• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mitsubishi Cement Corp. expanding Long Beach operations

Using California as a example of the successes of Liberal policies pegs the irony meter.

It leads the Nation in debt and unfunded liabilities, has the Highest poverty rates in the Nation, is home to 1/3 of the Nation's Welfare recipients even though it only has 1/8 of the Nation's citizen's and is driving out Millions of its tax paying citizens and hundreds of its Businesses to Red States like Texas.

Energy prices are higher and so is the cost of living.

In " Progressive " cities like San Francisco and Berkeley only the rich can afford to own property and businesses and crime rates are disproportionately divided between white and minorities.

In San Francisco blacks are charged for 40 percent of the Cities murders.

Hilarious how the silly libs in this thread are running from this post, which pretty much crucified their entire argument.

California is such a craphole, and it's so sad. It should be the jewel of the US, and instead it's just a growing cesspool.
 
That is mostly because of a reduction in emissions from vehicles due in large part to advances in technology. Nice try though.

Those advances are directly the result of emissions standards set by the EPA (nationally) and by the California Air Resources Board (in California). As the EPA and any environmental regulatory agency are regularly under attack by conservatives, it's safe to say Conservatives today no longer get to claim credit for emissions standards.
 
LOL

Was I around? I've been breathing SoCal air since the mid-50's, so yes, I was around. And it wasn't just liberals who passed air quality legislation. So let's not attempt to re-write history.

AB32 has little to do with this strawman you've thrown out. But thanks for the comment.

So it wasn't just liberals who passes environmental laws, but jobs getting outsourced is all liberals' fault. Gotcha.
 
So it wasn't just liberals who passes environmental laws, but jobs getting outsourced is all liberals' fault. Gotcha.

The post you have commented on related specifically to automobile pollution regulations that passed in the '60's.

Another FAIL on your part Kobie.
 
The post you have commented on related specifically to automobile pollution regulations that passed in the '60's.

Another FAIL on your part Kobie.

Mkay.
 
Those advances happened because of the emissions laws, not due to the civic mindedness of auto makers.

It takes two to tango. Do you really believe onerous California regulations alone are responsible for advancements in vehicle technology? :roll:
 
Those advances are directly the result of emissions standards set by the EPA (nationally) and by the California Air Resources Board (in California). As the EPA and any environmental regulatory agency are regularly under attack by conservatives, it's safe to say Conservatives today no longer get to claim credit for emissions standards.

Are you seriously making the claim that government regs alone are solely responsible for advancements in fuel efficiency and emission technology? Do you have tangible evidence to support that ridiculous claim?
 
I do, I grew up there in the 60's-70's, the brown smog that hung over LA was ever present.

If you did then you'd have heard all about the inversion layer that sits on LA during the spring and summer months. You know the native peoples used to throw a torch on that as they left for the summer to go to higher climes.

Your smog was mostly due to all vehicles then burning leaded gasoline while you were locked inside a jar with the lid closed. That's better now, but still heinous. The real problem is, people shouldn't be living there during that season. Even old wood fires would make the region smoggy.

Btw, you do know that it was Nixon that signed the EPA into existence and supported it all the way?
 
Last edited:
If you did then you'd have heard all about the inversion layer that sits on LA during the spring and summer months. You know the native peoples used to throw a torch on that as they left for the summer to go to higher climes.

Your smog was mostly due to all vehicles then burning leaded gasoline while you were locked inside a jar with the lid closed. That's better now, but still heinous. The real problem is, people shouldn't be living there during that season. Even old wood fires would make the region smoggy.

Btw, you do know that it was Nixon that signed the EPA into existence and supported it all the way?

And did. As was pointed out earlier in this thread.
 
So the natives had been burning off the land as they were want to do, and the smoke settled there. What's that got to do with the fact that the LA area was under smog perennially when I grew up there and is absent now.

It's not absent now btw. You're just used to it. Whenever any of my relatives from up north in the mountains go to Disneyland during the summer, they all swear it's the last time, the air is so rank.
 
If you did then you'd have heard all about the inversion layer that sits on LA during the spring and summer months. You know the native peoples used to throw a torch on that as they left for the summer to go to higher climes.

Your smog was mostly due to all vehicles then burning leaded gasoline while you were locked inside a jar with the lid closed. That's better now, but still heinous. The real problem is, people shouldn't be living there during that season. Even old wood fires would make the region smoggy.

Btw, you do know that it was Nixon that signed the EPA into existence and supported it all the way?

And did, as was pointed out earlier in this thread. Why Did a 1542 Spanish Voyage Refer to San Pedro Bay as the 'Bay of the Smoke'? | LA as Subject | SoCal Focus | KCET

Tricky Dick, that old crazy liberal. :mrgreen:
 
I'm sorry you can't read. Not sure you want to be so forthcoming with that admission.

The OP points out that local industry can't supply demand because of Progressive forced regulations, so those jobs are being sent overseas, rather than benefitting US citizens. So goes the Progressive meme about offshoring by evil corporations.

Do try to keep up Sangha.

your wasting time.

these guys don't care that a company could build and hire another 500 people. that is just off their radar.
they whine that companies shift jobs overseas but refuse to let up on the regulations that do so.

they cry that companies won't create more jobs but continue to increase the cost of making those jobs.

the irony is so bad they can't even see it in front of their face.
 
The OP points out that local industry can't supply demand because of Progressive forced regulations, so those jobs are being sent overseas, rather than benefitting US citizens. So goes the Progressive meme about offshoring by evil corporations.

Do try to keep up Sangha.

No, the OP does not point that out. It points out that jobs are being created in CA by Mitsubishi in response to increased demand.

Do try to tell the truth
 
I actually do agree with the right that us liberals are destroying jobs, I mean it's hard to refute the solid facts that the blue states of Nevada, Mississippi, South Carolina, Louisville, and West Virginia are 2-6th in the nation in terms of unemployment.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/state-unemployment-update.aspx

If it wasn't for damn liberals, those blue states above would be begging people to come fill jobs they'd have such low unemployment rates, but alas they vote for liberals so they get to suffer.
 
If you did then you'd have heard all about the inversion layer that sits on LA during the spring and summer months. You know the native peoples used to throw a torch on that as they left for the summer to go to higher climes.

Your smog was mostly due to all vehicles then burning leaded gasoline while you were locked inside a jar with the lid closed. That's better now, but still heinous. The real problem is, people shouldn't be living there during that season. Even old wood fires would make the region smoggy.

Btw, you do know that it was Nixon that signed the EPA into existence and supported it all the way?

Yes, and good for Nixon.
 
It's not absent now btw. You're just used to it. Whenever any of my relatives from up north in the mountains go to Disneyland during the summer, they all swear it's the last time, the air is so rank.

No, I haven't lived in SoCal for 32 years, and the air quality is magnitudes better when I return.
 
No, the OP does not point that out. It points out that jobs are being created in CA by Mitsubishi in response to increased demand.

Do try to tell the truth

LOL. I guess you had to think about that awhile before you had a brainstorm of an idea.

Only someone on the left could reach the insane conclusion you did. There is little hope for someone with such qualifications.

:lamo
 
No, I haven't lived in SoCal for 32 years, and the air quality is magnitudes better when I return.

Absolutely poisonous to just poisonous may be "magnitudes better" technically, but in terms of living or visiting there, very little difference in effect. They still have smog alerts and the local news still passes it off as no big deal. Like the side effects blasted through on every prescribed medication commercial.
 
Do you remember what Southern California's air looked like in the 1970's and 80's? Were you around then? Thanks to "Liberals" our air quality has improved substantially. Imagine what our air would be like if Liberals hadn't passed strong environmental laws in California. Industry is good but not at the expense of the environment.

You do realize that smog is not CO2, yes? Cities all over the country have cleaned up their act without the absurd cap-and-trade scheme that is killing California blue collar jobs.
 
You do realize that smog is not CO2, yes? Cities all over the country have cleaned up their act without the absurd cap-and-trade scheme that is killing California blue collar jobs.

Indeed. In fact quite a bit of that smog had to do, not with cars/gas burning vehicles, but with regular old burning. Things got much better when the state started to prohibit the burning off of the rice fields during certain seasons.
 
No, in the state of California, it was Progressives. And they did it my lying to the voters, and using gut and paste to create a new bill in the dead of night on a Saturday night during extraordinary session.

That's how progressives do things. When they raise their hand to pass laws and regulations nobody wants, they make sure to raise the middle finger to voters while doing so.

Well, not really. California idiotically labeled CO2 a pollutant. CO2 is a GHG.

CO2 is a "pollutant" in the same way water vapor is a "pollutant".
 
Well, not really. California idiotically labeled CO2 a pollutant. CO2 is a GHG.

CO2 is a "pollutant" in the same way water vapor is a "pollutant".

True. A more accurate depiction of what they did.

Having done so, this opened the way for the now infamous AB 32, and many other actions that are harming not only California citizens, but citizens in other states as well. Most recently, California regulators doubled down on CO2 emission levels standards, which will cause everyone buying a new car to pay more for it, no matter what state they live in.

California Progressives know the power they have, and openly talk about how they will force the Nation to comply to the regulations and standards they demand.
 
Are you seriously making the claim that government regs alone are solely responsible for advancements in fuel efficiency and emission technology? Do you have tangible evidence to support that ridiculous claim?

The government did not develop the new technology, it just set the conditions that caused the technology to develop. The catalytic convert, electrostatic precipitators would not have been developed had the government not set emission regulations for auto's and coal power plants.

If you want proof check out China, which has access to that technology, but does not enforce air pollution regulations very much. Companies are not on their own going to build and develop items that will increase costs, that consumers would not pay extra for if they do not have to
 
The government did not develop the new technology, it just set the conditions that caused the technology to develop. The catalytic convert, electrostatic precipitators would not have been developed had the government not set emission regulations for auto's and coal power plants.

If you want proof check out China, which has access to that technology, but does not enforce air pollution regulations very much. Companies are not on their own going to build and develop items that will increase costs, that consumers would not pay extra for if they do not have to
Again, comparing apples to bowling balls. Are you seriously comparing communist China with the the United States? Seriously? :roll:

That's your tangible evidence? :lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom