SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Sunday April 30 2017, @03:07PM
from the we-can-find-no-longer-find-data-against-our-plans dept.
from the we-can-find-no-longer-find-data-against-our-plans dept.
You were warned. Now it begins: The Chicago Tribune reports that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is working on changes to its Web properties:
The EPA's extensive climate change website now redirects to a page that says "this page is being updated" and that "we are currently updating our website to reflect EPA's priorities under the leadership of President Trump and Administrator Pruitt." It also links to a full archive of how the page used to look on Jan. 19, before Trump's inauguration.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Life is to you a dashing and bold adventure.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday April 30 2017, @09:05PM (2 children)
Did you ever give up trying to convince your idiot acquaintances in school that their views and priorities were short-sighted, self-destructive, and very bad for other people around them?
Yes, because I grew up and realized that was hypocritical delusion. Sanctimonious virtue signaling is a paltry replacement for a good argument and some patience can sway more people than you can be bothered to care about. Let us keep in mind that the EPA is one of the many blocks in the wall that created the Trump administration.
There are glaring abuses of the EPA's power, such as Sackett v. EPA [ballotpedia.org] where a couple was fined almost $75k per day for filling in alleged wetlands on a 0.6 acre lot or a quarter of a hectare with the EPA claiming that the couple couldn't appeal the fines and the EPA's ruling in court until they had paid those fines. The EPA has a variety of abusive and sometimes unconstitutional powers like the regulations on wetlands (a very expansive power since any poorly drained land is technically wetlands), Superfund, and vague laws on what is considered pollution (leading to their now reversed declaration that CO2 was a pollutant).
And what exactly is short sighted and self destructive about not being interested in more orders of magnitude reduction in pollution thresholds for already stringent pollution standards or one of the more significant creators of bureaucracy and stultifying regulation in the US (last I heard the EPA has contributed 10-20% of the pages of US law and regulation)? A lot of what the EPA does is just not that valuable for what the EPA costs - not just in direct budget but also in limiting US society.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 30 2017, @10:40PM (1 child)
Here's how to determine the difference between virtue signalling and good argument: does khallow agree with it? If so, it's good argument. If not, it's virtue signalling.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 01 2017, @04:52PM
Here's how to determine the difference between virtue signalling and good argument: does khallow agree with it?
Sorry, there's a lot of stuff I don't disagree with that isn't virtue signalling. You'll just have to come up with a better test. Although it is remarkable how many people with bad arguments (such as yourself here), I happen to disagree with.
One doesn't go to school because one knows too much. Let's look again at the virtue signalling I quoted:
Did you ever give up trying to convince your idiot acquaintances in school that their views and priorities were short-sighted, self-destructive, and very bad for other people around them?
Note the blanket characterization of everyone he knew as "idiot acquaintances". The genius swimming alone in a sea of fools is a traditional bit of virtue signalling going back to Plato's cave and using a lantern to search for wise men. And he casts blame only on others. They couldn't recognize the alleged wisdom of JoeMerchant's words, according to his comfortable narrative.
And what exactly is the smart thing to do about the US's situation that is so obvious that only "idiot acquaintances" can miss it?