Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 131: Deferred Action by Childish Administration

Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Regaro 09/08/17 1:57:04 PM #253:	I'm very glad Corrik has admitted that he's a greedy asshole. --- Congratulations to BKSheikah, winner of the BYIG Guru Contest <cite>Regaro posted [p:886251968] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>I'm very glad Corrik has admitted that he's a greedy asshole.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 2:16:16 PM #254:	Republicans believe proper testing and proof is required to show effects that are incontrovertible. Imposing limits on things that can be proven to be harmful is fine if it is across the board. There are a lot of regulations on industry that go beyond the scope of what is necessary and it has turned the EPA / DEP in PA a strongarming opposition, in which it is taking literal payouts which almost amount to bribes or extortion depending on how you look at it. Also, Republicans feel that many regulations are unfairly imposed across the nation and across the world. If you want to limit something, then the world needs to limit it everywhere, especially the major players. You cannot sacrifice American dominance and eventually safety by allowing other countries to continue to surpass us througy nefarious means. For example, you impose 30 new limits to an industry which costs them an extra 50 million to install, accrues them fines if it fails, and has maintenance upkeep while allowing another country to produce at will with no restrictions. Eventually, it is too much cheaper to produce in the other country so they just move their factory there and produce with no restrictions there. Did you prevent pollution? No. Imposing those limits cost you American jobs, hurting our economy, and kept the same if no more pollution by 2 full factories going strong elsewhere. The problem with the regulations is a lot are too far to allow American industry to compete. And, a lot of them are enforced in ways which are counter productive and also are detrimental to the worker's livelihoods. Going about cleaner production (where scientifically proven beyond doubt to be an issue) is not supported properly by the government and has all the burden put on the companies. Until limitations and restrictions and clean production is a standard across all nations (not in word but actuality), the United States cannot possibly adhere to unfeasible regulations that are not (proven to be) necessary. You cannot sacrifice the American economy for the environment, despite what many would wish. Without the American economy, the country breaks down and it leads to scenarios where America itself could cease to exist or cease to be able to provide necessary protection and safety. You could put it in other words as you would in other moral situations (while acknowledging by doing something "moral" you could actually be doing nothing at all / making it worse). --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886252817] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Republicans believe proper testing and proof is required to show effects that are incontrovertible. Imposing limits on things that can be proven to be harmful is fine if it is across the board. There are a lot of regulations on industry that go beyond the scope of what is necessary and it has turned the EPA / DEP in PA a strongarming opposition, in which it is taking literal payouts which almost amount to bribes or extortion depending on how you look at it. Also, Republicans feel that many regulations are unfairly imposed across the nation and across the world. If you want to limit something, then the world needs to limit it everywhere, especially the major players. You cannot sacrifice American dominance and eventually safety by allowing other countries to continue to surpass us througy nefarious means. For example, you impose 30 new limits to an industry which costs them an extra 50 million to install, accrues them fines if it fails, and has maintenance upkeep while allowing another country to produce at will with no restrictions. Eventually, it is too much cheaper to produce in the other country so they just move their factory there and produce with no restrictions there. Did you prevent pollution? No. Imposing those limits cost you American jobs, hurting our economy, and kept the same if no more pollution by 2 full factories going strong elsewhere. The problem with the regulations is a lot are too far to allow American industry to compete. And, a lot of them are enforced in ways which are counter productive and also are detrimental to the worker's livelihoods. Going about cleaner production (where scientifically proven beyond doubt to be an issue) is not supported properly by the government and has all the burden put on the companies. Until limitations and restrictions and clean production is a standard across all nations (not in word but actuality), the United States cannot possibly adhere to unfeasible regulations that are not (proven to be) necessary. You cannot sacrifice the American economy for the environment, despite what many would wish. Without the American economy, the country breaks down and it leads to scenarios where America itself could cease to exist or cease to be able to provide necessary protection and safety. You could put it in other words as you would in other moral situations (while acknowledging by doing something "moral" you could actually be doing nothing at all / making it worse).</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SupremeZero 09/08/17 2:18:20 PM #255:	Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers? --- There's always hope for better things in life. But you can't let anything, friend, lover,God himself,be your hope. You have to be your own hope <cite>SupremeZero posted [p:886252908] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 09/08/17 2:23:03 PM #256:	Corrick, say you're not 100% convinced that global warming is happening. Maybe you only think there's a 20% chance or whatever based on your interpretation of the available evidence. Shouldn't you still do something to hedge against that risk (just like all businesses hedge against other types of risk?) Doing nothing until you're 100% sure would be insane. --- Congrats to BKSheikah for winning the BYIG Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:886253132] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Corrick, say you're not 100% convinced that global warming is happening. Maybe you only think there's a 20% chance or whatever based on your interpretation of the available evidence. Shouldn't you still do something to hedge against that risk (just like all businesses hedge against other types of risk?) Doing nothing until you're 100% sure would be insane.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 2:26:07 PM #257:	SupremeZero posted... Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers? Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886253268] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>SupremeZero posted...</cite> <quote>Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers?</quote> Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 2:27:32 PM #258:	LordoftheMorons posted... Corrick, say you're not 100% convinced that global warming is happening. Maybe you only think there's a 20% chance or whatever based on your interpretation of the available evidence. Shouldn't you still do something to hedge against that risk (just like all businesses hedge against other types of risk?) Doing nothing until you're 100% sure would be insane. I think we can do a better job to prove it. Maybe we should focus more on that before how to deal with it. Before we possibly could waste all this money into it and then a global cooling happens possibly and wipes out that theory making it all for naught. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886253337] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote>Corrick, say you're not 100% convinced that global warming is happening. Maybe you only think there's a 20% chance or whatever based on your interpretation of the available evidence. Shouldn't you still do something to hedge against that risk (just like all businesses hedge against other types of risk?) Doing nothing until you're 100% sure would be insane.</quote> I think we can do a better job to prove it. Maybe we should focus more on that before how to deal with it. Before we possibly could waste all this money into it and then a global cooling happens possibly and wipes out that theory making it all for naught.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SupremeZero 09/08/17 2:29:14 PM #259:	Corrik posted... SupremeZero posted... Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers? Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching. Being allowed to dump your coal crap into rivers seems like a sterling reduction of regulation. --- There's always hope for better things in life. But you can't let anything, friend, lover,God himself,be your hope. You have to be your own hope <cite>SupremeZero posted [p:886253414] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SupremeZero posted...</cite> <quote>Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers?</quote> Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching.</quote> Being allowed to dump your coal crap into rivers seems like a sterling reduction of regulation.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 2:33:27 PM #260:	SupremeZero posted... Corrik posted... SupremeZero posted... Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers? Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching. Being allowed to dump your coal crap into rivers seems like a sterling reduction of regulation. Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886253616] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>SupremeZero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SupremeZero posted...</cite> <quote>Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers?</quote> Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching.</quote> Being allowed to dump your coal crap into rivers seems like a sterling reduction of regulation.</quote> Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SupremeZero 09/08/17 2:34:47 PM #261:	Corrik posted... SupremeZero posted... Corrik posted... SupremeZero posted... Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers? Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching. Being allowed to dump your coal crap into rivers seems like a sterling reduction of regulation. Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation. It is, isn't it. --- There's always hope for better things in life. But you can't let anything, friend, lover,God himself,be your hope. You have to be your own hope <cite>SupremeZero posted [p:886253680] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SupremeZero posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SupremeZero posted...</cite> <quote>Has coal been sufficiently proven harmful to it's own workers?</quote> Osha has standards which control worker safety in the workplace. Feasible PPE has been introduced to workers as approved by OSHA to keep workers safe as long as in compliance. Republicans care about lives. Now tell me how zero emissions in a coke plant (less than a car) makes sense with $30,000 fines every time it is failed (hint every day because it is impossible so the EPA and DEP just slap fines whenever they feel like it or need to prove they do their jobs or need funding) Now tell me how that compared to India where they have thirty workers on a pusher dumping water barrels on full blown coal fires bullowing black clouds of smoke after every oven they fill with coal. Tell me where we have gone too far with the regulation? It is too far and overreaching.</quote> Being allowed to dump your coal crap into rivers seems like a sterling reduction of regulation.</quote> Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation.</quote> It is, isn't it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/08/17 2:36:35 PM #262:	WhoopsyDaisy posted... How much wear and tear on our roads is that? About tree fiddy How much extra food and fuel subsidy does the government pay? About tree fiddy How much does the government have to pay in police and teachers? About tree fiddy How much does the government pay in accounting and data science and advertising and other public employees? About tree fiddy How much does the government have to pay for emergency services in case of accidents and injuries? About tree fiddy How much does the government have to pay for chronic illnesses like diabetes or HIV? About tree fiddy How much does that cost in food stamps or other kinds of welfare? About tree fiddy How much does that cost our water treatment plants and power grids and garbage dumps? About tree fiddy How much does that cost in cleaning rivers and roads? About tree fiddy What impact does that amount of competition for jobs and housing have on wages and housing prices? About tree fiddy How much money leaves the US and goes to their home countries? About tree fiddy --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886253773] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>WhoopsyDaisy posted...</cite> How much wear and tear on our roads is that? About tree fiddy How much extra food and fuel subsidy does the government pay? About tree fiddy How much does the government have to pay in police and teachers? About tree fiddy How much does the government pay in accounting and data science and advertising and other public employees? About tree fiddy How much does the government have to pay for emergency services in case of accidents and injuries? About tree fiddy How much does the government have to pay for chronic illnesses like diabetes or HIV? About tree fiddy How much does that cost in food stamps or other kinds of welfare? About tree fiddy How much does that cost our water treatment plants and power grids and garbage dumps? About tree fiddy How much does that cost in cleaning rivers and roads? About tree fiddy What impact does that amount of competition for jobs and housing have on wages and housing prices? About tree fiddy How much money leaves the US and goes to their home countries? About tree fiddy</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 09/08/17 2:37:18 PM #263:	Corrik posted... Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment. Thank you for deliberately misconstruing what I said. What I actually said was: Not_an_Owl posted... 1) An awful lot of Republicans are also Evangelicals, who believe the end of the world is near, the book of Revelations is literal truth, and that the environment doesn't matter because they're going to be Raptured up to heaven any day now. This is a world away from: Corrik posted... Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment. One is "it doesn't matter if this thing happens", the other is "let's intentionally make this thing happen". I do not think Republicans are literal Captain Planet villains, and it would be foolish and sophomoric to do so. --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:886253819] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment.</quote> Thank you for deliberately misconstruing what I said. What I actually said was: <cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote>1) An awful lot of Republicans are also Evangelicals, who believe the end of the world is near, the book of Revelations is literal truth, and that the environment doesn't matter because they're going to be Raptured up to heaven any day now.</quote> This is a world away from: <cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment.</quote> One is "it doesn't matter if this thing happens", the other is "let's intentionally make this thing happen". I do not think Republicans are literal Captain Planet villains, and it would be foolish and sophomoric to do so.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/08/17 2:39:09 PM #264:	WhoopsyDaisy posted... It's not punishment to kick out trespassers and they don't stop being trespassers just because they've been here a while. There's a reason there's a process to get access to the money that government spends on people. And the population of 340,000,000 people can work on more than one issue at once. Avoiding asking questions we need the answers to because they may hurt someone's fee fees is a great way to make existing problems worse. What do fees have to do with it? Aren't they paying fees to renew their status? --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886253892] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>WhoopsyDaisy posted...</cite> <quote>It's not punishment to kick out trespassers and they don't stop being trespassers just because they've been here a while. There's a reason there's a process to get access to the money that government spends on people. And the population of 340,000,000 people can work on more than one issue at once. Avoiding asking questions we need the answers to because they may hurt someone's fee fees is a great way to make existing problems worse.</quote> What do fees have to do with it? Aren't they paying fees to renew their status?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Regaro 09/08/17 2:39:19 PM #265:	ImTheMacheteGuy posted... Can you not --- Congratulations to BKSheikah, winner of the BYIG Guru Contest <cite>Regaro posted [p:886253901] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> Can you not</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 09/08/17 2:39:42 PM #266:	Corrik posted... Republicans believe proper testing and proof is required to show effects that are incontrovertible. Just FYI if you want to improve your troll game, drop lies like this into the middle of your giant posts (so people will have stopped reading before they even get to it). Throwing it out in line #1 is just sloppy. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:886253924] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Republicans believe proper testing and proof is required to show effects that are incontrovertible. </quote> Just FYI if you want to improve your troll game, drop lies like this into the middle of your giant posts (so people will have stopped reading before they even get to it). Throwing it out in line #1 is just sloppy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 09/08/17 2:44:17 PM #267:	I don't think anyone who posts in this topic is a DACA recipient, but if any of you know any it's important to get the word out that for people whose benefits expire before the end of the sixth month window (March 5th) they can only renew those benefits until October 5th: https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-process/renew-your-daca I really doubt this is something that the Trump admin will advertise, and I'm sure many DACA recipients will think they have 5 more months to apply than they actually do. --- Congrats to BKSheikah for winning the BYIG Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:886254161] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>I don't think anyone who posts in this topic is a DACA recipient, but if any of you know any it's important to get the word out that for people whose benefits expire before the end of the sixth month window (March 5th) they can only renew those benefits until October 5th: https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-process/renew-your-daca I really doubt this is something that the Trump admin will advertise, and I'm sure many DACA recipients will think they have 5 more months to apply than they actually do.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 09/08/17 2:51:30 PM #268:	Corrik posted... Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation. Yeah, funny thing about that: https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/28/14766462/trump-executive-order-clean-water-rule-epa-environment --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:886254510] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation.</quote> Yeah, funny thing about that: https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/28/14766462/trump-executive-order-clean-water-rule-epa-environment</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LapisLazuli 09/08/17 2:53:32 PM #269:	Anytime Corrik starts pretending like he knows what a percentage is or how math works, time to tune out. --- **** Netflix <cite>LapisLazuli posted [p:886254607] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Anytime Corrik starts pretending like he knows what a percentage is or how math works, time to tune out.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 2:55:52 PM #270:	I unfortunately could not find the video I wanted of 30 indian guys just throwing buckets of water on cook doors and billowing smoke into the sky... However https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wCJtbmMdZg If you look in the background, you can see the doors. All the yellow smoke and the fire, that's a fine each here if not put out within a few minutes. If you look back at how far these doors are apart, you generally push an oven every 10-30 minutes and alternate doors or go one at a time. Thus, some of those ovens have been emitting emissions for hours upon hours. The operatior would probably be fired if a management saw that in our plant. On the spot. Now, what is causing this? Improper technique or equipment or dimensions. When you put the door on, it is supposed to seal. White smoke is no issue and okay. Yellow smoke is a huge issue. That's fined all day. Usually you might get a few puffs of yellow smoke and its almost unavoidable as the door regresses in size when taken off but then expands again when inserted into the heat to seal. They fine you over just puffs you can't really avoid. Now, there is more if you look at this plant which is just wrong enviromentally. They have no hood on their hot car. Their oven doors smoke nonstop. They have no filter in their quench. Probably no filter in their stacks either. Etc etc etc. Now we have all these environmental safeguards yet whenever the EPA wants they just come in and fine us at will for stupid shit like puffs of smoke here and there. Where has the EPA overstepped its bounds? --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886254740] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>I unfortunately could not find the video I wanted of 30 indian guys just throwing buckets of water on cook doors and billowing smoke into the sky... However https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wCJtbmMdZg If you look in the background, you can see the doors. All the yellow smoke and the fire, that's a fine each here if not put out within a few minutes. If you look back at how far these doors are apart, you generally push an oven every 10-30 minutes and alternate doors or go one at a time. Thus, some of those ovens have been emitting emissions for hours upon hours. The operatior would probably be fired if a management saw that in our plant. On the spot. Now, what is causing this? Improper technique or equipment or dimensions. When you put the door on, it is supposed to seal. White smoke is no issue and okay. Yellow smoke is a huge issue. That's fined all day. Usually you might get a few puffs of yellow smoke and its almost unavoidable as the door regresses in size when taken off but then expands again when inserted into the heat to seal. They fine you over just puffs you can't really avoid. Now, there is more if you look at this plant which is just wrong enviromentally. They have no hood on their hot car. Their oven doors smoke nonstop. They have no filter in their quench. Probably no filter in their stacks either. Etc etc etc. Now we have all these environmental safeguards yet whenever the EPA wants they just come in and fine us at will for stupid shit like puffs of smoke here and there. Where has the EPA overstepped its bounds?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 09/08/17 2:59:52 PM #271:	Corrik, why are you defending criminals? I thought you were all about legalism. We need to throw these coal factory thugs who break the law every day into jail. Clearly the fines aren't stopping them from making a mockery of our country's laws. --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:886254948] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Corrik, why are you defending criminals? I thought you were all about legalism. We need to throw these coal factory thugs who break the law every day into jail. Clearly the fines aren't stopping them from making a mockery of our country's laws.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:00:15 PM #272:	Not_an_Owl posted... Corrik posted... Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation. Yeah, funny thing about that: https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/28/14766462/trump-executive-order-clean-water-rule-epa-environment From your own source... In 2015, the American Farm Bureau Federation led a lawsuit against the rule, arguing it puts the burden on farmers to get a permit for using fertilizers near ditches and streams. The case has been in the courts ever since, and the rule has never actually been implemented. Today’s executive order basically puts the legal case on hold, and directs the EPA to rework the rule. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886254969] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Not dumping into rivers is a pretty common sense regulation.</quote> Yeah, funny thing about that: https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/28/14766462/trump-executive-order-clean-water-rule-epa-environment</quote> From your own source... In 2015, the American Farm Bureau Federation led a lawsuit against the rule, arguing it puts the burden on farmers to get a permit for using fertilizers near ditches and streams. The case has been in the courts ever since, and the rule has never actually been implemented. Today’s executive order basically puts the legal case on hold, and directs the EPA to rework the rule.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 09/08/17 3:02:23 PM #273:	Corrik posted... a bunch of stuff about overseas pollution The solution to the problem of "other countries have laxer pollution regulations than we do" isn't "well fuck the environment let's pollute more", it's "hey let's make those other countries pollute less". Which, surprise surprise, is impossible right now because of the Trump administration's gutting of the State department. (I suppose you could technically exert some influence over high-polluting countries via trade deals and tariffs and whatnot, but realistically that just means the goods made by high-pollution methods go to other countries.) --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:886255097] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>a bunch of stuff about overseas pollution</quote> The solution to the problem of "other countries have laxer pollution regulations than we do" isn't "well fuck the environment let's pollute more", it's "hey let's make those other countries pollute less". Which, surprise surprise, is impossible right now because of the Trump administration's gutting of the State department. (I suppose you could technically exert some influence over high-polluting countries via trade deals and tariffs and whatnot, but realistically that just means the goods made by high-pollution methods go to other countries.)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:04:57 PM #274:	Not_an_Owl posted... Corrik posted... Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment. Thank you for deliberately misconstruing what I said. What I actually said was: Not_an_Owl posted... 1) An awful lot of Republicans are also Evangelicals, who believe the end of the world is near, the book of Revelations is literal truth, and that the environment doesn't matter because they're going to be Raptured up to heaven any day now. This is a world away from: Corrik posted... Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment. One is "it doesn't matter if this thing happens", the other is "let's intentionally make this thing happen". I do not think Republicans are literal Captain Planet villains, and it would be foolish and sophomoric to do so. I think before you come back with nonsense to defend your outlandish comment and numbered point that you should read your initial post you responded to. They said why do republicans HATE the environment. And you responded with those 3. Yes, I think my comment of fuck the environment destroy it falls absolutely in line with Hating the environment which you responded to with said list. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886255229] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment.</quote> Thank you for deliberately misconstruing what I said. What I actually said was: <cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote>1) An awful lot of Republicans are also Evangelicals, who believe the end of the world is near, the book of Revelations is literal truth, and that the environment doesn't matter because they're going to be Raptured up to heaven any day now.</quote> This is a world away from: <cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Listing that as a major factor of that is ridiculous. Most people who believe the end of the world is coming don't sit there and think fuck the environment let's destroy it if we have to go. Lol. It is a beyond ridiculous comment.</quote> One is "it doesn't matter if this thing happens", the other is "let's intentionally make this thing happen". I do not think Republicans are literal Captain Planet villains, and it would be foolish and sophomoric to do so.</quote> I think before you come back with nonsense to defend your outlandish comment and numbered point that you should read your initial post you responded to. They said why do republicans HATE the environment. And you responded with those 3. Yes, I think my comment of fuck the environment destroy it falls absolutely in line with Hating the environment which you responded to with said list.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:06:57 PM #275:	Not_an_Owl posted... Corrik posted... a bunch of stuff about overseas pollution The solution to the problem of "other countries have laxer pollution regulations than we do" isn't "well fuck the environment let's pollute more", it's "hey let's make those other countries pollute less". Which, surprise surprise, is impossible right now because of the Trump administration's gutting of the State department. (I suppose you could technically exert some influence over high-polluting countries via trade deals and tariffs and whatnot, but realistically that just means the goods made by high-pollution methods go to other countries.) Explain how you make China and India, the two world largest population countries, pollute less? I mean, been tried quite a bit. They will agree in word to shit and still do it to gain an edge. How do you enforce it? --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886255334] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>a bunch of stuff about overseas pollution</quote> The solution to the problem of "other countries have laxer pollution regulations than we do" isn't "well fuck the environment let's pollute more", it's "hey let's make those other countries pollute less". Which, surprise surprise, is impossible right now because of the Trump administration's gutting of the State department. (I suppose you could technically exert some influence over high-polluting countries via trade deals and tariffs and whatnot, but realistically that just means the goods made by high-pollution methods go to other countries.)</quote> Explain how you make China and India, the two world largest population countries, pollute less? I mean, been tried quite a bit. They will agree in word to shit and still do it to gain an edge. How do you enforce it?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 09/08/17 3:07:15 PM #276:	Corrik posted... I think before you come back with nonsense to defend your outlandish comment and numbered point that you should read your initial post you responded to. They said why do republicans HATE the environment. And you responded with those 3. Yes, I think my comment of fuck the environment destroy it falls absolutely in line with Hating the environment which you responded to with said list. Not_an_Owl posted... So to answer your question, I don't think anyone actually hates the environment - it's just that they have (for them) adequate reasons to not care about protecting it. Try again. --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:886255357] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>I think before you come back with nonsense to defend your outlandish comment and numbered point that you should read your initial post you responded to. They said why do republicans HATE the environment. And you responded with those 3. Yes, I think my comment of fuck the environment destroy it falls absolutely in line with Hating the environment which you responded to with said list.</quote> <cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote>So to answer your question, I don't think anyone actually hates the environment - it's just that they have (for them) adequate reasons to not care about protecting it.</quote> Try again.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:07:39 PM #277:	Not_an_Owl posted... Corrik posted... I think before you come back with nonsense to defend your outlandish comment and numbered point that you should read your initial post you responded to. They said why do republicans HATE the environment. And you responded with those 3. Yes, I think my comment of fuck the environment destroy it falls absolutely in line with Hating the environment which you responded to with said list. Not_an_Owl posted... So to answer your question, I don't think anyone actually hates the environment - it's just that they have (for them) adequate reasons to not care about protecting it. Try again. Owned --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886255381] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>I think before you come back with nonsense to defend your outlandish comment and numbered point that you should read your initial post you responded to. They said why do republicans HATE the environment. And you responded with those 3. Yes, I think my comment of fuck the environment destroy it falls absolutely in line with Hating the environment which you responded to with said list.</quote> <cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote>So to answer your question, I don't think anyone actually hates the environment - it's just that they have (for them) adequate reasons to not care about protecting it.</quote> Try again.</quote> Owned</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Forceful_Dragon 09/08/17 3:10:55 PM #278:	Corrik it sounds like you are just saying that because other countries are saving money by polluting that we should also save money by polluting so we don't "lose" to them. Incidentally how did you feel about trump pulling out of the non binding Paris Accords? --- ~C~ FD http://i.imgur.com/dGDfxaw.png <cite>Forceful_Dragon posted [p:886255572] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Corrik it sounds like you are just saying that because other countries are saving money by polluting that we should also save money by polluting so we don't "lose" to them. Incidentally how did you feel about trump pulling out of the non binding Paris Accords?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Not_an_Owl 09/08/17 3:14:14 PM #279:	Corrik posted... Not_an_Owl posted... Corrik posted... a bunch of stuff about overseas pollution The solution to the problem of "other countries have laxer pollution regulations than we do" isn't "well fuck the environment let's pollute more", it's "hey let's make those other countries pollute less". Which, surprise surprise, is impossible right now because of the Trump administration's gutting of the State department. (I suppose you could technically exert some influence over high-polluting countries via trade deals and tariffs and whatnot, but realistically that just means the goods made by high-pollution methods go to other countries.) Explain how you make China and India, the two world largest population countries, pollute less? I mean, been tried quite a bit. They will agree in word to shit and still do it to gain an edge. How do you enforce it? I don't know, because I'm not an economist or a diplomat. But hey, good news! Your boy Donny is in office now! Surely if anyone could get other nations to stick to some common-sense pollution regulations, it's the MASTER OF THE DEAL, right? --- Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb I headbang to Bruckner. <cite>Not_an_Owl posted [p:886255762] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Not_an_Owl posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>a bunch of stuff about overseas pollution</quote> The solution to the problem of "other countries have laxer pollution regulations than we do" isn't "well fuck the environment let's pollute more", it's "hey let's make those other countries pollute less". Which, surprise surprise, is impossible right now because of the Trump administration's gutting of the State department. (I suppose you could technically exert some influence over high-polluting countries via trade deals and tariffs and whatnot, but realistically that just means the goods made by high-pollution methods go to other countries.)</quote> Explain how you make China and India, the two world largest population countries, pollute less? I mean, been tried quite a bit. They will agree in word to shit and still do it to gain an edge. How do you enforce it?</quote> I don't know, because I'm not an economist or a diplomat. But hey, good news! Your boy Donny is in office now! Surely if anyone could get other nations to stick to some common-sense pollution regulations, it's the MASTER OF THE DEAL, right?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:15:27 PM #280:	Forceful_Dragon posted... Corrik it sounds like you are just saying that because other countries are saving money by polluting that we should also save money by polluting so we don't "lose" to them. Incidentally how did you feel about trump pulling out of the non binding Paris Accords? I don't know enough about it but was well under the impression the reasoning we were pulling out was because we were agreeing to things other countries wouldn't have actually done. In a way, yes. If it can't feasibly be done while allowing us to control the production then we need to find ways to make it feasibly done. Sacrificing our economy is not the right answer. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886255816] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Forceful_Dragon posted...</cite> <quote>Corrik it sounds like you are just saying that because other countries are saving money by polluting that we should also save money by polluting so we don't "lose" to them. Incidentally how did you feel about trump pulling out of the non binding Paris Accords?</quote> I don't know enough about it but was well under the impression the reasoning we were pulling out was because we were agreeing to things other countries wouldn't have actually done. In a way, yes. If it can't feasibly be done while allowing us to control the production then we need to find ways to make it feasibly done. Sacrificing our economy is not the right answer.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pyresword 09/08/17 3:16:28 PM #281:	I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying. --- Congratulations to BK_Sheikah00, this year's guru to achieve contest enlightenment! <cite>pyresword posted [p:886255859] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:18:17 PM #283:	pyresword posted... I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying. System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886255948] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>pyresword posted...</cite> <quote>I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying.</quote> System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
pyresword 09/08/17 3:23:05 PM #284:	Corrik posted... pyresword posted... I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying. System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue. I agree what you describe is not a logical approach to the issue. My expectation is that this is not an accurate description of how the system works, but since I really know extremely little about how the regulations actually work I should probably step back from the debate at this point. --- Congratulations to BK_Sheikah00, this year's guru to achieve contest enlightenment! <cite>pyresword posted [p:886256187] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pyresword posted...</cite> <quote>I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying.</quote> System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue.</quote> I agree what you describe is not a logical approach to the issue. My expectation is that this is not an accurate description of how the system works, but since I really know extremely little about how the regulations actually work I should probably step back from the debate at this point.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 3:27:36 PM #285:	Corrik posted... Explain how you make China and India, the two world largest population countries, pollute less? I mean, been tried quite a bit. They will agree in word to s* and still do it to gain an edge. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/05/china-air-pollution-solutions-environment-tangshan/ Seems like they're legit trying now --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886256402] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Explain how you make China and India, the two world largest population countries, pollute less? I mean, been tried quite a bit. They will agree in word to s* and still do it to gain an edge. </quote> http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/05/china-air-pollution-solutions-environment-tangshan/ Seems like they're legit trying now</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 09/08/17 3:35:01 PM #286:	Regaro posted... ImTheMacheteGuy posted... Can you not Not what? --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:886256788] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Regaro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> Can you not</quote> Not what?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 3:37:38 PM #287:	https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/906165830290997248 The House passes the hurricane relief package that raises debt ceiling & keeps the government open, 316-90. All 90 no votes were Republicans --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886256936] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/906165830290997248 <quote>The House passes the hurricane relief package that raises debt ceiling & keeps the government open, 316-90. All 90 no votes were Republicans</quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:38:53 PM #288:	pyresword posted... Corrik posted... pyresword posted... I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying. System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue. I agree what you describe is not a logical approach to the issue. My expectation is that this is not an accurate description of how the system works, but since I really know extremely little about how the regulations actually work I should probably step back from the debate at this point. It is better to control production and find ways to make feasibly less pollution. How much pollution was staved off when coke batteries started recycling coke oven gas to run the process instead of burning it off into the air and using natural gas to fuel the operation? --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886257007] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>pyresword posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pyresword posted...</cite> <quote>I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying.</quote> System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue.</quote> I agree what you describe is not a logical approach to the issue. My expectation is that this is not an accurate description of how the system works, but since I really know extremely little about how the regulations actually work I should probably step back from the debate at this point.</quote> It is better to control production and find ways to make feasibly less pollution. How much pollution was staved off when coke batteries started recycling coke oven gas to run the process instead of burning it off into the air and using natural gas to fuel the operation?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 3:45:09 PM #289:	https://thegeekygaeilgeoir.wordpress.com/2017/09/06/even-racists-got-the-blues/ Whoops --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886257377] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>https://thegeekygaeilgeoir.wordpress.com/2017/09/06/even-racists-got-the-blues/ Whoops</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 3:53:19 PM #290:	Jakyl25 posted... https://thegeekygaeilgeoir.wordpress.com/2017/09/06/even-racists-got-the-blues/ Whoops Blue Lives Matters isn't racist... --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886257843] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jakyl25 posted...</cite> <quote>https://thegeekygaeilgeoir.wordpress.com/2017/09/06/even-racists-got-the-blues/ Whoops</quote> Blue Lives Matters isn't racist...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 4:08:58 PM #291:	When you use it as a counter-movement to Black Lives Matter, it is. --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886258645] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>When you use it as a counter-movement to Black Lives Matter, it is.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Eddv 09/08/17 4:16:39 PM #292:	Corrik posted... pyresword posted... Corrik posted... pyresword posted... I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying. System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue. I agree what you describe is not a logical approach to the issue. My expectation is that this is not an accurate description of how the system works, but since I really know extremely little about how the regulations actually work I should probably step back from the debate at this point. It is better to control production and find ways to make feasibly less pollution. How much pollution was staved off when coke batteries started recycling coke oven gas to run the process instead of burning it off into the air and using natural gas to fuel the operation? This is why it's better to self-regulate. Guess what happens if you don't? You get harsher standards that dont take that stuff into account. Blame management for being shit heads. --- Board 8's Voice of Reason http://i.imgur.com/chXIw06.jpg <cite>Eddv posted [p:886259035] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pyresword posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote><cite>pyresword posted...</cite> <quote>I think the real elephant in the room here is that destroying the environment so that Americans can be better than everyone else shouldn't be any more okay than destroying the environment for the sake of personal profit. Of course if your view is that current regulations fail to prevent the environment from being destroyed then this comment doesn't apply, but that's not how I'm interpreting what you're saying.</quote> System is set up to hurt American business. Not to prevent pollution. Perhaps displace same pollution. Perhaps increase pollution elsewhere. Not to prevent pollution. That is not a logical approach to the issue.</quote> I agree what you describe is not a logical approach to the issue. My expectation is that this is not an accurate description of how the system works, but since I really know extremely little about how the regulations actually work I should probably step back from the debate at this point.</quote> It is better to control production and find ways to make feasibly less pollution. How much pollution was staved off when coke batteries started recycling coke oven gas to run the process instead of burning it off into the air and using natural gas to fuel the operation?</quote> This is why it's better to self-regulate. Guess what happens if you don't? You get harsher standards that dont take that stuff into account. Blame management for being shit heads.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 4:22:22 PM #293:	https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/906241511498625024 Tucker is at it again --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886259376] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/906241511498625024 Tucker is at it again</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HaRRicH 09/08/17 5:19:27 PM #294:	Jakyl25 posted... When you use it as a counter-movement to Black Lives Matter, it is. Same for All Lives Matter. Also same for making attacking police officers a hate crime like they did in Louisiana. I think it was already a felony that's above attacking a regular citizen (which I'd agree with), but making hate crimes based around wearing the badge is a bad move unless you want to make the argument that other jobs will be protected too. Black Lives Matter is for civil rights, and these counter movements have hijacked their names and protections to largely use against them. --- GameFlux: Unofficial GameFAQs board browser <cite>HaRRicH posted [p:886262385] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jakyl25 posted...</cite> <quote>When you use it as a counter-movement to Black Lives Matter, it is.</quote> Same for All Lives Matter. Also same for making attacking police officers a hate crime like they did in Louisiana. I think it was already a felony that's above attacking a regular citizen (which I'd agree with), but making hate crimes based around wearing the badge is a bad move unless you want to make the argument that other jobs will be protected too. Black Lives Matter is for civil rights, and these counter movements have hijacked their names and protections to largely use against them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 5:31:45 PM #295:	Jakyl25 posted... When you use it as a counter-movement to Black Lives Matter, it is. Uh, unless you are specifically saying Black Lives Matters is racist then you have no argument here. Supporting the Police is not racist. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886263044] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jakyl25 posted...</cite> <quote>When you use it as a counter-movement to Black Lives Matter, it is.</quote> Uh, unless you are specifically saying Black Lives Matters is racist then you have no argument here. Supporting the Police is not racist.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 5:35:57 PM #296:	Do you not understand how Blue Lives Matter was brought into existence as a counter-movement denial of Black Lives Matter? Context matters! You're looking purely at the name and not the circumstances of its existence. It's not just "supporting police." --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886263283] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Do you not understand how Blue Lives Matter was brought into existence as a counter-movement denial of Black Lives Matter? Context matters! You're looking purely at the name and not the circumstances of its existence. It's not just "supporting police."</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kenri 09/08/17 5:42:26 PM #297:	Corrik posted... Supporting the Police is not racist. I mean... --- Congrats to BKSheikah, who knows more about years than anyone else. <cite>Kenri posted [p:886263605] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Supporting the Police is not racist.</quote> I mean...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 5:44:44 PM #298:	Jakyl25 posted... Do you not understand how Blue Lives Matter was brought into existence as a counter-movement denial of Black Lives Matter? Context matters! You're looking purely at the name and not the circumstances of its existence. It's not just "supporting police." When cops were being shot in the streets of Dallas during a Black Lives Matters protest, I believe. It is not racist. Neither is All Lived Matters. A racist group would be No Black Lives Matters. You are just trying to label everything. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886263696] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jakyl25 posted...</cite> <quote>Do you not understand how Blue Lives Matter was brought into existence as a counter-movement denial of Black Lives Matter? Context matters! You're looking purely at the name and not the circumstances of its existence. It's not just "supporting police."</quote> When cops were being shot in the streets of Dallas during a Black Lives Matters protest, I believe. It is not racist. Neither is All Lived Matters. A racist group would be No Black Lives Matters. You are just trying to label everything.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DoomTheGyarados 09/08/17 5:47:46 PM #299:	https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJO2JcqUEAAlmLk.jpg --- Sir Chris <cite>DoomTheGyarados posted [p:886263857] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DJO2JcqUEAAlmLk.jpg</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
transience 09/08/17 5:48:02 PM #300:	I've long believed that Bernie did the Democratic party a disservice by saying "i don't care about your damn emails." that was going to come long and hard in the general election (and apparently a year later, ugh) and he stopped it from being an issue early on. it might have even won him the nomination, who knows. --- xyzzy <cite>transience posted [p:886263871] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>I've long believed that Bernie did the Democratic party a disservice by saying "i don't care about your damn emails." that was going to come long and hard in the general election (and apparently a year later, ugh) and he stopped it from being an issue early on. it might have even won him the nomination, who knows.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Corrik 09/08/17 5:48:37 PM #301:	Black Lives Matters is more inherently racist btw as it singles out one race of people whose lives matter. The too being understood is not a relatively good argument. I know a lot of good people are probably involved with it, but a few have done violence in the name of Black Lives Matters because it has not done a good job at differentiating between it being a black power group and a call for civil rights group. Arguing Blue Lives Matters, All Lives Matter are racist before Black Lives Matter just seems like a convenient argument and not a sound one. --- LoL ID = imajericho XBL GT = Corrik <cite>Corrik posted [p:886263905] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Black Lives Matters is more inherently racist btw as it singles out one race of people whose lives matter. The too being understood is not a relatively good argument. I know a lot of good people are probably involved with it, but a few have done violence in the name of Black Lives Matters because it has not done a good job at differentiating between it being a black power group and a call for civil rights group. Arguing Blue Lives Matters, All Lives Matter are racist before Black Lives Matter just seems like a convenient argument and not a sound one.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 5:49:08 PM #302:	Nah I think you're just naive. Especially with regard to All Lives Matter. That's even more obviously dismissive of Black Lives Matter! Like, what do you think the point of Black Lives Matter is, and why do you think people felt the need to respond with All Lives Matter? --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886263924] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote>Nah I think you're just naive. Especially with regard to All Lives Matter. That's even more obviously dismissive of Black Lives Matter! Like, what do you think the point of Black Lives Matter is, and why do you think people felt the need to respond with All Lives Matter?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 09/08/17 5:51:26 PM #303:	Corrik posted... Black Lives Matters is more inherently racist btw as it singles out one race of people whose lives matter. The too being understood is not a relatively good argument. God this is the most ignorant understanding of the world --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvGKDK2WIAAmKTf?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:886264031] in Politics C... [t:75747014]...</cite> <quote><cite>Corrik posted...</cite> <quote>Black Lives Matters is more inherently racist btw as it singles out one race of people whose lives matter. The too being understood is not a relatively good argument.</quote> God this is the most ignorant understanding of the world</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1 ... 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 131: Deferred Action by Childish Administration (+) Yeah! (+)

Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 131: Deferred Action by Childish Administration