4 ms·

> If that wasn't working out before we had an EPA, why would it start working out now? What makes you think it wasn't working before? Those same corporations w

by maratd 11y ago

> If that wasn't working out before we had an EPA, why would it start working out now? What makes you think it wasn't working before? Those same corporations would shit a brick if they had to defend themselves from a 1000 lawsuits vs just one from the EPA. Everybody would have standing instead of just the EPA, because really everybody is getting fucked. You think they're complaining now? They'll go bankrupt if you get rid of the federal protection, which was my point.

Frondo 11y ago
Ok, so we're agreed that pollution controls are a good idea. We're agreed that the basic functioning of the EPA is a good one. But instead of us citizens charging one government agency to do this specific job, you think it's going to work out better for us people to have to, as individuals, research and understand the issue enough to file lawsuits? That a bunch of regular folks, most of whom probably don't have a lot of cash lying around to file lawsuits, people who just own homes and work somewhere and whose community is now being polluted.. rather than use the specific tool of a government enforcer, the burden's on each of them to go file a bunch of separate lawsuits? And this outcome is better for them, and will lead to the same pollution restrictions they could get from the one agency doing its job? I mean, that's what it sounds like you're saying, but it just still doesn't make sense.
Frondo 11y ago
The other thing that gets me is, you're basically proposing using the court system as a way to resolve all kinds of problems that, right now, agencies are handling. What kind of court system would we need to handle the increased amount of lawsuit traffic? Wouldn't future libertarians just start railing against the bloated, overgrown size of the massive court system we'd need to handle a thousand lawsuits against one corporate polluter today... several hundred lawsuits against a restaurant that was poisoning people tomorrow... a thousand lawsuits against a factory that was making a lot of noise in the middle of a residential neighborhood...?

by maratd 11y ago

Frondo 11y ago

Ok, so we're agreed that pollution controls are a good idea. We're agreed that the basic functioning of the EPA is a good one. But instead of us citizens charging one government agency to do this specific job, you think it's going to work out better for us people to have to, as individuals, research and understand the issue enough to file lawsuits? That a bunch of regular folks, most of whom probably don't have a lot of cash lying around to file lawsuits, people who just own homes and work somewhere and whose community is now being polluted.. rather than use the specific tool of a government enforcer, the burden's on each of them to go file a bunch of separate lawsuits? And this outcome is better for them, and will lead to the same pollution restrictions they could get from the one agency doing its job? I mean, that's what it sounds like you're saying, but it just still doesn't make sense.

Frondo 11y ago

The other thing that gets me is, you're basically proposing using the court system as a way to resolve all kinds of problems that, right now, agencies are handling. What kind of court system would we need to handle the increased amount of lawsuit traffic? Wouldn't future libertarians just start railing against the bloated, overgrown size of the massive court system we'd need to handle a thousand lawsuits against one corporate polluter today... several hundred lawsuits against a restaurant that was poisoning people tomorrow... a thousand lawsuits against a factory that was making a lot of noise in the middle of a residential neighborhood...?