• 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!

Nixing EPA regulations: the price of "freedom", in terms of illness and death

A

ataraxia

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 18, 2016
Messages
62,229
Reaction score
39,291
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
As a target of the Trump administration's most draconian cuts, the EPA is meant to protect American lives and health. It seems the free market and the big corporations don't just magically address that problem if left completely "free" and unoppressed by government regulations.

President Obama's "Clean Power Plan" is intended to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, but it would also reduce harmful soot and smog, says Douglas Dockery, a department chairman at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that when implemented, the plan would prevent 3,600 premature deaths a year. In addition, the agency said, it would prevent 1,700 heart attacks, 90,000 asthma attacks and 300,000 missed days of work or school a year.

"It's not about the polar bears," said Dockery. Burning coal "is affecting people living around power plants and downwind of power plants right now."

Last week, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to review and possibly eliminate the EPA's plan to cut power plants' greenhouse gas emissions. The order rescinded previous analysis on the plan's benefits. The EPA had concluded that for every dollar businesses spent on the regulation, American families would save up to four dollars in health benefits...

Studies by Dockery's group and others became the foundation for regulations under the Clean Air Act. The EPA estimates that in 2010 alone, the cumulative rules under the act prevented 160,000 deaths, 54,000 cases of chronic bronchitis, 230 infant deaths, 130,000 cases of heart diseases and 86,000 emergency room visits. The agency predicted the act could prevent 230,000 deaths in 2020.
Cutting the "Clean Power Plan" could cost lives, experts say - CNNPolitics.com
Click to expand...

Too bad that all these Trump supporters have been thwarted from getting rid of their Obamacare healthcare to help them when this hits. Experience is the best teacher. They should be allowed to knock themselves out and do everything they want to do, like get rid of the ACA and cut EPA regulations, all at the same time. Get rid of all that big government tyranny and bureaucratic overreach like they want. And then they can learn the consequences firsthand. Until then, there will be no end to this whining about government tyranny for every sensible measure out there designed to protect them.
 
Last edited:
The government dictating solutions to problems they decide exist is reasonable? So basically what you're saying is that it's entirely reasonable for the government to decide to throw out any solution it sees fit to any problem it sees fit. You see, some of us think courts exist for a reason, while others think the government can treat everyone like their bitch.
 
Henrin said:
The government dictating solutions to problems they decide exist is reasonable? So basically what you're saying is that it's entirely reasonable for the government to decide to throw out any solution it sees fit to any problem it sees fit. You see, some of us think courts exist for a reason, while others think the government can treat everyone like their bitch.
Click to expand...

Tell me more about why it's ok for your power plant to kill my family members.

I love how you're so far into the liberarian "capitalism can never have faults" mindset that you literally think "air pollution causes health problems" is something the government made up.
 
ataraxia said:
As a target of the Trump administration's most draconian cuts, the EPA is meant to protect American lives and health. It seems the free market and the big corporations don't just magically address that problem if left completely "free" and unoppressed by government regulations.



Too bad that all these Trump supporters have been thwarted from getting rid of their Obamacare healthcare to help them when this hits. Experience is the best teacher. They should be allowed to knock themselves out and do everything they want to do, like get rid of the ACA and cut EPA regulations, all at the same time. Get rid of all that big government tyranny and bureaucratic overreach like they want. And then they can learn the consequences firsthand. Until then, there will be no end to this whining about government tyranny for every sensible measure out there designed to protect them.
Click to expand...

OH GNOES, we wont have layers of costly regulations and bureaucratic centralized control over every facet of business, what ever shall we do, where ever shall we flee?
 
Renae said:
OH GNOES, we wont have layers of costly regulations and bureaucratic centralized control over every facet of business, what ever shall we do, where ever shall we flee?
Click to expand...

To the hospital, with more health complications on average.

But you can continue your little sarcastic nonsense if you like.
 
Deuce said:
Tell me more about why it's ok for your power plant to kill my family members.

I love how you're so far into the liberarian "capitalism can never have faults" mindset that you literally think "air pollution causes health problems" is something the government made up.
Click to expand...

Tell me why it is ok for the government to decide on it's own that people are guilty of a harm and then force a solution on these so called guilty parties. How exactly does this action by the government not violate property rights?
 
Deuce said:
To the hospital, with more health complications on average.

But you can continue your little sarcastic nonsense if you like.
Click to expand...
They think it's funny until they're the ones that have poison drinking water, can't breathe the air and their local waterways are on fire.
 
Renae said:
OH GNOES, we wont have layers of costly regulations and bureaucratic centralized control over every facet of business, what ever shall we do, where ever shall we flee?
Click to expand...

I don't know. But you're gonna have to figure that out soon if the corporations are left free.
 
Henrin said:
Tell me why it is ok for the government to decide on it's own that people are guilty of a harm and then force a solution on these so called guilty parties. How exactly does this action by the government not violate property rights?
Click to expand...

These decisions are based on science and mountains of data and extensive consultation with experts in the field, not by right wing radio show pundits, a bunch of rednecks, and some reality TV stars. I know the words "experts" and "science" are dirty words to conservatives these days, and they scowl and hide their faces from them like witches and vampires at the approach of daylight, but it is a better way.
 
Henrin said:
Tell me why it is ok for the government to decide on it's own that people are guilty of a harm and then force a solution on these so called guilty parties. How exactly does this action by the government not violate property rights?
Click to expand...
What "right" does a mining and pharmaceutical company have to dump toxic materials into Lake Michigan? Can you or your employer dump garbage and anti-freeze and motor oil on your local highway on your local lake? Use your head man. You want to go back to the early 1970s where it was the wild west and companies could throw anything they wanted in the waterways and rivers and lakes were on fire? Wait of course you do. As long as businesses are doing anything they want you're cool with that.
 
ataraxia said:
Decisions are based on science and experts in the field, not by right wing radio show pundits and reality TV stars. I know the words "experts" and "science" are dirty words to conservatives these days, and they scowl and hide their faces from them like witches and vampires on the approach of sunlight, but it is a better way.
Click to expand...

So the decisions are not made by property owners, but instead by people that have no relation to the property being controlled.
 
HenryChinaski said:
What "right" does a mining and pharmaceutical company have to dump toxic materials into Lake Michigan? Can you or your employer dump garbage and anti-freeze and motor oil on your local highway on your local lake? Use your head man. You want to go back to the early 1970s where it was the wild west and companies could throw anything they wanted in the waterways and rivers and lakes were on fire? Wait of course you do. As long as businesses are doing anything they want you're cool with that.
Click to expand...

Is there a reason people keep coming back to me with this dumb strawman?
 
Henrin said:
Is there a reason people keep coming back to me with this dumb strawman?
Click to expand...
Just because you can't defend your position with an ounce of reason or common sense doesn't mean that it's a strawman.
 
HenryChinaski said:
Just because you can't defend your position with an ounce of reason or common sense doesn't mean that it's a strawman.
Click to expand...

It's a strawman because I never said harms should go unpunished or that somehow the 70's were grand.
 
Henrin said:
Is there a reason people keep coming back to me with this dumb strawman?
Click to expand...

You see, it's simple. Instead of acknowledging there are potentially other avenues to ensure clean air and water, many of these people only know "EPA GOOD, INDUSTRY BAD" and they are fed horror stories of the past as if that's the only choice. 1960's thinking or modern progressive overreach. Same thinking has killed the high dive at pools, made "free ranging children" something to be scorned....
 
Libertarians crack me up, I find it amusing that they somehow think that Americans are just not quite selfish enough.
 
Henrin said:
So the decisions are not made by property owners, but instead by people that have no relation to the property being controlled.
Click to expand...

Yes. A little like your neighbors can have a say in how loud and at what hours you can blast your stereo, or how fast you can drive your car in the neighborhood. It's called living in civil society. You've heard of such things, haven't you?

Besides, getting killed by the property in question is a sort of relation to it.
 
Last edited:
Renae said:
You see, it's simple. Instead of acknowledging there are potentially other avenues to ensure clean air and water, many of these people only know "EPA GOOD, INDUSTRY BAD" and they are fed horror stories of the past as if that's the only choice. 1960's thinking or modern progressive overreach. Same thinking has killed the high dive at pools, made "free ranging children" something to be scorned....
Click to expand...

Pray tell, what are these wonderful other avenues? Are they as wonderful and clever as your alternative avenues to the ACA? :lamo
 
Last edited:
ataraxia said:
Pray tell, what are these wonderful ways?
Click to expand...

That you ask tells me you willfully have chosen not to understand the nature of reality in 2017, I could cite for you a multitude of ways State government, public pressure, environmentally concious investors would hold heavy sway on such, but you would dismiss such because "EPA GOOD!!! BAD AIR BAD!!!" ONLY EPA CAN MAKE AIR GOOD!!!

So why should I bother?
 
Deuce said:
Tell me more about why it's ok for your power plant to kill my family members.
Click to expand...
You would first have to demonstrate that a particular power plant caused the death of your family members. Then explain how your life would be somewhat better in the absence of power.
 
Fletch said:
You would first have to demonstrate that a particular power plant caused the death of your family members. Then explain how your life would be somewhat better in the absence of power.
Click to expand...

Dr. Dockery has already explained that in his quote in the OP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom