.

We always just get some half-assed attempt at being witty and some faces. Wash, rinse, repeat. And your sycophants lap it like always.




Cool story but what does that have to do with the op?



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: GuidedKill
Drain that EPA swamp!!! they are about worthless....


Meanwhile in EPA free China


Ahh a conservative utopia..almost no regulations whatsoever.


I was in China in 2014 for a month in August. I flew into Beijing, traveled to QingDao, then QingZhou initially. But over that month saw MUCH of the land and cities.

It was NOT unlike that picture. In fact, in QingZhou, where I did most of my work, I think I saw blue skies ONCE for a few hours on a super windy day.

However, China has a POWER problem which leads to or creates it's pollution problem. They put powerplants in the middle of the city. How stupid is that? That is the major cause of their pollution. That and the fact that they dont' regulate their vehicle emissions anywhere close to the standards of a developed nation.

I think there is a place for the EPA. I think it does a lot of good. But programs like the one in the OP being cut, which are dubiously helpful, can be stripped of funding immediately as far as I'm concerned.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: TrueBrit

Looks like you are easily 'led'.

(get it? nudge nudge)



I like that you never actually deny your extreme partisanship or your distortion of facts or deny just plain making stuff up when somebody calls you out on it.

We always just get some half-assed attempt at being witty and some faces. Wash, rinse, repeat. And your sycophants lap it like always.




Cool story but what does that have to do with the op?


About as much as your question does



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: SeaWorthy

Jobs Jobs, portfolios, Stock markets, who cares if the planet will end unlivable everyone will have a job on the dirty cinder that is left.


Weren't we there, like, 60 years ago?

We are so going backwards.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: GuidedKill
Drain that EPA swamp!!! they are about worthless....


Meanwhile in EPA free China


Ahh a conservative utopia..almost no regulations whatsoever.


Just a few stats from the EPA coal regulation...

Next, here are the things you need to know about how the regulations will negatively impact the economy.

-New regulations will kill 226,000 American jobs.

-New regulations will cost the U.S. economy $51 billion per year.

-Even with new regulations, carbon is only expected to decrease by 1.8 percent by 2030.

1.8% reduction....sounds likes it's totally workinLink



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tempter
I think there is a place for the EPA. I think it does a lot of good. But programs like the one in the OP being cut, which are dubiously helpful, can be stripped of funding immediately as far as I'm concerned.

Sensible response, yes, I would be in favor of anti-corruption and fat task forces unleashed on all government programs. make them work cheaper, more efficient, and better. Get rid of the 300 dollar hammer type thing.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: GuidedKill
-Even with new regulations, carbon is only expected to decrease by 1.8 percent by 2030.

With nearly no regulations, how much is carbon meant to increase?

how much will a slew of new medical issues linked to heavy pollution cost the economy?

Can we put a coal plant next door to you? how about letting them dump into your water supply? seems fine..get a brita filter I guess.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
It's easy to have an emotional reaction. "Oh no! They are cutting the environmental protection, the planet is doomed"

But lets get real. Half of the people working there do nothing but browse the web all day. EVERY government agency is bloated and wasting our money. They all need the fat cut off. So I'm not buying all of the grave concerns by some people here. They are just uninformed of how wasteful government is.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: SaturnFX

China isn't Conservative.

That's why they have big pollution.




posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: GuidedKill
-Even with new regulations, carbon is only expected to decrease by 1.8 percent by 2030.



Can we put a coal plant next door to you? how about letting them dump into your water supply? seems fine..get a brita filter I guess.


I actually have one near me and fish it's cooling tower exhaust waters all the time in the Winter....Hell fishing is SOOOOO GREAT next to the plant they don't let you keep fish in the Winter time cause there are SOOO many it's like shooting fish in a barrel...

What else do you have



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: GuidedKill
-Even with new regulations, carbon is only expected to decrease by 1.8 percent by 2030.

With nearly no regulations, how much is carbon meant to increase?

how much will a slew of new medical issues linked to heavy pollution cost the economy?

Can we put a coal plant next door to you? how about letting them dump into your water supply? seems fine..get a brita filter I guess.


But Brita filters use carbon to filter the water.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: GuidedKill
-Even with new regulations, carbon is only expected to decrease by 1.8 percent by 2030.

With nearly no regulations, how much is carbon meant to increase?

how much will a slew of new medical issues linked to heavy pollution cost the economy?

Can we put a coal plant next door to you? how about letting them dump into your water supply? seems fine..get a brita filter I guess.


But Brita filters use carbon to filter the water.



OMG don't throw common sense into the debate...Common sense is a "trigger" don't you know.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: xuenchen

That is an ironic statement, given that the EPA protects actual swamps and such from those who would like to dump pollutants in them, perform hydraulic fracturing in them, and for that matter other terrains and natural places to boot.

But who cares right? Drain the swamp! Remove the fat cats and the corporate shills (and replace them with oil billionaires and their lackeys).

I despair at your utter witlessness in this matter xuenchen. I swear I used to believe you had functioning synapses at one stage, but I suppose thats the scientific method for you. Better observation will sometimes lead one to have to change ones understanding of events.


I guess the biggest question is how much do they need to be functional? We do have a large problem in our Government and other agencies that have continued to grow and grow, and not due to needs as much as to people's desires to create jobs and control above and beyond what is actually required to preform the needed tasks. Bureaucracy is not typically a good thing and does more damage than good if it goes unchecked. Our school system has this problem too where when you look above the teachers and first level of management there is this huge layer of bureaucracy that adds little to the system, but each position that pays well over a teacher salary are created from personal greed of people in the power who can create those things. Lots of cronyism going on....

Creating more and more Government jobs is not healthy growth though the left would tell you otherwise, just look at Greece to see where that all ends up to be...




edit on 10-3-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

EPA employees were protesting outside their Chicago headquarters last week, due to a projected 27% funding cut for this region.

When asked why they think they're so critical, the explanation was how a tank car jumped the track, and spilled chemicals. They had to clean it up.

I don't think a few less people working at their office will adversely affect cleanup efforts, when the occasional derailment occurs. When something bigger happens, the government can use a private company.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: mikell

Why do they that? Is it to keep their waste out of it?



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xuenchen

EPA employees were protesting outside their Chicago headquarters last week, due to a projected 27% funding cut for this region.

When asked why they think they're so critical, the explanation was how a tank car jumped the track, and spilled chemicals. They had to clean it up.

I don't think a few less people working at their office will adversely affect cleanup efforts, when the occasional derailment occurs. When something bigger happens, the government can use a private company.


A lot of these events happen at the state level anyways...

Here is the deal... Government jobs pay well, demand little productivity, give great benefits well beyond much of the private sector, does have some accountability but that accountability is not based on revenue and does not require quality of work from the individual. You can have all that and still get continuous step promotions with almost zero chance you could lose your job....

The kicker is all this can be totally unproductive and in any case it is pure cost to the tax payers.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: conscientiousobserver
a reply to: mikell

Why do they that? Is it to keep their waste out of it?


Yes. Big herds can cause eutrophication of fresh waters. Runoff from feedlots is a problem, too.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: SaturnFX

originally posted by: GuidedKill
-Even with new regulations, carbon is only expected to decrease by 1.8 percent by 2030.



Can we put a coal plant next door to you? how about letting them dump into your water supply? seems fine..get a brita filter I guess.


I actually have one near me and fish it's cooling tower exhaust waters all the time in the Winter....Hell fishing is SOOOOO GREAT next to the plant they don't let you keep fish in the Winter time cause there are SOOO many it's like shooting fish in a barrel...

What else do you have

I hear fish near the Fukushima power plant are mammoth sized...amazing! grab your rod.


OVERVIEW
Power plant water discharges are filled with toxic pollution such as mercury, arsenic, lead, and selenium—heavy metals that can cause neurological and developmental damage, cause harm in utero, damage internal organs and cause cancer.

Enjoy your tumors and brain damage...actually, this explains a lot...



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 01:01 PM
link   
The problem is assumption of authority and uncontrolled growth of the agency. The OP touched on a part of the growth problem that was mainly for education and public show. A lesser budget will not significantly detract from their mission. The EPA has far too many lawyers and too few knowledgeable folk. The recent declaration of CO2 as a "toxic gas" was designed to allow the agency to control power plant emissions and was purely political and designed to circumvent Congress. Standards were carefully set to ensure that coal was excluded and only natural gas fired plants would meet the standards without CO2 capture and sequestration. While this may be an admirable goal, calling CO2 a toxic gas is incorrect in that it is not a toxin but the product of respiration of plants and animals.
They need to cut zealots and SJW's and focus on what is actually important.
edit on 3/10/2017 by pteridine because: ETA




top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join