That is impressive editing
@CunningLinguist, Donald Trump would write stuff much worse than this, so I think it's edited
Global warming? Fake News!! Overrated!
@Liquid Stuff, you may be asking why your ice cream went away. No its not terrorists, it's GLOBAL WARMING
@Liquid Stuff, Sad!!
I'm ending welfare for all the trees, effective immediately. If they don't want to be cut down they need to get jobs like the rest of us. For too long trees have been living on the government dollar and have produced nothing of value.
@Donald Drumpf, except oxygen, paper, wood for the fire, lumber to build houses, habitats for animals, aesthetic beauty in the world, shade...
You know, this motherfvcker should really read The Giving Tree.
@TheKnightsWhoSayNi, The Giving Tree? Chinese propaganda!
@TheKnightsWhoSayNi, I thought the sarcasm was obvious
@Donald Drumpf, YEAH! LETS SEND THEM BACK TO THEIR COUNTRY! For too long they have mooched off of American enterprise.
Regardless if you dont like political pictures, you have to admit him not trying to protect our resources for future generations is idiotic. Without clean water we all die
@Implicit88, what makes you think that he doesn't want to protect our resources?
@Caine, yeah! My dog drinks toilet water all the time and he's not dead! Dirty water is just fine
@Caine, is common sense and logic not enough or do you not have either in the first place?
@BearDaniels, since youre clearly too retarded ill explain that i was referring to the allegation as to what he says trump is doing. Cause ill tell you right now that this is not it.
But hey common sense is hard to come by.
@BearDaniels, btw thanks for the downvote dicklick
@Caine, look at chinas lack of regulations. U cant even breathe outside some days. Is this what u want? They have water farmers cant even use due to dumping harsh chemicals. The usa did this in the past as well but not to that extent. Look at lead in water pipes in many cities around the world. People dont care the cost, they will poison people for a paycheck.
@Implicit88, hold on. Are you blaming trump for lead in water pipes that were installed years before he was in office? Whats he supposed to do force them to be dug up and spend millions correcting an issue that should have been dealt with before his election?
Also the air quality issue is called smog. He cant fix that either, because cars are all ready regulated to try and prevent smog. It didnt work, trust me i see it in the city everyday. Dumping chemicals is also long before trump and beyond that is also regulated to no avail. the u.s. wasnt as big in the past so that comparison means nothing without percentages.
Trump isnt in charge of the world, only the u.s. so that is also irrelevant.
@Caine, by no means am i blaming him for lead. I was merely using it as an example to show people will poison people to make a quick buck. Trump wants to roll back emission requirements on cars which lead to more smog. More coal plants will also lead to more smog. More fracking will also lead to guess what, more pollutants in the air. People will always try to make money by dumping but that doesnt mean we should stop regulating it means we should focus on it even more. Dont forget smog in harmful to your body, people in areas with more smog have a lower life expectancy. People around fracking sites have way higher chances of cancer. We need to capture more renewable energy so we can be more successful in the long term. Also one of the main problems with regulations are the fines. Fines are minimal compared to those companies profits. Start fining any companies involved 10% of revenue (not net income), that doubles after every offense, and see how fast they are to fix these issues.
@Caine, just want to say again that trump has no fault on the past but he will own the future. We need to protect ourselves. Not the planet. The planet will be fine with what ever we do, we just wont since we will have destroyed our habitat
@Implicit88, since this is a circle jerk of hate anyway im just gonna say for those reading who have brains. Blaming anyone for the issue listed is nuts. Lead wasnt to kill people or cut corners, in fact lead was considered superior in strength and it wasnt until much later that the effects became apparent.
While you ball sacks are looming for reasons to hate the pres, ill remind you that there are over a hundered other countries who arent doing any better on these subjects, but lets crawl up trumps ass.
@Caine, i dont think i ever once insulted you. I merely tried stating facts. For you to say there is a circle of jerks is unfair, when posting to a medium such as this, there will always be disagreements. I realize the lead wasnt meant to harm people. But when we learned it was, we didnt do much to correct our miscalculation. I also realize there are those who arent doing better, but you shouldn't compare yourself to bad off people and say im doing alright. You should see where we are as a nation and think are we headed in the best direction for all of us or only a handful of us. I would be critical of any president whether dem or repub. i want to help even those that dont agree with me since we are all in this together.
@Implicit88, except we did take measures to correct it but mmk.
I called a circle jerk cause of the same group of nard bars coming back for downvotes.
The comparison is less about comparing to equally wrong and more along the lines of theres probably a reason for it and i can tell you what it is, technology + money.
I realize these days everyone wants everything free and has no clue that the money for things has to come from somewhere and normally thats the complaint id have with the piping, but lead pipes have all been replaced with galvanized steel pipe. The battle on smog is actually making alot of progress tbh with all the new zero emission cars. As for coal burning I can tell you for a fact that in long term coal is better than the available alternatives.
Anyway the anti trump brigade is always going to be impossible to enlighten and ill just receive more down votes anyway so im done with it.
@Caine, well this was a nice conversation. One last thing though. We have enough money for things we want to accomplish. We have the highest gdp in the world. Thanks for a good discussion.
If you could show me the planet's pvssy, I'd definitely fvck it.
The legislation he's reversing simply drives industry to places that don't have any regulation on the matter. If you're actually interested in environmentalism or the economy, you would see that this is a net gain in every sense.
@Doctor Krieger, By subsidising the fossil fuel industry?
@Doctor Krieger, Also, your icon is terrifyingly arousing
@Doctor Krieger, I see your point and understand that you're saying these industries are just moving to China (and similar places) because of these environmental restrictions and continuing to pollute. This also costs American jobs. That's what you're saying, right?
Here's my counterpoints:
1. Jobs moving overseas is an enormously complicated issue that is not just a result of environmental restrictions. If you want those jobs to move back here, we would need to implement a ton of anti-labor laws and lower the minimum wage. Are those jobs really worth the human rights and environmental consequences that come along with getting them back?
2. Even if they're polluting elsewhere, they AREN'T polluting here. While this doesn't really make a difference for climate change, it does mean the US will have cleaner air and fewer health issues from pollution.
So reversing this is a single step in a long process that COULD increase jobs here. But it definitely hurts us for now.
@Doctor Krieger, Don't you DARE try and reason the people in the community with logic. What the hell are you thinking?
@Cpt Crunch, Growth doesn't happen without pain. It's going to take work, and pain, in order to be the country and people we want to be.
@Doctor Krieger, are you *really* saying that those interested in environmentalism should see this new legislation as a net gain?!? The guy thinks climate change is a Chinese hoax and doesn't even understand how hairspray can leave a "sealed" room. Why/how in the world would his legislation be meant to protect the environment?
@Blue Shirted Guy, it's not meant to protect the environment, yet it will more than Bush's or Obama's regulations.
Personally, I am not in favor of state-coerced environmentalism. I think that there would absolutely be a market for environmentalism to be achieved in if the state simply stopped being involved in the free market as a whole.
@Doctor Krieger, I just don't understand how a guy who doesn't believe in protecting the environment, passing legislation that isn't meant to protect the environment, will ultimately protect the environment more than Bush's or Obama's regulations. Like Issa Gold stated, how does subsidizing the coal industry protect the environment?
@AnimusJ, If you think bringing back blue collar jobs is worth loss in worker's rights, then that is your preference.
However, the blue collar workers here have some mistaken beliefs. They want these jobs back, but they also want decent wages (many want $15/hour) and benefits. These 2 things cannot happen together unless the American government subsidizes their wages or gives ENORMOUS incentive for corporations in some other way.
In China, laborers are compensated poorly, work awful hours, and don't get benefits. Despite this, many of their products are comparable in quality to those made by American laborers (at least they're comparable when they need to be for that product).
So American blue collar laborers need to dramatically lower their requirements for jobs if they want companies to move back here. Most of them won't, and I think it makes perfect sense that they don't want to be in the same boat as Chinese laborers. However, they need to realize the catch 22 present here.
High taxation and regulations did more to save trees and create clean water and clean air than personal responsibility ever did! (Sarcasm).
I'm really impressed with the effort put into this *upvote*