The march to kill democracy.

Taichiliberal said:
Think! if a company challenges a law and it reaches SCOTUS, why cut regulation precedent out of the loop to the point of future ineffectiveness? Remember, Congress created regulatory agencies for a reason (i.e. Love Canal, Vytorin).
Click to expand...
Just because some regulation was passed in the past doesn't mean it's relevant or effective today. Regulatory agencies should be kept on a very tight leash and forced to justify far beyond what they do any new regulation they want to pass.

They should also almost never, ever, be engaged in "zero tolerance" regulation. With an agency like the EPA or OSHA, their position should be "How much pollution should we allow?" not "How do we eliminate all pollution?" With OSHA it should be "How safe is safe enough?" not "We need everything 100% safe."
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Just because some regulation was passed in the past doesn't mean it's relevant or effective today. Regulatory agencies should be kept on a very tight leash and forced to justify far beyond what they do any new regulation they want to pass.

They should also almost never, ever, be engaged in "zero tolerance" regulation. With an agency like the EPA or OSHA, their position should be "How much pollution should we allow?" not "How do we eliminate all pollution?" With OSHA it should be "How safe is safe enough?" not "We need everything 100% safe."
Click to expand...

I previously gave you 2 references as to what happens when companies stoop to nefarious means to save or make a buck. Do the research. Without those regulatory agencies the SCOTUS just side stepped, they would have gotten away with it. And remember, the agencies are NOT perfect....look how long it took to lock up the sob's of Massey Energy.

I could go on, but I seriously doubt you will put in the time and effort to get educated on these references, and then logically deduce how detrimental the latest SCOTUS ruling is.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I previously gave you 2 references as to what happens when companies stoop to nefarious means to save or make a buck. Do the research. Without those regulatory agencies the SCOTUS just side stepped, they would have gotten away with it. And remember, the agencies are NOT perfect....look how long it took to lock up the sob's of Massey Energy.

I could go on, but I seriously doubt you will put in the time and effort to get educated on these references, and then logically deduce how detrimental the latest SCOTUS ruling is.
Click to expand...
Regulations or not, some companies will "stoop to nefarious means." All too often, regulations come after the cows have left the barn, so-to-speak.

What the SCOTUS did was stop or slow agencies from creating 'zero tolerance' regulations, regulations using bad science, or regulations based on political whims.

The agencies aren't perfect, and that's why they need to be on a very short leash.

Let's compare Massey Energy to the EPA then. Massey had a massive fine levied against it for ignoring safety and health regulations to the tune of about $11 million in 2011.

Four years later, the EPA ignored safe engineering and environmental regulations at the Gold King mine causing a breech in a tailings dam that flooded a four-state watershed with toxic pollutants. The EPA then failed to warn other parties about the breech, and completely fucked away any sort of containment. Parties harmed, like the Navajo Nation, sued the EPA to the tune of about $200 million.

You know what the EPA's response was? They have immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act and don't have to pay shit to anyone. I'll take my chances with a rogue corporation to being fucked by an unaccountable government bureaucracy.
 
1719940027678-png.1595038
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Regulations or not, some companies will "stoop to nefarious means." All too often, regulations come after the cows have left the barn, so-to-speak.

What the SCOTUS did was stop or slow agencies from creating 'zero tolerance' regulations, regulations using bad science, or regulations based on political whims.

The agencies aren't perfect, and that's why they need to be on a very short leash.

Let's compare Massey Energy to the EPA then. Massey had a massive fine levied against it for ignoring safety and health regulations to the tune of about $11 million in 2011.

Four years later, the EPA ignored safe engineering and environmental regulations at the Gold King mine causing a breech in a tailings dam that flooded a four-state watershed with toxic pollutants. The EPA then failed to warn other parties about the breech, and completely fucked away any sort of containment. Parties harmed, like the Navajo Nation, sued the EPA to the tune of about $200 million.

You know what the EPA's response was? They have immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act and don't have to pay shit to anyone. I'll take my chances with a rogue corporation to being fucked by an unaccountable government bureaucracy.
Click to expand...
To each of your sentences:

1. As I previously wrote: "And remember, the agencies are NOT perfect....look how long it took to lock up the sob's of Massey Energy."
2. Again, a generalization on your part. FYI: https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/top-cases
3. Ahh, but the SCOTUS is applying a "short leash", they are literally taking the reigns WITHOUT HAVING THE EXPERTISE ON THE DETAILS. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-...-environment-4ae73d5a79cabadff4da8f7e16669929
4. You're flat out WRONG. FYI: https://www.epa.gov/goldkingmine/go... continuing to expend resources on litigation.

You should really know WTF you're talking about before you endorse the bad decisions of a MAGA SCOTUS to "take your chances" with.
 
Taichiliberal said:
To each of your sentences:

1. As I previously wrote: "And remember, the agencies are NOT perfect....look how long it took to lock up the sob's of Massey Energy."
2. Again, a generalization on your part. FYI: https://www.osha.gov/enforcement/top-cases
3. Ahh, but the SCOTUS is applying a "short leash", they are literally taking the reigns WITHOUT HAVING THE EXPERTISE ON THE DETAILS. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-...-environment-4ae73d5a79cabadff4da8f7e16669929
4. You're flat out WRONG. FYI: https://www.epa.gov/goldkingmine/gold-king-mine-litigation-settlements#:~:text=EPA and the United States have settled all,rather than continuing to expend resources on litigation.

You should really know WTF you're talking about before you endorse the bad decisions of a MAGA SCOTUS to "take your chances" with.
Click to expand...
All that proves what I stated. For example, in number 4, the Navajo Nation alone is seeking about $150 million in damages. The EPA has spent less than $30 million on their clean up efforts and these have largely been cosmetic.

www.intermountainhistories.org

The Gold King Mine Disaster: EPA’s “Help” Not Wanted | Intermountain Histories

In 2015, the EPA hired private contractors to clear the entrance to the abandoned Gold King Mine outside of Silverton, Colorado. They sought to determine the mine’s impact on contamination of the nearby Animas River. There had been a steady trickle of highly acidic waste coming from the mine...
www.intermountainhistories.org www.intermountainhistories.org

www.usatoday.com

EPA won't pay claims in mine spill that released 3M of gallons of toxic water

The EPA announced today that it will not pay more than $1.2 billion in claims filed against it in response to the Gold King Mine spill.
www.usatoday.com


coloradosun.com

Many hoped the Gold King Mine spill would bring change. Five years later, they’re still waiting.

It didn’t take long after the sludge settled five years ago for the calls for change to begin. In fact, 3 million gallons of orange-gold water that poured out of the Gold King Mine on Aug. 5, 2015, was still flowing through the Colorado River watershed when discussions about the broader issue...
coloradosun.com coloradosun.com

So, yea, the EPA says they're doing a fine job, while everybody else involved in this disaster says the EPA is just making things worse.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Think! if a company challenges a law and it reaches SCOTUS, why cut regulation precedent out of the loop to the point of future ineffectiveness? Remember, Congress created regulatory agencies for a reason (i.e. Love Canal, Vytorin).
Click to expand...
What's the odds on that happening? The appeals process leaves most decisions behind, never heard. The Supreme Court takes even fewer cases. A government agency can put in place bad regulations that could take decades to overturn, if they ever are.
 
Dachshund said:
But what about that radical, Woke Darkie that was appointed to the SC Bench ? You know the one who is female, but could not define the term "woman"? The same one who was a big fan of the ground-breaking, children's book: "Anti-racist Baby", by Ibram X. Kendi (the former best-selling, Racial Marxist, author, who now seems to have disappeared from the public spotlight (?) And the same woke Darkie, who LIED and OBFUSCATED all the way through her Senate confirmation hearings - and was even caught LYING, red-handed, on numerous occasions - but there were no consequences, of course (because if anyone had said - "YOU LIED" !!- to a Darkie - esp a Darkie woman with a funny hair-cut - they'd be condemned as a racist).


That was a neat example of American democracy in action - Right ?


Dachshund - the WONDER HOUND

DLM....Dachshund Lives Matter !!k
Click to expand...
What American democracy?? The United States was never a democracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top