| Author |
|
Dieslut
TWL Member
|
| 01-16-2011 11:05 AM / profile
|
|
|
Hey Puddin posting for a banned person is against da rules. HappySoc can do his own I won you lost post in a few days.
|
|
Stryk
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-16-2011 11:30 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Cocytus
I'll give you a pass to since DDT which was causing problems with some children was protecting people in Africa from malaria. Since the ban has based, millions of Africans have died as a result of that ban on DDT which was killing off the mosquito population.
You want to talk about heavy chemicals? You should look into the chemicals used to make a solar panel. It ain't pretty friend!
I do believe the EPA has played an important role in protecting Americas. I also believe some of their policies are hurting us economically. God only knows the cost to build a home, manufacture a product or farm the land with all the regulations set by the EPA. We are far to concerned with environmental impact reports than we are with keeping this economy competitive. Take a look at the California Coastal Commission and the power they wield over the people. Pathetic power hungry plant and animal protectors! There is so much fucking open space in this country, but these morons feel inner cities should have wildlife protection.
Let's say you win the argument about the EPA. What about all the other governmental agencies that hamper business in America? Then there's bedbugs. Their resurgence has been blamed on the end of the use of DDT.
Not only are they expensive to remove $2000 on up not to mention the damage to home and furniture, but the removal can bring pesticides into your home.
And my favorite, the 1.6 gallon flush toilet. The biggest farce of all time. People just flush multiple times now and when it plugs, flush multiple times again.
But that's just not the inherent stupidity of it. The bothersome part is I live where we need to pay for equipment and electricity to keep water out of our basements. I'm surrounded geographically on 3 sides by the biggest freshwater lakes on the planet, and yet I have to live like someone in Yuma.
|
|
the wierdo
i before e, except after...wtf?
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-16-2011 01:33 PM / profile
|
|
I agree with you on the flush toilets. As for DDT and bedbugs, spray away, but it won't work.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/08/conservatives-blame-environmentalists-for-bedbugs.html#
Originally posted by: Key Paragraph
DDT “devastated” bedbug populations when it was introduced in the 1940s, says Richard Cooper, technical director for Cooper Pest Solutions and a widely quoted authority on bedbug control. Mattresses were soaked in it, wallpaper came pre-treated with it. It also killed boll weevils, which fed on cotton buds and flowers (by far, the majority of DDT was applied to cotton fields), and, incidentally, it killed bald eagles and numerous other species of birds, the phenomenon that gave Carson her title. In the laboratory, DDT can cause cancer in animals; its effect on human beings has long been debated, but since it accumulates up the food chain, and stays in the body for years, the consensus among public-health experts was that it was better to act before effects showed up in the population. But long before the United States banned most uses of it in 1972, DDT had lost its effectiveness against bedbugs—which, like many fast-breeding insects, are extremely adept at evolving resistance to pesticides. “Bloggers talk about bringing back DDT,” says Bob Rosenberg, director of government affairs for the National Pest Management Association, “but we had stopped using it even before 1972.”
|
|
Cocytus
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-16-2011 05:25 PM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: the wierdo
I agree with you on the flush toilets. As for DDT and bedbugs, spray away, but it won't work.
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/08/conservatives-blame-environmentalists-for-bedbugs.html#
Originally posted by: Key Paragraph
DDT “devastated” bedbug populations when it was introduced in the 1940s, says Richard Cooper, technical director for Cooper Pest Solutions and a widely quoted authority on bedbug control. Mattresses were soaked in it, wallpaper came pre-treated with it. It also killed boll weevils, which fed on cotton buds and flowers (by far, the majority of DDT was applied to cotton fields), and, incidentally, it killed bald eagles and numerous other species of birds, the phenomenon that gave Carson her title. In the laboratory, DDT can cause cancer in animals; its effect on human beings has long been debated, but since it accumulates up the food chain, and stays in the body for years, the consensus among public-health experts was that it was better to act before effects showed up in the population. But long before the United States banned most uses of it in 1972, DDT had lost its effectiveness against bedbugs—which, like many fast-breeding insects, are extremely adept at evolving resistance to pesticides. “Bloggers talk about bringing back DDT,” says Bob Rosenberg, director of government affairs for the National Pest Management Association, “but we had stopped using it even before 1972.”
So you are saying that humans would have built an immunity against DDT if we kept using it?
|
|
the wierdo
i before e, except after...wtf?
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-16-2011 05:55 PM / profile
|
|
|
It's just like drinking alcohol: kill off all the weaker brain cells so only the fittest survive.
|
|
Mockery
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 01:04 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Coba|t
Originally posted by: the wierdo
Originally posted by: Mockery
Originally posted by: the wierdo
Originally posted by: Mockery
Virtually NOTHING...and I mean nothing our government actually does has a positive wealth multiplier attached to it. And by it's mere essence and definition it can't...or else someone else, besides the government, would already be doing that job and making a killing from it.
There are lies, damned lies, and things that conservatives claim as fact.
Seriously...
Give me some examples of anything that the government does (especially the Fed) that will measurably pay us back dividends in the future!!
That will shut me the fuck up quick.
Banning DDT not only reduced medical costs among people who would have had cancer or birth defects, but also had a multiplicative effect as those non-brain-damaged children were allowed to grow up and enter the workforce.
Not to mention putting limits on poisons, heavy metals, and nitrates in water thanks to Nixon.
And didn't the FED make a good chunk of money off some of those bailouts?
OMFG!!!
Make it stop...first off those regulations actually made everything more expensive...not cheaper.
And profit... apparently we need a refresher on what money in versus money out means again.
Money out != warm fuzy feelings....
I now pay $5 a month for an EPA Arsenic compliance bill on my drinking water...which means I am still being poisoned, but I now have to pay money just to have my water district advise me about it.
I guess it could be worse, Hinkley, CA residents have to pay an EPA mandated fee to have ethanol added to their wells so that their drinking water can have a more delicious moonshine tang when they ingest deadly Chromium-6 ladened water via PGE.
ROHS compliance forced semichip manufacturers to run overseas in hordes...and don't even get me started about the bailouts. Just as carbon credits forced jobs to flee from Europe.
And nothing forces up a stock index like the fat fucking hand and endless pockets of the US FED....if they have the ability to fund their own national debt of course they have the power to force up a useless corporations stock index price.
Under a ponzi-schema just because you print money to force up an index ticker doesn't mean anything was actually fundamentally fixed and/or accomplished...
The US tax payer profited from the bailouts just like the bond holders profited off of the Worldcom and Enron thievery...
Post edited by Mockery at 1/17/2011 1:44:28 AM
|
|
Mockery
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 01:10 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Coba|t
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: Coba|t
And didn't the FED make a good chunk of money off some of those bailouts?
Yeah, the Fed profited. Some of the companies profited. We lost. All we got was robbed.
Not to mention all the jobs in the auto industry that still exist, you know, those people who are employed and would've been adversely effected by situations developing in the decade before this that they had no tangible part in besides voting.
Ahh yes...keeping jobs that couldn't be (and still can't be) supported on their own surely creates wealth.
Letting a market decide what cars it wants and what cars people should buy with their own money is so not centrally planned enough for this generation.
Best to have the gov decide that fate for us.
|
|
Mockery
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 01:15 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Cocytus
[
Our companies are competing against companies that are heavily subsidized by their home country's. I hate to say this, but maybe we should look at that kind of model and replicate it here. The problem is when Republicans say cut welfare Democrats turn around and say cut corporate welfare. That doesn't make much sense in today's competitive environment.
I hate even suggesting that idea, but we our companies are at a disadvantage.
Stick your DDT where the sun don't shine. We need to loosen regulations created by the EPA.
Honest question here, does it seem like liberals, Democrats and environmentalist's have an agenda which has created huge problems with our economy? When I look at that US Debt link I can't help but think we could be making money if we didn't have our agenda being dominated by the above people.
Just wondering!
exactly the kind of questions we should be asking ourselves...
What ideological idealists don't understand is that you can't impose regulatory restrictions on one group/area/region and expect it not to put them at a competitive disadvantage.
I love a clean environment as much as the next guy, but it doesn't face the reality that it puts American's at a massive disadvantage and doesn't stop pollution one iota...it only outsources it (much like our jobs) to another country to be done for us.
At this rate America will be the cleanest and most jobless country on Earth...won't that be great.
|
|
Mockery
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 01:22 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: the wierdo
I'll give you a pass to since DDT which was causing problems with some children was protecting people in Africa from malaria. Since the ban has based, millions of Africans have died as a result of that ban on DDT which was killing off the mosquito population.
You want to talk about heavy chemicals? You should look into the chemicals used to make a solar panel. It ain't pretty friend!
I do believe the EPA has played an important role in protecting Americas. I also believe some of their policies are hurting us economically. God only knows the cost to build a home, manufacture a product or farm the land with all the regulations set by the EPA. We are far to concerned with environmental impact reports than we are with keeping this economy competitive. Take a look at the California Coastal Commission and the power they wield over the people. Pathetic power hungry plant and animal protectors! There is so much fucking open space in this country, but these morons feel inner cities should have wildlife protection.
Let's say you win the argument about the EPA. What about all the other governmental agencies that hamper business in America?
Not to mention mercury vapor in fluorescent bulbs...
And yet, as dangerous as they "allegedly are, we are being mandated by the EPA to switch over to them completely by 2012.
Go figure...It's now a Federal crime to improperly dispose of a fluorescent bulb in the garbage can (up to $35,000 fine for the first offense)...It requires "trained personnel" to legally install them into a residence ...the clean up requires bullshit like this to be adhered to...
http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html
But they are MANDATORY FOR YOU TO OWN if you still want to have light inside of your house now that they are outlawing the sale of regular old incandescent bulbs.
This is exactly the type of draconian and mindless bullshit that has become the epitome of the EPA and environmental efforts in this country...
Post edited by Mockery at 1/17/2011 1:27:28 AM
|
|
Mockery
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 01:53 AM / profile
|
|
We have to set and reorganize our priorities in this country....we simply can't have everything we want without some level of sacrifice.
We can't create clean/green energy when we can't build new solar power facilities in the remote fucking dessert.
Tortoise Controversy Threatens Huge Solar Plant
http://www.ktvu.com/news/23665394/detail.html
We can't properly dispose of our garbage when we can't build dumps...
http://www.pe.com/localnews/environment/stories/PE_News_Local_D_dump17.29d4390.html
"The operation, they said, would bring unbearable odors and ravens that feed on endangered desert tortoises. It would disrupt migration patterns of bighorn sheep, create noise and light pollution and increase nitrogen deposits that fuel the growth of invasive plants , they said.
I'm an eco-nut IMO...I'd much rather see animals than people living on this planet, but enough is e-fucking-nuff already.
Post edited by Mockery at 1/17/2011 1:53:34 AM
|
|
EclipseSix
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 02:09 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Mockery
We have to set and reorganize our priorities in this country....we simply can't have everything we want without some level of sacrifice.
We can't create clean/green energy when we can't build new solar power facilities in the remote fucking dessert.
Tortoise Controversy Threatens Huge Solar Plant
http://www.ktvu.com/news/23665394/detail.html
We can't properly dispose of our garbage when we can't build dumps...
http://www.pe.com/localnews/environment/stories/PE_News_Local_D_dump17.29d4390.html
"The operation, they said, would bring unbearable odors and ravens that feed on endangered desert tortoises. It would disrupt migration patterns of bighorn sheep, create noise and light pollution and increase nitrogen deposits that fuel the growth of invasive plants , they said.
I'm an eco-nut IMO...I'd much rather see animals than people living on this planet, but enough is e-fucking-nuff already.
Well obviously Desert Tortoises were a fuck up by God, kinda like platypuses. Is anyone else surprised a tortoise that lives in the desert is endangered?
Post edited by EclipseSix at 1/17/2011 2:09:36 AM
|
|
the wierdo
i before e, except after...wtf?
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 02:33 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Mockery
Originally posted by: Coba|t
Originally posted by: the wierdo
Originally posted by: Mockery
Originally posted by: the wierdo
Originally posted by: Mockery
Virtually NOTHING...and I mean nothing our government actually does has a positive wealth multiplier attached to it. And by it's mere essence and definition it can't...or else someone else, besides the government, would already be doing that job and making a killing from it.
There are lies, damned lies, and things that conservatives claim as fact.
Seriously...
Give me some examples of anything that the government does (especially the Fed) that will measurably pay us back dividends in the future!!
That will shut me the fuck up quick.
Banning DDT not only reduced medical costs among people who would have had cancer or birth defects, but also had a multiplicative effect as those non-brain-damaged children were allowed to grow up and enter the workforce.
Not to mention putting limits on poisons, heavy metals, and nitrates in water thanks to Nixon.
And didn't the FED make a good chunk of money off some of those bailouts?
OMFG!!!
Make it stop...first off those regulations actually made everything more expensive...not cheaper.
That was a very emotional rant Mockery but you didn't even do a glancing blow to the basic logic of my argument, which is that pollution is an externality. Of course prices seem to go up when you outlaw companies from doing something like dumping mercury in a stream. That's because those prices were being subsidized by the people who had to pay for all the health complications of living downstream. Overall, rampant industrial pollution in our waters is destructive to our GDP. To allow it is the worst form of corporatism.
|
|
Cocytus
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 05:06 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Mockery
I love a clean environment as much as the next guy, but it doesn't face the reality that it puts American's at a massive disadvantage and doesn't stop pollution one iota...it only outsources it (much like our jobs) to another country to be done for us.
This is exactly what I'm talking about!
First our country has to bend over for the environmentalist's, so the jobs go to China. Now they are trying to make China bend over. How the fuck do these people expect to have manufacturing? It doesn't matter where it is, it's still polluting the planet. China is probably a few decades away from become the next New Jersey.
I was talking to my friend and he said something interesting I've not heard. There are only so many manufacturing jobs, construction job, white collar jobs etc... If we think we can manufacture our way out of this, then we are in for a big surprise. When I see the Federal government spending money to create jobs, it just reinforces this idea about there being too many people and not enough jobs in this world. I think 10-20% unemployment is our future if the population continues to grow.
WE ARE AT PEAK JOBS!!!!!!
Post edited by Cocytus at 1/17/2011 5:13:54 AM
|
|
Nathan Bedford Forrest
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 08:52 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Mockery
Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: the wierdo
I'll give you a pass to since DDT which was causing problems with some children was protecting people in Africa from malaria. Since the ban has based, millions of Africans have died as a result of that ban on DDT which was killing off the mosquito population.
You want to talk about heavy chemicals? You should look into the chemicals used to make a solar panel. It ain't pretty friend!
I do believe the EPA has played an important role in protecting Americas. I also believe some of their policies are hurting us economically. God only knows the cost to build a home, manufacture a product or farm the land with all the regulations set by the EPA. We are far to concerned with environmental impact reports than we are with keeping this economy competitive. Take a look at the California Coastal Commission and the power they wield over the people. Pathetic power hungry plant and animal protectors! There is so much fucking open space in this country, but these morons feel inner cities should have wildlife protection.
Let's say you win the argument about the EPA. What about all the other governmental agencies that hamper business in America?
Not to mention mercury vapor in fluorescent bulbs...
And yet, as dangerous as they "allegedly are, we are being mandated by the EPA to switch over to them completely by 2012.
Go figure...It's now a Federal crime to improperly dispose of a fluorescent bulb in the garbage can (up to $35,000 fine for the first offense)...It requires "trained personnel" to legally install them into a residence ...the clean up requires bullshit like this to be adhered to...
http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html
But they are MANDATORY FOR YOU TO OWN if you still want to have light inside of your house now that they are outlawing the sale of regular old incandescent bulbs.
This is exactly the type of draconian and mindless bullshit that has become the epitome of the EPA and environmental efforts in this country...
On top of all of that, the EPA, so far as I can tell, is part of the Executive Branch and are making law!
Who needs Congress when we have kings!
_________________
See through the propaganda. Stop empowering and enriching the state by cheering its wars. Set aside the television talking points. Look at the world anew, without the prejudices of the past, and without favoring your own government’s version of things. Be decent. Be human. Do not be deceived by the Joe Bidens, the John McCains, the Barack Obamas and Hillary Clintons. Reject the biggest government program of them all. Peace builds. War destroys.
-Lew Rockwell
|
|
Pillbug
Diplomat
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 09:28 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
On top of all of that, the EPA, so far as I can tell, is part of the Executive Branch and are making law!
Who needs Congress when we have kings!
Without looking it up folks, can you tell me one or both:
1) Who proposed it?
2) Of which party was s/he a member?
|
|
CaptPlanet
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 09:44 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: Mockery
Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: the wierdo
I'll give you a pass to since DDT which was causing problems with some children was protecting people in Africa from malaria. Since the ban has based, millions of Africans have died as a result of that ban on DDT which was killing off the mosquito population.
You want to talk about heavy chemicals? You should look into the chemicals used to make a solar panel. It ain't pretty friend!
I do believe the EPA has played an important role in protecting Americas. I also believe some of their policies are hurting us economically. God only knows the cost to build a home, manufacture a product or farm the land with all the regulations set by the EPA. We are far to concerned with environmental impact reports than we are with keeping this economy competitive. Take a look at the California Coastal Commission and the power they wield over the people. Pathetic power hungry plant and animal protectors! There is so much fucking open space in this country, but these morons feel inner cities should have wildlife protection.
Let's say you win the argument about the EPA. What about all the other governmental agencies that hamper business in America?
Not to mention mercury vapor in fluorescent bulbs...
And yet, as dangerous as they "allegedly are, we are being mandated by the EPA to switch over to them completely by 2012.
Go figure...It's now a Federal crime to improperly dispose of a fluorescent bulb in the garbage can (up to $35,000 fine for the first offense)...It requires "trained personnel" to legally install them into a residence ...the clean up requires bullshit like this to be adhered to...
http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html
But they are MANDATORY FOR YOU TO OWN if you still want to have light inside of your house now that they are outlawing the sale of regular old incandescent bulbs.
This is exactly the type of draconian and mindless bullshit that has become the epitome of the EPA and environmental efforts in this country...
On top of all of that, the EPA, so far as I can tell, is part of the Executive Branch and are making law!
Who needs Congress when we have kings!
EPA makes rules, not laws...granted by Congress. I'm fairly certain we want at least the far-fetched possibility that the professionals could maybe give us a better solution than career politicians. Compare how the EPA makes a rule or how Congress votes and you tell me which is a more accessible process.
|
|
Nathan Bedford Forrest
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 10:13 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: CaptPlanet
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
Originally posted by: Mockery
Originally posted by: Cocytus
Originally posted by: the wierdo
I'll give you a pass to since DDT which was causing problems with some children was protecting people in Africa from malaria. Since the ban has based, millions of Africans have died as a result of that ban on DDT which was killing off the mosquito population.
You want to talk about heavy chemicals? You should look into the chemicals used to make a solar panel. It ain't pretty friend!
I do believe the EPA has played an important role in protecting Americas. I also believe some of their policies are hurting us economically. God only knows the cost to build a home, manufacture a product or farm the land with all the regulations set by the EPA. We are far to concerned with environmental impact reports than we are with keeping this economy competitive. Take a look at the California Coastal Commission and the power they wield over the people. Pathetic power hungry plant and animal protectors! There is so much fucking open space in this country, but these morons feel inner cities should have wildlife protection.
Let's say you win the argument about the EPA. What about all the other governmental agencies that hamper business in America?
Not to mention mercury vapor in fluorescent bulbs...
And yet, as dangerous as they "allegedly are, we are being mandated by the EPA to switch over to them completely by 2012.
Go figure...It's now a Federal crime to improperly dispose of a fluorescent bulb in the garbage can (up to $35,000 fine for the first offense)...It requires "trained personnel" to legally install them into a residence ...the clean up requires bullshit like this to be adhered to...
http://www.epa.gov/cfl/cflcleanup.html
But they are MANDATORY FOR YOU TO OWN if you still want to have light inside of your house now that they are outlawing the sale of regular old incandescent bulbs.
This is exactly the type of draconian and mindless bullshit that has become the epitome of the EPA and environmental efforts in this country...
On top of all of that, the EPA, so far as I can tell, is part of the Executive Branch and are making law!
Who needs Congress when we have kings!
EPA makes rules, not laws...granted by Congress. I'm fairly certain we want at least the far-fetched possibility that the professionals could maybe give us a better solution than career politicians. Compare how the EPA makes a rule or how Congress votes and you tell me which is a more accessible process.
Please show me the Constitutional authority for the Executive branch to "make rules" and levy fines without legislation having been enacted by Congress.
While you are at it, I'm still waiting for proof that the States sacrificed their sovereignty upon joining the Union.
_________________
See through the propaganda. Stop empowering and enriching the state by cheering its wars. Set aside the television talking points. Look at the world anew, without the prejudices of the past, and without favoring your own government’s version of things. Be decent. Be human. Do not be deceived by the Joe Bidens, the John McCains, the Barack Obamas and Hillary Clintons. Reject the biggest government program of them all. Peace builds. War destroys.
-Lew Rockwell
|
|
Nathan Bedford Forrest
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 10:13 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Pillbug
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
On top of all of that, the EPA, so far as I can tell, is part of the Executive Branch and are making law!
Who needs Congress when we have kings!
Without looking it up folks, can you tell me one or both:
1) Who proposed it?
2) Of which party was s/he a member?
All I know is that it was created under the Nixon administration.
_________________
See through the propaganda. Stop empowering and enriching the state by cheering its wars. Set aside the television talking points. Look at the world anew, without the prejudices of the past, and without favoring your own government’s version of things. Be decent. Be human. Do not be deceived by the Joe Bidens, the John McCains, the Barack Obamas and Hillary Clintons. Reject the biggest government program of them all. Peace builds. War destroys.
-Lew Rockwell
|
|
Pillbug
Diplomat
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 11:16 AM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Nathan Bedford Forrest
All I know is that it was created under the Nixon administration.
Good enough.
|
|
Coba|t
TeamWarfare Vet
|
| 01-17-2011 12:08 PM / profile
|
|
Originally posted by: Mockery
OMFG!!!
Make it stop...first off those regulations actually made everything more expensive...not cheaper.
Let me ask you this - is it cheaper to recognize a problem at the source of emission and treat whatever it is leaking into the water system, or to clean up trace quantities of a product... such as Arsenic, after its already reached the system?
You're working on the back end of the same issue, the EPA imposes fines on companies that violate emissions guidelines to prevent the same sort of pollution you now have to pay a fee to correct prior to consuming the still contaminated water.
As opposed to a corporation being fined, the EPA coming in and seeing their arsenic emissions being dumped into the water, and then their operation being shut down before it can pollute a significant portion of the water near it.
Its called prevention - and it saves money and lives later on.
|
|
| New Thread / Reply to Thread |
|
