Results 121 to 130 of 136
Thread: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
-
10-13-2018 #121
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Here's some more about your 'darling' EPA...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/markhen.../#26f7081321ad
"I am, a SIGMA Male...
-
10-13-2018 #122
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Posts
- 3,201
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
If I spent time on it I'm sure I could show that this is also dubious, but what would be the point when you will just ignore it?
Even if some of it was correct, why does it follow that the solution is to abolish the EPA rather than reform it? Defence is notorious for waste and inefficiency - does this mean the military should be abolished as well?
You seem to be unaware that environmental pollution is clearly recognised as an area of market failure that justifies government intervention, even by most conservative economists. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_economics The basic problem with libertarianism is that it completely ignores these and other market failures.
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
-
10-13-2018 #123
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Posts
- 13,541
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Oh dear, Mr Fanti, Mark Hendrickson is notorious, and has been part of the politicization of science since the EPA was founded which makes claims such as climate change is a hoax, refers to the campaign to reduce carbon emissions as a 'carbon jihad', and basically ridicules all science that does not fit his model of 'capitalist morality' in which markets know best and anyone who interferes with markets is basically a lunatic or a communist or some other pathetic epithet. He claims asbestos is not that dangerous in defiance of science (a neighbour of mine died from a asbestos-related cancer some years ago).
He quotes the science that he thinks supports his argument, and dismisses all the science that does not. To cap it all, he is incapable of offering an informed opinion on the science of climate change because like so many 'deniers' he doesn't know what the science is, as you can see in this link
-https://www.catholic.org/news/green/story.php?id=50502
The fanatics who want to shut down the EPA also want to shut down the Department of Education, because they hate taxes that much, because they are convinced in spite of the evidence against them, that commercial firms can be trusted. Whatever the bureaucratic issues there have been in the management of the EPA, the core issue is simple: do you want to protect your environment or just watch is deteriorate in front of your eyes because Conservatives literally don't care about it?
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
-
10-13-2018 #124
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Bottom line is that I've provided you with 2 different sources reporting about the corruption in the EPA. If you can't see it, then argue with the sources, not me....
I'm just the messenger.
But....Now I'm convinced that after providing you with sources about EPA corruption, you can't see the swamp.
Have a good weekend!
1 out of 3 members liked this post."I am, a SIGMA Male...
-
10-13-2018 #125
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,563
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Bringing things back to Trump's Supreme Court pick, Trump picked the most partisan choice he could get away with, and crippled the FBI's investigation that would have shown he was a liar.
If I lie to you once, and you believe it, shame on me.
If I lie to you twice and you believe it, shame on you.
Anyone who believes Trump's 5 thousand lies has serious Daddy issues.
World Class Asshole
-
10-13-2018 #126
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Posts
- 13,541
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
The problem is that you define the Federal Agency as a 'swamp' when it is really just a large bureaucracy that generates issues of management competence, disagreements on policy and need not be held up as an example of what is wrong with the US when the same problems exist in, for example, the Department of Defence and the multiple problems that exist when you have cash flow in the Billions, Senators and Congressional Representatives fighting to get contracts in their locality, let alone the conflicts over jobs and strategy that take place in the upper reaces of the armed forces.
Of course there were disagreements with the use of DDT, which these days is rarely used because alternative chemicals have been developed. But the disagreement and its impact on policy was not part of a corrupt system of decision making but reflected a growing anxiety throughout the 1960s -Rachel Carson's Silent Spring (1962) being a seminal publication (and also a controversial one)- about the impact that modern industry was having on the environment. Indeed, in the same way that Conservatives felt in the 1960s that they had lost the battle against civil rights, they re-grouped in the 1970s to mobilize opinion against the science that underpinned a lot of the environmental movement's major causes. It means that Myron Ebell can not only dismiss the role of human agency in climate change but characterise the whole of the debate as a 'left-wing' attempt to centralize policy making in the Federal government with an array of carbon taxes and other regimes all of which are 'bad for business', an argument that has been made time and again and has proven to be wrong. Again, in the 1960s when the movement wanted lead removed from petrol/gasoline, the car firms objected, said it was unncecessary, would ruin the industry -it never happened, and the removal of lead from fuel has been a health advance welcomed by all. I could go on but I think you see the difference in our arguments.
You had no response to the links which laid out the achievements of the EPA, you have said nothing about the links you provided to an anti-science crank called Mark Hutchinson, but rather than rely on other people, you yourself have not made a case for a Libertarian alternative to 'the swamp'. I would rather hear your own version of the politics you want to see, rather than listen to some half-baked objectons selective in nature and wholly unconvincing so far.
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
-
10-14-2018 #127
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Posts
- 3,201
-
10-14-2018 #128
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
Hey Fanti
Step back & leave them to it
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
-
10-16-2018 #129
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
2 out of 3 members liked this post."I am, a SIGMA Male...
-
10-16-2018 #130
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,563
Re: Trump's Supreme Court nominee
1) You guys have explained yourselves perfectly, and
2) Yes, it was a complete waste of time.
World Class Asshole
Similar Threads
-
Election and the supreme court
By Prospero in forum Politics and ReligionReplies: 1Last Post: 10-21-2012, 12:13 AM -
Supreme court and citizens first
By Prospero in forum Politics and ReligionReplies: 0Last Post: 05-19-2012, 11:49 AM -
Supreme Court ruled today on the D.C. gun ban
By InHouston in forum Politics and ReligionReplies: 295Last Post: 07-26-2008, 11:26 PM -
Supreme Court ruled today on the D.C. gun ban
By InHouston in forum Politics and ReligionReplies: 12Last Post: 07-04-2008, 10:45 AM -
U.S. Supreme Court Justices
By InHouston in forum General DiscussionReplies: 6Last Post: 02-15-2006, 05:21 PM