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.
originally posted by: Metallicus
This is GOOD news.
These Government agencies have far too much power over states and landowners. Hopefully we see the dismantling of all of these oppressive Federal ‘alphabet’ agencies over the next few years...the NSA and IRS come to mind.
originally posted by: Metallicus
This is GOOD news.
These Government agencies have far too much power over states and landowners. Hopefully we see the dismantling of all of these oppressive Federal ‘alphabet’ agencies over the next few years...the NSA and IRS come to mind.
originally posted by: TheJesuit
So just browsing around and im seeing a lot of language within stories and actual quotes from politicians and senior leadership within the EPA that really seems like it's heading that way just look at the decision to put "on hold" to open a mining operation in Alaska and destroying one of the largest salmon fisheries on the west coast. The regulations put in place to prevent another Deepwater disaster rolled back because a company that makes Billions in profits says it's too expensive?
The EPA is being dismantled and no one can see it .
originally posted by: Hewhowaits
originally posted by: Metallicus
This is GOOD news.
These Government agencies have far too much power over states and landowners. Hopefully we see the dismantling of all of these oppressive Federal ‘alphabet’ agencies over the next few years...the NSA and IRS come to mind.
Agreed..
Every time a new statute is enacted, the EPA goes completely overboard and decides they can pick and choose who and where it applies to.
It's no different than pay to play.
Why is it a homeowner can't modify or build on wetlands, yet mining companies can dump nasty crap in the water supply?
Because somebody got a check.
Screw em, they did it to themselves.
And add the FDA to that list.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Aazadan
Litigation.
If you poison people in Texas, the Texas state government would have right to sue for recompense.
The problem is, the EPA as a concept is valuable. But its a group of unelected officials that make decisions which are quite often completely baffling in logic. Which tells me that they aren't there for the environment insomuch as to meter out permits to the highest bidder.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Aazadan
Litigation.
If you poison people in Texas, the Texas state government would have right to sue for recompense.
The problem is, the EPA as a concept is valuable. But its a group of unelected officials that make decisions which are quite often completely baffling in logic. Which tells me that they aren't there for the environment insomuch as to meter out permits to the highest bidder.
originally posted by: jimmyx
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Aazadan
Litigation.
If you poison people in Texas, the Texas state government would have right to sue for recompense.
The problem is, the EPA as a concept is valuable. But its a group of unelected officials that make decisions which are quite often completely baffling in logic. Which tells me that they aren't there for the environment insomuch as to meter out permits to the highest bidder.
sounds like you have no idea what the EPA does.....I think you should move your entire family right next to a fraking field to show good faith in your convictions, so as to enjoy the air and drinking water quality of those areas
originally posted by: Wayfarer
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Aazadan
Litigation.
If you poison people in Texas, the Texas state government would have right to sue for recompense.
The problem is, the EPA as a concept is valuable. But its a group of unelected officials that make decisions which are quite often completely baffling in logic. Which tells me that they aren't there for the environment insomuch as to meter out permits to the highest bidder.
I can't really agree with the idea of dismantling regulatory agencies because they're not 100% perfect.
In a regulation-less situation, the company would throw caution to the wind via all efforts to maximize profit, kill as many people as necessity would dictate to maximize profit, and then a nominally small cut (pay-off) to the victims families to sweep it under the rug.