Toggle sidebar

Which one did more damage to America's

K

Keyser76

Freshman
Apr 7, 2010
11,912
58
0
Right on, without them we could still pay **** wages, have no middle class and that river in Ohio would still be on fire!
 
C

countryroads89_rivals

Sophomore
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
If it wasn't for that damned EPA, we could be living the dream like this:

 
M

MountaineerWV

Sophomore
Sep 18, 2007
26,324
194
0
EERs 3:16 said:
industrial might:

Labor Unions or the EPA?
Click to expand...

Probably both, because we all know that business industrialists would never purposely cut corners to increase profit margins if there were no regulatory actions.......[thumbsup]......right?
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,612
841
113
Keyser76 said:
Right on, without them we could still pay **** wages, have no middle class and that river in Ohio would still be on fire!
Click to expand...
The EPA didn't clean up the rivers. The Clean Water Act cleaned up rivers. The EPA did a good job with the clean water act until they ran out sections of that to implement and they started trying to write new laws.
 
Airport

Airport

All-American
Dec 12, 2001
87,039
7,886
113
EERs 3:16 said:
industrial might:

Labor Unions or the EPA?
Click to expand...

If left alone, all three do harm. The problem I have with the ePA is it has become a defacto ruling arm of the left. Sending all the the EPA employees to the border to protect us, would be one of the first thing I'd do as President.
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,865
287
83
dave said:
The EPA didn't clean up the rivers. The Clean Water Act cleaned up rivers. The EPA did a good job with the clean water act until they ran out sections of that to implement and they started trying to write new laws.
Click to expand...
Of course the CWA is nothing without the USEPA who promulgated and oversees the rules (NPDES, etc) that require companies to clean up their water discharges. Most if not all states administer these programs on behalf of the Fed.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,612
841
113
moe said:
Of course the CWA is nothing without the USEPA who promulgated and oversees the rules (NPDES, etc) that require companies to clean up their water discharges. Most if not all states administer these programs on behalf of the Fed.
Click to expand...
It is the other way around. The CWA is written law and the EPA enforces the law. When they stick to that they do OK. States do a good job of it too. When the EPA becomes a politiical tool it just tramples freedoms.
 
E

EERs 3:16

Redshirt
Oct 17, 2001
73,677
26
0
MountaineerWV said:
Probably both, because we all know that business industrialists would never purposely cut corners to increase profit margins if there were no regulatory actions.......[thumbsup]......right?
Click to expand...

So, what we've done is push all the pollution on the poor/undeveloped nations.......gotta love how the left keeps oppressing the poor.
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,865
287
83
dave said:
It is the other way around. The CWA is written law and the EPA enforces the law. When they stick to that they do OK. States do a good job of it too. When the EPA becomes a politiical tool it just tramples freedoms.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that the USEPA wrote the CWA. In general terms they wrote the details (water quality standards, etc.). So to say that "the EPA didn't clean up the rivers" ignores the USEPA's critical role in doing just that. I'm not going to spend the day on this, done.
http://www.epa.gov/wqs-tech/federal...ndards-specific-states-territories-and-tribes
http://www.epa.gov/wqc
 
M

mneilmont

Sophomore
Jan 23, 2008
20,883
166
0
moe said:
Of course the CWA is nothing without the USEPA who promulgated and oversees the rules (NPDES, etc) that require companies to clean up their water discharges. Most if not all states administer these programs on behalf of the Fed.
Click to expand...
What could be wrong with that? If the feds promulgate a regulation that has a negative impact on the state, state enforcement simply ignores the new mandate and there are no consequences. Right? What could be wrong with that? Everybody happy?
 
M

mneilmont

Sophomore
Jan 23, 2008
20,883
166
0
moe said:
I don't believe that's how it works. States can make more stringent criteria but not less (than the Fed).
Click to expand...
But you are falsely assuming that the states were pushing the issue as well as the fed and your scenario assumes the only difference is the degree or to what extent the issue is to be pressed. What happens if the state has no interest at all in enforcing the new regulation. As a matter of fact, the state opposes the new mandate. Now what happens when the state says NO.
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,865
287
83
mneilmont said:
But you are falsely assuming that the states were pushing the issue as well as the fed and your scenario assumes the only difference is the degree or to what extent the issue is to be pressed. What happens if the state has no interest at all in enforcing the new regulation. As a matter of fact, the state opposes the new mandate. Now what happens when the state says NO.
Click to expand...
Just like with new air regs, our (WV) attorney general joined other states' attorneys general and sued in federal court and recently lost I believe.
 
M

mneilmont

Sophomore
Jan 23, 2008
20,883
166
0
moe said:
Just like with new air regs, our (WV) attorney general joined other states' attorneys general and sued in federal court and recently lost I believe.
Click to expand...
I am not familiar with the issue, but what happens if the state doesn't choose to enforce it.

I assume Feds brought case to a sweetheart court and got judgement. Going to SCOUS via appeal?
 
M

moe

Junior
May 29, 2001
32,865
287
83
mneilmont said:
I am not familiar with the issue, but what happens if the state doesn't choose to enforce it.
Click to expand...
It's above my pay grade but states either enforce the new statute or sue the USEPA in federal court to get it overturned/recinded. States can't arbitrarily decide to not enforce USEPA regulations, water quality standards, etc.
 
C

countryroads89_rivals

Sophomore
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
dave said:
When they stick to that they do OK. States do a good job of it too. When the EPA becomes a politiical tool it just tramples freedoms.
Click to expand...

Are the states doing a good job in Michigan, dumb dave? You know the guy is a Republican governor? You also know they have had a few children die from their drinking water, right? This is 20 phucking 16 and we have lead contaminated drinking water in the US. Shameful. I hope no businesses' rights were trampled over the lead poisoning.
 
M

MountaineerWV

Sophomore
Sep 18, 2007
26,324
194
0
countryroads89 said:
Are the states doing a good job in Michigan, dumb dave? You know the guy is a Republican governor? You also know they have had a few children die from their drinking water, right? This is 20 phucking 16 and we have lead contaminated drinking water in the US. Shameful. I hope no businesses' rights were trampled over the lead poisoning.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And all you have to do is look at the reason WHY the public drinking source was switched......yep......MONEY! But, as I've said before, modern day industrialists and such wouldn't dare put the public in danger if there were no EPA restrictions and/or guidelines....right? ;)
 
DvlDog4WVU

DvlDog4WVU

All-Conference
Feb 2, 2008
47,395
3,570
113
MountaineerWV said:
Exactly. And all you have to do is look at the reason WHY the public drinking source was switched......yep......MONEY! But, as I've said before, modern day industrialists and such wouldn't dare put the public in danger if there were no EPA restrictions and/or guidelines....right? ;)
Click to expand...
While it would be a disaster, I think the planet would be better off with about half its population. We need another plague or something.
 
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,612
841
113
countryroads89 said:
Are the states doing a good job in Michigan, dumb dave? You know the guy is a Republican governor? You also know they have had a few children die from their drinking water, right? This is 20 phucking 16 and we have lead contaminated drinking water in the US. Shameful. I hope no businesses' rights were trampled over the lead poisoning.
Click to expand...

The EPA dropped the ball in Flint too. I mean they fired the Head EPA-Chicago official because she knew about what was going on and didn't act.
How exactly does the political party of the Governor matter? I guess if the governor had been a democrat the city of Flint would not have switched water sources?

I am not sure how any of that is relevant to the fact that water quality today is overall significantly better than it was in 1971 when Congress and the President via the Clean Water Act directed the EPA to set new scientific based standards for water quality and to implement a multi decade plan to clean up not only industrial pollution, sedimentation, flow control and water quality standards. If the states didn't do a good job (which they generally have) it would be the EPA's place to right the wrong.
 
Last edited:
dave

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,612
841
113
MountaineerWV said:
Exactly. And all you have to do is look at the reason WHY the public drinking source was switched......yep......MONEY! But, as I've said before, modern day industrialists and such wouldn't dare put the public in danger if there were no EPA restrictions and/or guidelines....right? ;)
Click to expand...
Some people will do anything if it makes them a buck. Other people are conscious of those around them. You see it in every facet of business. The problem with the EPA is not the guidelines they should regulate. That is why they exist. The problem with the EPA is that they have stepped beyond their obligations due to political will of politicians who use government agencies for duties that they were never intended, and this isnt a democrat or republican problem because both parties are guilty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
WV Sports

Latest

  1. 01 WV Sports Safety Kamari Wilson using past experiences to grow in current role
  2. 02 WV Sports Practice intensity helps develop preparation, depth for West Virginia
  3. 03 WV Sports Looking at the potential impact of CB Jason Chambers and TE Jacob Barrick
  4. 04 WV Sports Jason Chambers, Jacob Barrick rejoin WVU football during eligibility process
  5. 05 WV Sports What makes Cam Cook such a natural fit in WVU's offense
Top Bottom