B-Man Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 when bad history AND bad analogy meet. A lot of Trump critics are flipping about the president’s proposed budget, but few will phrase it more dramatically than NY Times’ columnist Nicholas Kristof: Nicholas KristofVerified account @NickKristof Follow More Reading through the Trump budget, I feel as the Romans must have felt in 456 AD as the barbarians conquered and ushered in the dark ages. $54 billion out of a $1.115 TRILLION dollar budget = the dark ages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Most of Europe is clean because they have intrusive government. Been to Italy or France lately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Been to Italy or France lately? Or Portugal. Southern Europe is not like their neighbors from the North. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 East Germany - West Germany North Korea - South Korea And one small gubment regulated sprout farm in Germany killed more people than Fukushima, the Gulf Spill, and the Exxon Valdez combined. Germany - India My point is there's no exact correlation between government intrusion and pollution. The only real correlation seems that places in governmental chaos (different from intrusiveness) will do whatever they want to the environment. See large portions of Africa and South America. Environmental rules are hard to enforce without a strong hand. It's one of those market imperfect moments from a practical solutions standpoint. Roads are similarly messy to conceive of in free market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 16, 2017 Author Share Posted March 16, 2017 Obviously the country is cleaner since the creation of the EPA. It has done the country good service Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg F Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 How so? I have a newer one, 5 gallon, for genset. But have old cans that I don't dear part with. New one is a PITA, but I still haven't lost fuel. Chain saw and string trimmer. When filling them it helps to have 3 hands. One to hold the gas can, one to pull back the spring loaded gas nozzel, and one to hold what I am trying to fill. Having only 2 hands the gas doesn't always go where intended. Second issue is if the can is sitting in the sun. Pressure builds up and if I forget to release the pressure before pouring the gas comes out fire hose style. If I do release the pressure then it kind of defeats the purpose of the 'environmentally friendly ©' gas can by releasing the fumes it was designed to prevent. I have three 5 gallon, one 2.5 gallon, and two 1 gallon. One of the 1 gallon is the 'environmentally friendly ©' type. The 5 gallon cans are used for the lawn mower and snowblower. The good 1 gallon goes to camp for the lawnmower (non-ethanol gas). The 'environmentally friendly' © can gets filled with non-ethanol gas/oil mixture for the string trimmer and chain saw. The 2.5 gallon I picked up at a yard sale for the nozzle that fits my 5 gallon cans. Now you are probably wondering why this guy has so many gas cans. Then again maybe you're not but I am going to tell you anyway. The 5 gallon cans I bought new for $5 a piece (my age is showing). Back in the day I used to go through the local reservation where gas was 50 ¢ to 80 ¢ per gallon cheaper. Two fill ups and they were paid for. Now they are used when redeeming gas credit we get from the grocery store (X cents/gallon) that is good for up to 20 gallons. My wife bought the 'environmentally friendly ©' can (don't ask) and I bought the 1 gallon originally for the chain saw and string trimmer which was before we bought the camp. Leave that open in a hot confined space and you are asking for an airspace in the explosive range. I don't remember ever hearing that happen. Gasoline has a fairly narrow fuel to air ratio that it will ignite (1.3% to 7.6%). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Not sure your point or that it's valid. India has the least effective government on the planet and they pollute like MFers. Most of Europe is clean because they have intrusive government. I'm a free market guy but it's hard to totally trust the market to adequately punish Exxon if it cuts corners. The EPA needs to be less intrusive agreed. But it also needs better ammo. Who said anything about effective government? If anything, your India example proves my point because they have among the most regulated and bureaucratic rules in the world, and as you say it's one of the more ineffective governments in the world. Nobody is also arguing that there should be no rules or that companies don't deserve to be punished when they break the rules. The argument is - should an effort be made to slow down an ever expanding federal overreach? Because making up rules to put more power in the hands of bureaucrats without seeing benefits from that expansion is not a recipe for success. The EPA has been on a tear over the last 8 years in expanding its regulatory powers outside Congressional oversight. That's not how the executive agencies are supposed to function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 I understand Conservatives hate environmentalist and all, but this sure looks like a real sh it sandwich for the GOP after some oil spill or unsafe water pops up. Even with the EPA at current funding we have major industrial spills of toxic yuck in the rivers and streams. Now will anyone force the coal companies or anyone to clean it up?? https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/case-summary-duke-energy-agrees-3-million-cleanup-coal-ash-release-dan-river What are these big cuts and how are they going to hurt the environment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 I understand Conservatives hate environmentalist and all, but this sure looks like a real sh it sandwich for the GOP after some oil spill or unsafe water pops up. Even with the EPA at current funding we have major industrial spills of toxic yuck in the rivers and streams. Now will anyone force the coal companies or anyone to clean it up?? https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/case-summary-duke-energy-agrees-3-million-cleanup-coal-ash-release-dan-river You think the EPA cleans up oil spills? You really are a moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Why are people upset with Trump doing what he said he would? He got voted into office based on such things as reducing regulations and building the wall. It is the people's wish. Keep in mind he only got 45.94% of the vote and he's one of the most controversial presidents in our lifetime due to his campaign rhetoric and the fact we continue to be a divided nation politically. One way to look at this is his approval rating was the lowest ever entering office and has stayed about the same throughout the first two months (45% average) despite the economy doing well. Expanding the base is vital to the midterm elections and his chances in 2020. He is coming through on a lot of his campaign promises (but that only appeases his base). One way I think will help him expand his base is investing in our infrastructure. Only the most conservative right wing of the party would be against that. Ultimately though it will be how he handles health care that will define his first couple of years as president and I wish him the best of luck as his true tests as a negotiator will be on full display. I have no problem with any of the cuts he made although he pry could of kept funding for meals and wheels and I'm sure with the public backlash they will scrap that cut when they pass the budget. I like that we're spending more money on our military and our veterans. Maybe not as much on our military that the neocons like, but you can't appease everybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Keep in mind he only got 45.94% of the vote and he's one of the most controversial presidents in our lifetime due to his campaign rhetoric and the fact we continue to be a divided nation politically. Why do you bring up the fact that he only got 46% of the vote? Is that supposed to mean something? I mean, it does mean something. It means HIllary lost. But are you trying to suggest that after beating the most corrupt and deceptive candidate ever, that somehow the problem with this country is Trump? When limos are burning and traffic is blocked and police are beaten and women are dressed like vaginas, you think Trump is the sole reason the country is divided politically? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 17, 2017 Author Share Posted March 17, 2017 You think the EPA cleans up oil spills? You really are a moron. You really have no idea what you are talking about. Why don't you go away? Just stop posting here. The place would be better without you. Sure, your little idiot minions would feel naked and afraid, but so what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 You really have no idea what you are talking about. Why don't you go away? Just stop posting here. The place would be better without you. Sure, your little idiot minions would feel naked and afraid, but so what? I heard yesterday that over half the epa's budget goes to grants/giveaways to whomever. That should be of concern to you on it's own shouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 You really have no idea what you are talking about. Why don't you go away? Just stop posting here. The place would be better without you. Sure, your little idiot minions would feel naked and afraid, but so what? Describe the EPA's response to Deepwater Horizon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 17, 2017 Author Share Posted March 17, 2017 I heard yesterday that over half the epa's budget goes to grants/giveaways to whomever. That should be of concern to you on it's own shouldn't it? Giveaways to states to clean up oil spills and brown fields. How is that a concern? Describe the EPA's response to Deepwater Horizon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Giveaways to states to clean up oil spills and brown fields. How is that a concern? Nope. Try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 17, 2017 Author Share Posted March 17, 2017 Nope. Try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 You can't actually explain what they did, can you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Describe the EPA's response to Deepwater Horizon. Didn't they work on BP's fine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 17, 2017 Author Share Posted March 17, 2017 You can't actually explain what they did, can you? What's the point? Federal Reserve, so what? Someone has so little credibility that they are not to be taken even half way seriously. Know who that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts