SCOTUS goes against EPA in a 5-4 ruling. We won’t have cheap eggs but we will have water with dookie particles in it! Thanks Trump..

[Into the Night]

Enjoy your shitty water moron. You voted for it.

Water quality in cities hasn't changed because Trump got elected, Sybil.

 

[Into the Night]

Not wanting shit in our drinking water is smart. Try again

Water is treated before use in city water systems, Sybil. Residential well water may or may not require treatment to remove iron or calcium compounds.

None of it is controlled by the EPA or Trump. It is city, county, and State governments that inspect water supply systems, Sybil. Here in Washington, that's left up to the counties, using rules set by the State of Washington (in accordance with their authority provided by the Constitution of the State of Washington).

The EPA does not inspect water systems.

 

[Into the Night]

You can't grasp that there are levels of 'stuff' in water that are harmless and safe. Your apparent demand for pristine, distilled water, with nothing else in it is insane.

Can you drink distilled water safely?

Does it matter what type of water a person drinks? Learn about distilled water, including its risks and possible benefits, in this article.

www.medicalnewstoday.com

Can You Drink Distilled Water?

Learn about the uses of distilled water, including its side effects, potential benefits, and more.

www.healthline.com

Drinking distilled water can be harmful. It tends to remove necessary salts from your system.
Drink tap water. It's safe.

Drinking bottled water is just drinking tap water from someone else's tap, but with the pollution of plastic bottles being left everywhere instead of being properly disposed of, and it's expensive.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, water needs to be treated and there are safe levels that we should keep. Increasing the levels of fecal matter in water is not safe.
Do us a favor. Go take a shit and add it to your water and drink it. Let us know after how "safe" it was.

What 'fecal matter'???

 

[Into the Night]

What's wrong with wanting safe water?

Nothing. Water supplies are treated and tested. Neither the EPA nor the FDA nor Trump do any of that. Local governments do.

 

[Into the Night]

Says the oath-breaking ex-Captain supporting an American Oligarchy.

He is not a Democrat, Sybil.

 

[Into the Night]

The wealthy and corporations should decide.

That is ignoring the IBC and IRC, and various State, county, and city laws, Sybil.

 

[Into the Night]

The problem is that there are no more standards and no more inspectors.

Inspectors of water systems and sewer systems are State and local officials, Sybil. They don't work for the EPA or FDA. The standards they use are the current building codes that State and/or county as adopted at the time. Those inspectors are still there and still doing their job.

 

[archives]

SCOTUS Rules against EPA in Water Pollution Case

One conservative justice, Amy Coney Barrett, joined the court's three liberals in dissent.

time.com

Those million dollars donations weren’t for nothing

 

[Into the Night]

Are you sure about that? I’m not but if you don’t seem to think it doesn’t go ahead and drink water that has more than 0.2 ppb of Mercury. Good luck to you.

The allowable limit is 2 ppb of mercury, Hoopie.

Illiteracy: Missing comma. Run-on sentence. Mercury is not a proper noun. It is not capitalized.
Logic errors: Extreme argument fallacy. Assumption of victory fallacy. False quotation.

Fear mongering.

 

[Into the Night]

A simple "I don't know" would have answered the question, Terry.

He just demonstrated he DOES know, Sybil.

The fact you listed a lot of stuff without a link, ergo claiming it as your own writing, is interesting. It adds to my opinion that you are suffering from cognitive issues and shouldn't be held accountable for your own actions.

He doesn't need to link to regulations.

BTW, my sincer apologies for fucking up and forgetting you are a retired Navy Chief and not in the USAF like ex-Capt. @Earl. The mistake was unintentional.

Irrelevance fallacy. Bulverism fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed. What does it tell you when someone fabricates a bunch of fantastical hypothetical examples without evidence?

'Whatif'. Irrelevance fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes. Yes they do. I’ve been doing this for 35 years and the last 20 years in regulatory compliance. They by god do set limits. Title V of the CAA sets emmision standards for hazardous air pollutants, The NPDES sets limits under the CWA for discharges into navigable waterways and RCRA setS regulatory limits for solid waste management including industrial and hazardous waste and DOT’s Pipepline And Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) sets limits and standards for transportation of hazardous materials and OSHA establishes safety standards for exposure to hazardous substances and NIOSH establishes exposure limits in the workplace to hazardous substances and biological indices.

I’m not making up political bullshit. I deal with this stuff everyday and I am professionally certified in Hazardous Materials Management. I also chair the examination committee for my professional association that writes the examination questions for the professional certification examination.

I can assure you that in this line of work you are surrounded by regulatory limits and requirements on all sides and that those limitations are established on the best developed available demonstrated technologies to establish regulatory limits.

Since too many officials declare everything to be a 'hazardous material', your claim is rather meaningless.

Go get a good chemical dictionary and read up on some MSDS.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Inspectors of water systems and sewer systems are State and local officials, Sybil. They don't work for the EPA or FDA. The standards they use are the current building codes that State and/or county as adopted at the time. Those inspectors are still there and still doing their job.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

'Whatif'. Irrelevance fallacy.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

He just demonstrated he DOES know, Sybil.

He doesn't need to link to regulations.

Irrelevance fallacy. Bulverism fallacy.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Since too many officials declare everything to be a 'hazardous material', your claim is rather meaningless.

Go get a good chemical dictionary and read up on some MSDS.

 

[Diesel]

One in the same thing. How safe is safe enough? We have 35,000 people (roughly) die a year in auto accidents. That appears to be acceptable right now for the cost of the vehicles you can currently buy. Is that safe enough? If not, how much safer should it be, and what will it cost?

You just contradicted yourself. "Safe enough" does not mean "too safe". You still haven't been able to define "too safe", which is the term you used.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

You just contradicted yourself. "Safe enough" does not mean "too safe". You still haven't been able to define "too safe", which is the term you used.

Too safe is when safety rules prevent doing something that needs doing but because of the costs, process, or other factors in meeting safety regulations cannot be done. Too safe is when a standard is so high it results in no additional gain in safety over a lower standard.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Too safe is when safety rules prevent doing something that needs doing but because of the costs, process, or other factors in meeting safety regulations cannot be done. Too safe is when a standard is so high it results in no additional gain in safety over a lower standard.

Are water standards too safe? Food standards? Are you a follower of RFK Jr, Terry?