In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
Maybe we should just ban the sale of cars so that no one dies in car wrecks.
You missed the point. Your tongue in cheek solution is actually one that the left is fond of, anyway. Banning trans fats, incandescent bulbs that don't meet the criteria, implementing CAFE standards, and other assorted things are all limited/full bans. None of them pose an immediate risk to life either.
My point was that he used one example to talk about regulation, so I pointed something else out as a counter-point. It probably educated some people, as well. Well, maybe.
Maybe the point is that the regulation isn't good enough, as the free market dictates that dangerous cars be made more dangerous because that's the cheapest way to do it.
Or perhaps you could let the car companies do it- I think they would try to make cars that are both safe and efficient. These are both things that are really important to consumers (families especially). So to say that regulation isn't good enough is absurd, less people would be dead if CAFE standards didn't exist. Right now safety is sacrificed for efficiency.
My point is that regulation can actually cause harm, though most lefties seem blind to it. The only type of buruacacy they hate is one that runs an insurance agency because they like profit. Every government entity and regulation, no matter how new or harmful is essential.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
What do you mean? Aren't they responsible? Aren't they being investigated?
I can't find any. Do you have any proof that they will be held responsible?
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
Yeah, it's been posted a few times. What does deregulation have to do with it?
They weren't regulated
They weren't?
No, not for stored chemicals apparently. The regulation only applied to production of chemicals. It's why I asked, does anyone actually believe that blind/widespread deregulation is progress? But some of you guys jumped out of your seats as if I accused you of something O.o
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
Maybe we should just ban the sale of cars so that no one dies in car wrecks.
You missed the point. Your tongue in cheek solution is actually one that the left is fond of, anyway. Banning trans fats, incandescent bulbs that don't meet the criteria, implementing CAFE standards, and other assorted things are all limited/full bans. None of them pose an immediate risk to life either.
My point was that he used one example to talk about regulation, so I pointed something else out as a counter-point. It probably educated some people, as well. Well, maybe.
Maybe the point is that the regulation isn't good enough, as the free market dictates that dangerous cars be made more dangerous because that's the cheapest way to do it.
Cheap isn't always more desirable.
Are you telling me it's not more desirable in this case, or are you just inserting something you learned in business school that is irrelevant?
I don't think you need to go to college to know that cheap isn't always more desirable.
So simply stating the obvious then for no reason?
I interpreted
as the free market dictates that dangerous cars be made more dangerous because that's the cheapest way to do it.
to imply that the free market has a preference for cheap, which isn't true as cheaper isn't always more desirable. Sorry if that was a misinterpretation.
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
because that's the wrong way of making regulations. are you saying this was the wrong deregulation? good to hear you agree.
I'm saying that your one example is useless, because the opposite case is true for cars, and that's killed and hurt more than this water leak. "The wrong way of making regulation." What does that mean? What's the "right way'? All regulation has some sort of negative effect, because it stifles people and costs money. So CAFE really isn't different than any other regulation, it just costs human lives, while the well contaminated some water for a while.
Glad to hear you don't like CAFE standards.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
I'm not saying there should be no laws or no punishment, where did you get that idea?
I didn't!
Then we don't have a problem. Regulations (rules governing an activity) have nothing to do with accountability or responsibility, both of which I'm sure are coming to the company in question. I'm all for making people who cause damage to pay for it, unless the Federal Government forced said company into something.
Those punishments are fine imo, if they are within reason.
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
Maybe we should just ban the sale of cars so that no one dies in car wrecks.
You missed the point. Your tongue in cheek solution is actually one that the left is fond of, anyway. Banning trans fats, incandescent bulbs that don't meet the criteria, implementing CAFE standards, and other assorted things are all limited/full bans. None of them pose an immediate risk to life either.
My point was that he used one example to talk about regulation, so I pointed something else out as a counter-point. It probably educated some people, as well. Well, maybe.
Maybe the point is that the regulation isn't good enough, as the free market dictates that dangerous cars be made more dangerous because that's the cheapest way to do it.
Or perhaps you could let the car companies do it- I think they would try to make cars that are both safe and efficient. These are both things that are really important to consumers (families especially). So to say that regulation isn't good enough is absurd, less people would be dead if CAFE standards didn't exist. Right now safety is sacrificed for efficiency.
My point is that regulation can actually cause harm, though most lefties seem blind to it. The only type of buruacacy they hate is one that runs an insurance agency because they like profit. Every government entity and regulation, no matter how new or harmful is essential.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
What do you mean? Aren't they responsible? Aren't they being investigated?
I can't find any. Do you have any proof that they will be held responsible?
Well,
Federal authorities, including the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, have opened an investigation into the spill.
Booth Goodwin, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of West Virginia, said Monday his office will determine whether federal laws were broken.
“Companies whose facilities could affect the public water supply should be on notice: If you break federal environmental laws, you will be prosecuted,” Goodwin said in a statement.
On January 14 2014 13:52 Roe wrote: No, not for stored chemicals apparently. The regulation only applied to production of chemicals. It's why I asked, does anyone actually believe that blind/widespread deregulation is progress? But some of you guys jumped out of your seats as if I accused you of something O.o
You used the spill to attack deregulation and you've yet to demonstrate that deregulation had anything to do with the spill.
And no, we shouldn't blindly regulate or deregulate.
As 2014 dawns, ObamaCare's most disruptive changes to the health care system are just now getting under way. For American businesses, that means a raft of new taxes that will pose devastating consequences for their employees and the broader economy.
Paramount among them is a new tax on health insurers (HIT) that's projected to "hit" them for more than $100 billion over the next decade. ObamaCare's architects intended to eat into the margins of insurers with this levy — and even set it proportional to each company's market share, so that bigger insurers pay more.
But the truth is that firms in every sector will pay it, as insurers will simply pass the tax along to employers in the form of higher premiums.
Indeed, premiums are expected to jump 2% to 3% over the course of this year thanks to this tax. By 2023, they could be about 4% higher.
These tax-fueled premiums hikes will hit small and midsize firms in particular.
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
because that's the wrong way of making regulations. are you saying this was the wrong deregulation? good to hear you agree.
I'm saying that your one example is useless, because the opposite case is true for cars, and that's killed and hurt more than this water leak. "The wrong way of making regulation." What does that mean? What's the "right way'? All regulation has some sort of negative effect, because it stifles people and costs money. So CAFE really isn't different than any other regulation, it just costs human lives, while the well contaminated some water for a while.
Glad to hear you don't like CAFE standards.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
I'm not saying there should be no laws or no punishment, where did you get that idea?
I didn't!
Then we don't have a problem. Regulations (rules governing an activity) have nothing to do with accountability or responsibility, both of which I'm sure are coming to the company in question. I'm all for making people who cause damage to pay for it, unless the Federal Government forced said company into something.
Those punishments are fine imo, if they are within reason.
You're sure? I was trying to find the link/news feed about that, mind filling me in?
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
Maybe we should just ban the sale of cars so that no one dies in car wrecks.
You missed the point. Your tongue in cheek solution is actually one that the left is fond of, anyway. Banning trans fats, incandescent bulbs that don't meet the criteria, implementing CAFE standards, and other assorted things are all limited/full bans. None of them pose an immediate risk to life either.
My point was that he used one example to talk about regulation, so I pointed something else out as a counter-point. It probably educated some people, as well. Well, maybe.
Maybe the point is that the regulation isn't good enough, as the free market dictates that dangerous cars be made more dangerous because that's the cheapest way to do it.
Or perhaps you could let the car companies do it- I think they would try to make cars that are both safe and efficient. These are both things that are really important to consumers (families especially). So to say that regulation isn't good enough is absurd, less people would be dead if CAFE standards didn't exist. Right now safety is sacrificed for efficiency.
My point is that regulation can actually cause harm, though most lefties seem blind to it. The only type of buruacacy they hate is one that runs an insurance agency because they like profit. Every government entity and regulation, no matter how new or harmful is essential.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
What do you mean? Aren't they responsible? Aren't they being investigated?
I can't find any. Do you have any proof that they will be held responsible?
Federal authorities, including the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, have opened an investigation into the spill.
Booth Goodwin, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of West Virginia, said Monday his office will determine whether federal laws were broken.
“Companies whose facilities could affect the public water supply should be on notice: If you break federal environmental laws, you will be prosecuted,” Goodwin said in a statement.
On January 14 2014 13:52 Roe wrote: No, not for stored chemicals apparently. The regulation only applied to production of chemicals. It's why I asked, does anyone actually believe that blind/widespread deregulation is progress? But some of you guys jumped out of your seats as if I accused you of something O.o
You used the spill to attack deregulation and you've yet to demonstrate that deregulation had anything to do with the spill.
And no, we shouldn't blindly regulate or deregulate.
Actually I did (indirectly) say that there weren't any regulations to do with storing chemicals, exactly the situation in this story. So yes, as I said earlier deregulation or unregulated companies won't give us the idealized economy american conservatives keep talking about. Heck Johnny, I'll use damage done to society a whole lot more to attack deregulation if I feel like it.
On January 14 2014 13:52 Roe wrote: No, not for stored chemicals apparently. The regulation only applied to production of chemicals. It's why I asked, does anyone actually believe that blind/widespread deregulation is progress? But some of you guys jumped out of your seats as if I accused you of something O.o
You used the spill to attack deregulation and you've yet to demonstrate that deregulation had anything to do with the spill.
And no, we shouldn't blindly regulate or deregulate.
Actually I did (indirectly) say that there weren't any regulations to do with storing chemicals, exactly the situation in this story. So yes, as I said earlier deregulation or unregulated companies won't give us the idealized economy american conservatives keep talking about. Heck Johnny, I'll use damage done to society a whole lot more to attack deregulation if I feel like it.
edit: sorry for spam
Could you post your source for no regulation on storage?
Edit: Also, deregulation isn't about removing all regulations for the heck of it.
On January 14 2014 13:52 Roe wrote: No, not for stored chemicals apparently. The regulation only applied to production of chemicals. It's why I asked, does anyone actually believe that blind/widespread deregulation is progress? But some of you guys jumped out of your seats as if I accused you of something O.o
You used the spill to attack deregulation and you've yet to demonstrate that deregulation had anything to do with the spill.
And no, we shouldn't blindly regulate or deregulate.
Actually I did (indirectly) say that there weren't any regulations to do with storing chemicals, exactly the situation in this story. So yes, as I said earlier deregulation or unregulated companies won't give us the idealized economy american conservatives keep talking about. Heck Johnny, I'll use damage done to society a whole lot more to attack deregulation if I feel like it.
edit: sorry for spam
Could you post your source for no regulation on storage?
Edit: Also, deregulation isn't about removing all regulations for the heck of it.
On January 14 2014 13:52 Roe wrote: No, not for stored chemicals apparently. The regulation only applied to production of chemicals. It's why I asked, does anyone actually believe that blind/widespread deregulation is progress? But some of you guys jumped out of your seats as if I accused you of something O.o
You used the spill to attack deregulation and you've yet to demonstrate that deregulation had anything to do with the spill.
And no, we shouldn't blindly regulate or deregulate.
Actually I did (indirectly) say that there weren't any regulations to do with storing chemicals, exactly the situation in this story. So yes, as I said earlier deregulation or unregulated companies won't give us the idealized economy american conservatives keep talking about. Heck Johnny, I'll use damage done to society a whole lot more to attack deregulation if I feel like it.
edit: sorry for spam
Could you post your source for no regulation on storage?
Edit: Also, deregulation isn't about removing all regulations for the heck of it.
JonnyBObvious is really on a roll tonight.
Because what this thread really needs is more one liners :/
Can we try to keep it civil guys? This thread has an awful reputation as is.
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
because that's the wrong way of making regulations. are you saying this was the wrong deregulation? good to hear you agree.
I'm saying that your one example is useless, because the opposite case is true for cars, and that's killed and hurt more than this water leak. "The wrong way of making regulation." What does that mean? What's the "right way'? All regulation has some sort of negative effect, because it stifles people and costs money. So CAFE really isn't different than any other regulation, it just costs human lives, while the well contaminated some water for a while.
Glad to hear you don't like CAFE standards.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
I'm not saying there should be no laws or no punishment, where did you get that idea?
I didn't!
Then we don't have a problem. Regulations (rules governing an activity) have nothing to do with accountability or responsibility, both of which I'm sure are coming to the company in question. I'm all for making people who cause damage to pay for it, unless the Federal Government forced said company into something.
Those punishments are fine imo, if they are within reason.
You're sure? I was trying to find the link/news feed about that, mind filling me in?
Didn't Johnny do that? The appropriate officials are looking into it. This is the federal government we are talking about here, the only thing they try to do quickly is pass gun control. And I'm sure someone will sue. Let me put it this way- I don't think the guilty parties will get away scot free.
And I seriously doubt the activity was unregulated. This has to do with chemicals used in the environment- from what I understand and know about chemicals in general, I'd bet these particular ones are highly regulated. I know fracking, drilling and refining certainly are regulated.
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
because that's the wrong way of making regulations. are you saying this was the wrong deregulation? good to hear you agree.
I'm saying that your one example is useless, because the opposite case is true for cars, and that's killed and hurt more than this water leak. "The wrong way of making regulation." What does that mean? What's the "right way'? All regulation has some sort of negative effect, because it stifles people and costs money. So CAFE really isn't different than any other regulation, it just costs human lives, while the well contaminated some water for a while.
Glad to hear you don't like CAFE standards.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
I'm not saying there should be no laws or no punishment, where did you get that idea?
I didn't!
Then we don't have a problem. Regulations (rules governing an activity) have nothing to do with accountability or responsibility, both of which I'm sure are coming to the company in question. I'm all for making people who cause damage to pay for it, unless the Federal Government forced said company into something.
Those punishments are fine imo, if they are within reason.
You're sure? I was trying to find the link/news feed about that, mind filling me in?
Didn't Johnny do that? The appropriate officials are looking into it. This is the federal government we are talking about here, the only thing they try to do quickly is pass gun control. And I'm sure someone will sue. Let me put it this way- I don't think the guilty parties will get away scot free.
And I seriously doubt the activity was unregulated. This has to do with chemicals used in the environment- from what I understand and know about chemicals in general, I'd bet these particular ones are highly regulated. I know fracking, drilling and refining certainly are regulated.
The question then is whether or not they were required to have sufficient insurance to cover this kind of accident. Cause if not they've socialised the risk from it while privatising the gains.
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
As over 300,000 people in West Virginia face a fourth day without water, state environmental officials are now estimating that as much as 7,500 gallons of a chemical used to process coal — Crude MCHM — may have spilled into the Elk River. That number is a substantial increase from early estimates of 2,000 to 5,000 gallons.
The chemical leak, first reported Thursday, was at a facility owned by Freedom Industries along the Elk River, just 1.5 miles upstream from a major intake used by the largest water utility in the state, West Virginia American Water.
At a press conference Saturday afternoon, Jeff McIntyre, president of West Virginia American Water Company, said that it would likely still be “several days” before tap water in the nine counties affected would be safe for anything besides flushing toilets.
The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention has set the standard of 1 part per million as a safe concentration of Crude MCHM in drinking water. Levels of the chemical must remain below this threshold for over 24 hours of testing before the water company can begin flushing the system.
At a press briefing Saturday evening, Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin’s (D) office released the first results of the now round-the-clock water sampling efforts. While some tests are coming in below the safe threshold, the system is still far from clean. Eight out of 18 recent test results tested above 1 part per million. Some of the earliest tests showed concentrations as high as 3 parts per million.
“The reason the numbers are going down is we believe less of the material is getting into the water,” said Mike Dorsey, the chief of homeland security and emergency response at the State Department of Environmental Protection. “We have cut of the source of the leak, the tank. There is still material under the concrete and the soil. We’ve taken aggressive measures on the shore line below the site.”
A team from the Chemical Safety Board will arrive in West Virginia on Monday to begin the long process of assessing the cause of the spill. The CSB is an independent federal agency with the authority to investigate industrial chemical accidents. The agency issues recommendations for prevention of future accidents.
To date, FEMA has brought in 1.4 million liters of water for residents. An additional 1.6 million liters are expected to come in over the course of the weekend.
The New York Times reported Saturday that at least 122 people have gone to local hospitals complaining of nausea, vomiting, and skin and eye irritation.
because that's the wrong way of making regulations. are you saying this was the wrong deregulation? good to hear you agree.
I'm saying that your one example is useless, because the opposite case is true for cars, and that's killed and hurt more than this water leak. "The wrong way of making regulation." What does that mean? What's the "right way'? All regulation has some sort of negative effect, because it stifles people and costs money. So CAFE really isn't different than any other regulation, it just costs human lives, while the well contaminated some water for a while.
Glad to hear you don't like CAFE standards.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
I'm not saying there should be no laws or no punishment, where did you get that idea?
I didn't!
Then we don't have a problem. Regulations (rules governing an activity) have nothing to do with accountability or responsibility, both of which I'm sure are coming to the company in question. I'm all for making people who cause damage to pay for it, unless the Federal Government forced said company into something.
Those punishments are fine imo, if they are within reason.
You're sure? I was trying to find the link/news feed about that, mind filling me in?
Didn't Johnny do that? The appropriate officials are looking into it. This is the federal government we are talking about here, the only thing they try to do quickly is pass gun control. And I'm sure someone will sue. Let me put it this way- I don't think the guilty parties will get away scot free.
And I seriously doubt the activity was unregulated. This has to do with chemicals used in the environment- from what I understand and know about chemicals in general, I'd bet these particular ones are highly regulated. I know fracking, drilling and refining certainly are regulated.
The question then is whether or not they were required to have sufficient insurance to cover this kind of accident. Cause if not they've socialised the risk from it while privatising the gains.
And if they don't it's a pretty safe bet that they will be required to pay the difference, there are procedures in place for apportioning blame and setting a money value to it for these kinds of things. Those procedures mostly consist of "how much the judge feels like bending over this company that fucked up." Because they always appeal the fine(s).
On January 14 2014 12:56 Roe wrote: so uhhh...is anyone talking about the company that poisoned the waters in west virginia to the point that 300 000 people didn't have water for 4 days (and expected to be several more)? How can people really believe this deregulation (or unregulation) actually improves quality of life or the economy?
because that's the wrong way of making regulations. are you saying this was the wrong deregulation? good to hear you agree.
I'm saying that your one example is useless, because the opposite case is true for cars, and that's killed and hurt more than this water leak. "The wrong way of making regulation." What does that mean? What's the "right way'? All regulation has some sort of negative effect, because it stifles people and costs money. So CAFE really isn't different than any other regulation, it just costs human lives, while the well contaminated some water for a while.
Glad to hear you don't like CAFE standards.
Yeah I mean Freedom Industries tried hard to not poison the water...And now where's the accountability? Where's the responsibility?
I'm not saying there should be no laws or no punishment, where did you get that idea?
I didn't!
Then we don't have a problem. Regulations (rules governing an activity) have nothing to do with accountability or responsibility, both of which I'm sure are coming to the company in question. I'm all for making people who cause damage to pay for it, unless the Federal Government forced said company into something.
Those punishments are fine imo, if they are within reason.
You're sure? I was trying to find the link/news feed about that, mind filling me in?
Didn't Johnny do that? The appropriate officials are looking into it. This is the federal government we are talking about here, the only thing they try to do quickly is pass gun control. And I'm sure someone will sue. Let me put it this way- I don't think the guilty parties will get away scot free.
And I seriously doubt the activity was unregulated. This has to do with chemicals used in the environment- from what I understand and know about chemicals in general, I'd bet these particular ones are highly regulated. I know fracking, drilling and refining certainly are regulated.
The question then is whether or not they were required to have sufficient insurance to cover this kind of accident. Cause if not they've socialised the risk from it while privatising the gains.
And if they don't it's a pretty safe bet that they will be required to pay the difference, there are procedures in place for apportioning blame and setting a money value to it for these kinds of things. Those procedures mostly consist of "how much the judge feels like bending over this company that fucked up." Because they always appeal the fine(s).
Assuming that they keep the money the same place they keep the liability. If they separate the two then you're out of luck.
That's something that annoys me about corporate personhood. The advocates of it explain that a corporation is, at its heart, a group of people acting collectively and therefore should be respected and protected under the law as if it's a person. And yet if a corporation does something criminal or negligent the shareholders, who have been established to collectively be the corporation, are not held accountable. If your group is collectively negligent, or employ someone to be negligent on your behalf, you should be accountable. People would be far more involved in making sure their corporations acted responsibly in society if they didn't have all the rights and none of the accountability of the people involved.
Shareholders effectively own the company, they do not constitute the corporation. If the CEO fucks up, they fire him ... they aren't the CEO and don't bear equal responsibility. They aren't the lowest man on the totem pole that didn't follow safety proceeding. They aren't the supervisor that drafted the safety policies that ended up being insufficient, or the trainers he hired that inadequately ensured that they were read. They aren't the contractor that delivered faulty containment. Any one of these parties could be found to be negligent in an investigation. None of them necessarily was hired to be negligent on another's behalf (the whole claim is quizzical). The shareholders take some hits--fines paid, profits lost in publicity, and any insurance increase. Those costs are a force of accountability in self-interest if nothing else.
Assuming that they keep the money the same place they keep the liability. If they separate the two then you're out of luck.
There's no place the company can put the money to keep it safe from a judge ordering them to hand it over. Unless it's in numbered accounts in some Kazakhstan bank and no one can prove that it is theirs.
That's something that annoys me about corporate personhood. The advocates of it explain that a corporation is, at its heart, a group of people acting collectively and therefore should be respected and protected under the law as if it's a person. And yet if a corporation does something criminal or negligent the shareholders, who have been established to collectively be the corporation, are not held accountable.
Shareholders aren't held accountable because most of the time shareholders do not hold an active position of authority within the company and it would be a great miscarriage of justice to punish people for something they had no active part in. Shareholder authority is delegated to the board and shareholder authority usually doesn't extend much past "we can fire the board."
If your group is collectively negligent, or employ someone to be negligent on your behalf, you should be accountable. People would be far more involved in making sure their corporations acted responsibly in society if they didn't have all the rights and none of the accountability of the people involved.
It's hardly fair to suggest that shareholders hire people to be negligent on their behalf when negligence occurs. Shareholders usually don't hire anyone except the board, and they hire them to increase their dividends and share price, not be negligent and have the government hit the company for millions or billions of dollars and have the value of their stock plummet. Let's say Wal-Mart commits some horrible crime, are you really suggesting 83-year old Mitzy Perkins from Creekbottom Junction, Iowa, who owns 100 shares of Wal-Mart stock, bears some responsibility? What did she or any shareholder do but buy stock?
Mens rea, sir, you can't just throw it out the window because you feel like things would be better if you could spank people who had no actual connection to the crime. It is not likely that if you could, shareholders would become more vigilant in their oversight of the company. The more likely outcome of your suggestion would be that far fewer people would become shareholders, increasing the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few. Which would, things being as they are, probably make it harder for successful punishment of wrongdoing. That's bad, right?
Assuming that they keep the money the same place they keep the liability. If they separate the two then you're out of luck.
There's no place the company can put the money to keep it safe from a judge ordering them to hand it over. Unless it's in numbered accounts in some Kazakhstan bank and no one can prove that it is theirs.
That's something that annoys me about corporate personhood. The advocates of it explain that a corporation is, at its heart, a group of people acting collectively and therefore should be respected and protected under the law as if it's a person. And yet if a corporation does something criminal or negligent the shareholders, who have been established to collectively be the corporation, are not held accountable.
Shareholders aren't held accountable because most of the time shareholders do not hold an active position of authority within the company and it would be a great miscarriage of justice to punish people for something they had no active part in. Shareholder authority is delegated to the board and shareholder authority usually doesn't extend much past "we can fire the board."
If your group is collectively negligent, or employ someone to be negligent on your behalf, you should be accountable. People would be far more involved in making sure their corporations acted responsibly in society if they didn't have all the rights and none of the accountability of the people involved.
It's hardly fair to suggest that shareholders hire people to be negligent on their behalf when negligence occurs. Shareholders usually don't hire anyone except the board, and they hire them to increase their dividends and share price, not be negligent and have the government hit the company for millions or billions of dollars and have the value of their stock plummet. Let's say Wal-Mart commits some horrible crime, are you really suggesting 83-year old Mitzy Perkins from Creekbottom Junction, Iowa, who owns 100 shares of Wal-Mart stock, bears some responsibility? What did she or any shareholder do but buy stock?
Mens rea, sir, you can't just throw it out the window because you feel like things would be better if you could spank people who had no actual connection to the crime. It is not likely that if you could, shareholders would become more vigilant in their oversight of the company. The more likely outcome of your suggestion would be that far fewer people would become shareholders, increasing the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few. Which would, things being as they are, probably make it harder for successful punishment of wrongdoing. That's bad, right?
That's absurd. No one is getting rich playing the medium- to long-term publicly traded stocks game with their wages and listening to Jim Cramer. Mitzy Perkins is a fish swimming upstream.
EPT
