3 ms·

The same EPA that under 5+ administrations has taken no material action to reduce the effects of climate change? Approved the widespread use of PFAS for stuff a

The same EPA that under 5+ administrations has taken no material action to reduce the effects of climate change? Approved the widespread use of PFAS for stuff as silly as egg pans and snowboard wax, poisoning people's blood and community water supplies for decades? The same EPA that allows the use of leaded AVgas for flights over communities and schools, because otherwise a dentist might have to pay a little more for his Cessna flight? Gosh, they were such a paragon of environmental protection, effective and well organized in the last 40 years.

kyleweng 1mo ago
Yeah, they were bad at their jobs before, so we should make them even worse now!
- alex43578 1mo ago
  It doesn't serve any purpose to act like they were good at their jobs before. Returning to a status quo of 5 or 15 years ago is such a mediocre goal in this space that its arguably not worth spending political capital on.
magicalist 1mo ago
> The same EPA that under 5+ administrations has taken no material action to reduce the effects of climate change? Huh? The endangerment finding was in 2009. The problem is that we have a very litigious set of polluters and then we elected Trump who stacked the supreme court, and then we elected Trump again, this time with a bunch of insane people with him who had specific plans to bring on the end of this country via the unitary executive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_greenhouse_gases_under_the_Clean_Air_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_greenhouse_gases...
- alex43578 1mo ago
  Huh? Scientists in federal government were discussing the risks of CO2 and the greenhouse effect for 30+ years before that point. There's literal White House memos from 1977 calling it out. In that time we've cycled through R's and D's, the courts have swung left and right, but still nothing meaningful was done. It's hilarious the kneejerk recency bias people have with thinking that every failure of the government is because of Trump.

kyleweng 1mo ago

Yeah, they were bad at their jobs before, so we should make them even worse now!

alex43578 1mo ago
It doesn't serve any purpose to act like they were good at their jobs before. Returning to a status quo of 5 or 15 years ago is such a mediocre goal in this space that its arguably not worth spending political capital on.

magicalist 1mo ago

> The same EPA that under 5+ administrations has taken no material action to reduce the effects of climate change? Huh? The endangerment finding was in 2009. The problem is that we have a very litigious set of polluters and then we elected Trump who stacked the supreme court, and then we elected Trump again, this time with a bunch of insane people with him who had specific plans to bring on the end of this country via the unitary executive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_greenhouse_gases_under_the_Clean_Air_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_greenhouse_gases...

alex43578 1mo ago
Huh? Scientists in federal government were discussing the risks of CO2 and the greenhouse effect for 30+ years before that point. There's literal White House memos from 1977 calling it out. In that time we've cycled through R's and D's, the courts have swung left and right, but still nothing meaningful was done. It's hilarious the kneejerk recency bias people have with thinking that every failure of the government is because of Trump.