A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Environment

Posted: Feb 8, 2017

Do you think the rollback of all the environmental regulations now taking place is good for the average person or being done to further enrich all those billionaires?

;

My - opinion

[ In Reply To ..]
is removing regulations that protect our environment are destructive to everyone (mostly our planet), though they do benefit the top 1% and most of them don't care about the environment, just their money. I did say most because there are exceptions.

What I think - is...

[ In Reply To ..]
1. Liberals have to exaggerate and misrepresent everything or they have no arguments at all, as in your post. No one is rolling back "all" the environmental regulations by any stretch of the imagination.

2. I imagine that some non-billionaires will be "enriched" by a less draconian deathgrip on energy production, such as oil field workers, steel workers, coal miners, and a lot of other people that Democrats once claimed to represent, but no longer do.

Not just those direct worker beneficiaries but - many, many others too...

[ In Reply To ..]
My BIL is a machinist and works for a company that makes special drills and other parts and equipment. People in those support industries will benefit.

Then, those people spend money that goes to wages for waitresses and grocery store clerks, retail clerks and many others.

Less "billionaire" class warfare stuff and more thinking, please.

One of the regulations rolled back - OABO

[ In Reply To ..]
protects the streams near coal mines. What good does it do to have a job if you can't drink the water from your tap or if the pollution kills all the life forms in the water. And someone misunderstood the statement "all the regulations" which meant not each and every one but all those that have been and are being rolled back. For example, if you say to your child "Why did you eat all that candy? it doesn't mean he ate all the candy in the world.

That one - just

[ In Reply To ..]
made me sick. Money before environment. Typical republican way.

The reg in question didn't "protect streams". It was specifically intended - to close down coal mines.

[ In Reply To ..]
In the "name" of "the environment." There was a contrary report that noted that few mines were polluting any nearby streams. It's not even in the nature of the way that coal is processed today.

It's just too easy to hoodwink people these days, it seems.

That One - NOMAN

[ In Reply To ..]
The regulation was in place to stop coal mining companies from dumping waste into local waterways. So, now it will be permissible to do so. If this is not the way it works in coal mining now, why is it necessary to repeal the regulation and allow dumping?

and more trashing of - the planet

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

Taking care of the planet - benefits everybody

[ In Reply To ..]
destroying it hurts everybody. Have you ever experienced a disaster like the Gulf oil spill or others? They don't just affect liberals. He is going to kill as many regulations as possible so his rich buddies will benefit and then we will all suffer for it. The idiot he put as the head of the EPA wants to dismantle it. Great choice!!!!!

Similar Messages:

Aug 01, 2017
Let's get that wall up and who cares about the endangered species. ...

Feb 25, 2013
Bloomberg's ban prohibits 2-liter soda with your pizza and some nightclub mixers The city Health Department last week began sending brochures to businesses that would be affected by the latest ban, including restaurants, bars and any “food service” establishment subject to letter grades. And merchants were shocked to see the broad sweep of the new rules. “It’s not fair. If you’re gonna tell me what to do, it’s no good,” said Steve DiMaggio of Caruso’s in Cobble Hil ...

Aug 22, 2017
From CNN, "A bad work environment could lead to poor health"; link posted below. ...