This is what fewer regulations looks like

[K1052]

Guys, just keep repeating the mantra, Hope and Change, Hope and Change. In this case at least for you there's not hope but the change, it's coming. If it gets bad enough there is a whole world of open borders out there just waiting for you. Or not. But you owe it to yourselves to find out. Somewhere out there is the utopia you both desire and deserve.

So...you've got nothing then?

 

[HomerJS]

The population density in China versus here in American has nothing to do with it I am sure.

NYC doesn't look nearly as bad. Pretty dense there

 

[IronWing]

Yeah, because there's no happy medium between "no regulation free for all, pollute at will" and "hyper regulated government stranglehold red tape" at all. Obviously, any attempt to curb regulation or remove onerous / burdensome regs that don't have a good cost/benefit balance puts us squarely in "no regulation free for all" land. /sarcasm

Do you guys not bother to think about anything before posting this drivel?

We have a keen sense of history. Regulations are "fixed" to remove "hyper regulated government stranglehold red tape", people die, and the ass-covering politicians hyperventilate that the agencies "aren't doing their jobs", ignoring the fact that deregulation stripped the agencies of authority to act. Look for the phrases, "self policing", and "it's in a company's self-interest to do the right thing" to be bantered about as safety and environmental regs are gutted. The learning curve is a loop-de-loop.

 

[K1052]

I'm justing going to leave this here.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2017...ered-103-planned-coal-plants-to-be-cancelled/

The US is giving up the world stage and China is eager to move into the spotlight.

 

[K1052]

We have a keen sense of history. Regulations are "fixed" to remove "hyper regulated government stranglehold red tape", people die, and the ass-covering politicians hyperventilate that the agencies "aren't doing their jobs", ignoring the fact that deregulation stripped the agencies of authority to act. Look for the phrases, "self policing", and "it's in a company's self-interest to do the right thing" to be bantered about as safety and environmental regs are gutted. The learning curve is a loop-de-loop.

Rivers on fire from chemical waste will keep the poors warm. Why do you hate the poor?

 

[JockoJohnson]

Only "liberals" are proponents of free trade and moving factories overseas?


Put down the bong, McCarthy.


.

Reading failure. He never said "only" liberals.

Anyone who is for the environment should be aware of where their goods are coming from. A good bit of liberals are also proponents of strong environmental regulation. If it comes from shithole, high-pollution countries and liberals purchase goods created in those countries, they are approving of the pollution. Buy from the properly regulated (or overly regulated) countries that don't pollute the planet.

 

[PokerGuy]

LA was pretty close to that in the past.

Baloney. On its worst day, LA isn't even remotely as bad as some of the places in China (and elsewhere), Saudi Arabia etc right now. Not even in the same ballpark. The smog and air pollution is bad, but those places are on a whole other level.

Deregulate and it will head that way again, i why China is so screwed up.

In your world it's just a binary, "deregulate" or "regulate" setting?

 

[PokerGuy]

We have a keen sense of history. Regulations are "fixed" to remove "hyper regulated government stranglehold red tape", people die, and the ass-covering politicians hyperventilate that the agencies "aren't doing their jobs", ignoring the fact that deregulation stripped the agencies of authority to act. Look for the phrases, "self policing", and "it's in a company's self-interest to do the right thing" to be bantered about as safety and environmental regs are gutted. The learning curve is a loop-de-loop.

So in your world, there is no balance to be struck, just keep piling on more regulations and regulation is always a good thing. I think you have to evaluate every regulation on a cost/benefit basis (not just monetary, factor in whatever costs / benefits you want). Adjust regulations to get the most benefit for the lowest cost, don't just blindly regulate or deregulate based on ideology.

 

[K1052]

Baloney. On its worst day, LA isn't even remotely as bad as some of the places in China (and elsewhere), Saudi Arabia etc right now. Not even in the same ballpark. The smog and air pollution is bad, but those places are on a whole other level.

In your world it's just a binary, "deregulate" or "regulate" setting?

He said in the past.

LA in 1948:

NYC in 1966:

 

[K1052]

So in your world, there is no balance to be struck, just keep piling on more regulations and regulation is always a good thing. I think you have to evaluate every regulation on a cost/benefit basis (not just monetary, factor in whatever costs / benefits you want). Adjust regulations to get the most benefit for the lowest cost, don't just blindly regulate or deregulate based on ideology.

As long as the public bears the costs and business reaps the benefits.

 

[IronWing]

I think you have to evaluate every regulation on a cost/benefit basis (not just monetary, factor in whatever costs / benefits you want). Adjust regulations to get the most benefit for the lowest cost, don't just blindly regulate or deregulate based on ideology.

Then you should be a happy camper because that is exactly how regulations are developed (with lots of input from affected industries and the public).

 

[brycejones]

Then you should be a happy camper because that is exactly how regulations are developed (with lots of input from affected industries and the public).

But that process has produced results he doesn't like ideologically so it must be wrong.

 

[boomerang]

So...you've got nothing then?

You asked me to cite examples in an area that is far outside my area of expertise. I hire people to make those decisions for me. I do that through a process called voting. I stated that there will be changes and I base that on the Trump win and which party controls Congress. I stand behind that assertion.

I'm not going to get into some circle-jerk discussion with you centered around your fears. I'm certain you don't like that but I am equally certain that you'll get over it. Or not. Makes no difference to me.

 

[K1052]

You asked me to cite examples in an area that is far outside my area of expertise. I hire people to make those decisions for me. I do that through a process called voting. I stated that there will be changes and I base that on the Trump win and which party controls Congress. I stand behind that assertion.

I'm not going to get into some circle-jerk discussion with you centered around your fears. I'm certain you don't like that but I am equally certain that you'll get over it. Or not. Makes no difference to me.

You took off on a rant about open borders when asked about environmental regulation so I could only conclude that you actually have no idea what you're talking about. Big of you to admit it though.

 

[PokerGuy]

Then you should be a happy camper because that is exactly how regulations are developed (with lots of input from affected industries and the public).

But that process has produced results he doesn't like ideologically so it must be wrong.

If you guys actually think that process is how all regulations come about and are continually evaluated, you're either incredibly naive or stupid. Take your pick.

I'm not one to think regulations are automatically bad, but done incorrectly they create as many (or more) issues as they solve.

 

[realibrad]

A big issue are illegal coal plants that run by paying off inspectors.

https://weather.com/science/environment/news/stunning-photos-of-illegal-coal-plant-factory-in-china

That coal plant cost more than 300 million. Its not a fly by night operation.

 

[IronWing]

If you guys actually think that process is how all regulations come about and are continually evaluated, you're either incredibly naive or stupid. Take your pick.

Why do you have a need to feel oppressed?
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/basics-regulatory-process

 

[fskimospy]

My statement wasn't exclusive. I said I find it ironic that liberals would be supportive of free trade, as it is highly exploitative of developing nations.

The oligarchs obviously love free trade, and they are rarely liberal, but at least in America, one Clinton furthered free trade more so than perhaps any other President and another Clinton lost an election largely because of the backlash against it.

That 'highly exploitative' trade is one of the primary reasons why the percentage of people in extreme poverty has declined from 55% of the world in 1945 to 25% today. Funny how you keep trying to save these developing nations from the thing that's actually saving them.

 

[Paratus]

He said in the past.

LA in 1948:

NYC in 1966:

Or Pittsburgh in the 40's

(Downtown 8:40 AM)

Or worse Donora just south of Pittsburgh

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Donora_smog

Where toxic smog killed 20 people during the event, 50 more within a month from respiratory problems, 800 animals, sickened 1000's and would have killed thousands had it continued any longer.

The 1948 Donora smog was a historic air inversion that resulted in a wall of smog that killed 20 people and sickened 7,000 more in Donora, Pennsylvania, a mill town on the Monongahela River, 24 miles (39 km) southeast of Pittsburgh. The event is commemorated by the Donora Smog Museum.

Sixty years later, the incident was described by The New York Times as "one of the worst air pollution disasters in the nation's history".[2]Even 10 years after the incident, mortality rates in Donora were significantly higher than those in other communities nearby.[3]

 

[Starbuck1975]

That 'highly exploitative' trade is one of the primary reasons why the percentage of people in extreme poverty has declined from 55% of the world in 1945 to 25% today. Funny how you keep trying to save these developing nations from the thing that's actually saving them.

Funny how you keep ignoring the environmental impacts, and also the alarming stratification and wealth income differentials between the very rich and very poor.

 

[K1052]

Or Pittsburgh in the 40's

(Downtown 8:40 AM)

Or worse Donora just south of Pittsburgh

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Donora_smog

Where toxic smog killed 20 people during the event, 50 more within a month from respiratory problems, 800 animals, sickened 1000's and would have killed thousands had it continued any longer.

That smog means employment. Can't have employment without murderous smog.

 

[fskimospy]

Funny how you keep ignoring the environmental impacts, and also the alarming stratification and wealth income differentials between the very rich and very poor.

Where did you get the idea that I was ignoring those things? Pollution is a problem, but one that's far more easily solved when your country is more productive. (we are a good example of this) Income inequality is a problem, but not NEARLY as large a problem as 55% of the world living in extreme poverty. I am willing to bet if you asked the average person in a developing country if they were willing to give their increased wages back in exchange for a more equal society they would laugh in your face.

 

[soundforbjt]

That smog means employment. Can't have employment without murderous smog.

Smell that? That's the smell of "job creators ".

 

[Starbuck1975]

Where did you get the idea that I was ignoring those things? Pollution is a problem, but one that's far more easily solved when your country is more productive. (we are a good example of this) Income inequality is a problem, but not NEARLY as large a problem as 55% of the world living in extreme poverty. I am willing to bet if you asked the average person in a developing country if they were willing to give their increased wages back in exchange for a more equal society they would laugh in your face.

We are not a very good example of this because we've simply outsourced production. We could not produce goods to scale at the same price point as China, with all our productivity and advances, without trading something else...either an increase in cost of goods or services, which then shifts the poverty line, or an increase in pollution, which is a detriment to health and welfare.

Ask those workers if they are willing to trade increased wages for breathable air and drinkable water.

 

[realibrad]

Where did you get the idea that I was ignoring those things? Pollution is a problem, but one that's far more easily solved when your country is more productive. (we are a good example of this) Income inequality is a problem, but not NEARLY as large a problem as 55% of the world living in extreme poverty. I am willing to bet if you asked the average person in a developing country if they were willing to give their increased wages back in exchange for a more equal society they would laugh in your face.

God, why are you so conservative lol.

Seriously though, its perfectly reasonable that trade can be a net reduction in pollution. Take CA as an example. CA is not a great place to grow things in terms of water. CA is consuming so much water for food production, that the salt water in the deltas is going too far up stream and killing life. If CA were to import food from more places, the net reduction to the environment would be worth the gas burned.

Not always is this how things work, but sometimes producing local is worse.

*good on Spy for arguing for something that is right, even when its unpopular.