re: EPA dismisses half of the scientists on its advisory board

quote:

---

Thats a good start, now fire the other half and shut down the EPA altogether.

---

What city will be the first to look like China? Meaning having "stay inside" smog days like Beijing? I'm in a suburb of Houston, so I am thinking we'd be high up the list.

quote:

---

Second it's cute that you think business people have no interest in public good

---

That is 100% proven. If you are trying to make the argument that business people will favor the public interest over the interests of the companies they work for, you are making a mistake.

Business will ALWAYS favor its own profit interest over ANY interest of the public. Always has, always will.

quote:

---

What I DO have a problem with is stacking the EPA with industry people who will then in turn be making decisions based on what's best for their business, not what's in the public interest.

---

Lolz, as of this wasn't happening under Obama with him using the agency to build the green energy sector and throwing monrey anf contracts at his friends.

Best interest of the public by creating hidden taxes on the middle class through fee's and costly regulations of business that did little to effect the climate. He just used it to get more dollars to spend on his failed policies on the backs of Americans to make himself and his friends wealthier, and to gain power and influence.

quote:

---

saying its scientists often fail to weigh the cost of implementing new regulations on businesses.

---

This is not their job to do.

quote:

---

Do you really think industry representatives should be the ones to make that call? Do they have the public interest at heart? Not saying they shouldn't be consulted at all but come on this is absurd.

---

Who said they were making the call? From what I see they will provide input... Do you think a scientist that has never held an actual job in industry is well equipped to determine the best way to regulate an industry OR do you think maybe putting the scientist together with an industry expert to come to a common conclusion concerning a problem might not be the best way to go?

Seems to me if you get the industry on board and allow them to participate in crafting the regulations that eventually obtain the desired goal, you will get the best result for both...

And it does work (before you say it does not), especially at the State level in the development of new environmental regulations and programs... The biggest advantage is you already have the buy in from the industry, which usually cuts down on the legal challenges...

quote:

---

What I DO have a problem with is stacking the EPA with industry people who will then in turn be making decisions based on what's best for their business, not what's in the public interest. That's not draining the swamp, that's doubling down on it.

---

May be the EPA could use some input from industry? It might help them to stop doing things like polluting our rivers.

quote:

---

The Environmental Protection Agency said Friday it will not repay claims totaling more than $1.2 billion for economic damages from a mine waste spill the agency accidentally triggered in Colorado,

---

"How can anyone agree that "integrity of its science"can possibly maintained if all of the scientists are just part of one big groupthink?"


Global cooling...

Global warming...

Climate change...

Bringing the Swack Hammer down on the pseudoscience ideologues.