Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

archpaper.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 366 posts

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#331

Post by perl4ever »

prolikewh0a wrote: post #324
e40 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because as we all know, both sides are exactly the same. /s

What are they different on that makes the lives of everyday Americans better? Abortion? LGBT rights? They're both war & business parties and practically do exactly the same things. They both sell out the worker in favor of the establishment. Once you expand your knowledge of political ideologies outside of USA's acceptable overton window, you get a true sense of just how close both parties actually are.

"Both parties are the same" made sense in 2000, when there were two generic white guys running, if you were too young to remember Watergate or Iran-Contra much, and also because the trillion dollar wars and deficits to come were unimaginable. After the invasion of Iraq, let alone the ACA, and what's happened post 2016, it seems to me like hollow propaganda. It's fundamentally no longer possible to have a productive discussion when you can't get to the point of believing your counterpart is sincere about anything.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#332

Post by kaybe »

amluto wrote: post #244
yorwba wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There aren’t credible alternatives. Other countries (e.g. Germany) do not routinely chlorinate their drinking water and seem to do fine.

After a bit of reading, it seems that this is mainly achieved by having a much newer and better maintained water distribution system. It would be great to have that in the USA.

The local US army bases in Germany actually chlorinate their perfectly fine tap water. What a waste!

But it is probably the perception of unchlorinated water as not safe, and you will probably have a similar problem in the US itself if you switched the water system..

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#334

Post by genericid »

menacingly wrote: post #230
bruinjoe wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so true. We should just ban lobbying because it is only used by rich corporations and individuals.

I've always looked at money's influence in politics as a sort of balanced system, like the house and senate. We need both equal access to politics and proportional access to politics based on resources. Otherwise, democracy devolves into two me's and a Jeff Bezos voting on who pays for my stuff.

> Otherwise, democracy devolves into two me's and a Jeff Bezos voting on who pays for my stuff.

Democracy does not "devolve" into that, that is what democracy is.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#336

Post by chiefofgxbxl »

wvenable wrote: post #125
DougWebb wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We" didn't vote for this. A bit less than 25% of us voted for it, a bit more than 25% voted against it, and nearly 50% of us didn't bother to vote at all. (3rd parties got a small number of votes in the middle there too.) Neither of the major parties has a majority, or anything like a "mandate" about what the American people want. The majority wants "none of the above". If anyone figures out how to get that majority…

The 50% of people who didn't vote basically have said, we don't care to choose. So they got exactly what they voted for.

Blaming people who didn't vote is a strange thing.

For one, it ignores any practical barriers to voting. Maybe someone was working an hourly job with no flexibility to make it to the polls that particular day.

Also, the status-quo of our political system is also in play. What about someone living outside of one of the 6 swing states and their vote wouldn't have likely made a difference. Consider New York State: a Democratic voter may skip with the knowledge that the state will absolutely go blue, and a Republican voter may feel their vote is in vain because the state will go blue anyway.

Shouldn't it be the people who cast their votes who are held accountable for the individuals they put in office? For this I leave you with George Carlin's explanation on the matter [0]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#337

Post by khazhou »

prolikewh0a wrote: post #328
khazhou wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There wasn't even a single issue you agreed with either Hillary or Trump on? Because even if there was just one thing you cared about and which only one side supported, then by your stated principle that both parties are (otherwise) the same, then you should have voted for that. Or... even if both sides were pro-war, pro-big-business, anti-worker, whatever, you could have still voted against the undignified office-de…

One thing that I agree with isn't enough to get me to drop my morals and vote in favor of endless wars, low wages, unaffordable healthcare, unaffordable college, keeping marijuana illegal, privatization of our schools, more oil drilling & fracking, more income inequality, more anti-union rhetoric, doing the favors of Wall St., surveillance state, etc. I voted for Obama in 2012, and even though his public image was fa…

This is on your hands, too.

I mean, it's probably not even worth me making the same cliched points about responsibility to vote, that you can read anywhere else. I'll just note this: the disappointment in Obama, the lack of perfect (or often, even "good") candidates, the general disappointment in the actions by government... none of that is new, unique to this cycle, unique to the U.S., or unique to you.

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#338

Post by prolikewh0a »

perl4ever wrote: post #331
prolikewh0a wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are they different on that makes the lives of everyday Americans better? Abortion? LGBT rights? They're both war & business parties and practically do exactly the same things. They both sell out the worker in favor of the establishment. Once you expand your knowledge of political ideologies outside of USA's acceptable overton window, you get a true sense of just how close both parties actually are.

"Both parties are the same" made sense in 2000, when there were two generic white guys running, if you were too young to remember Watergate or Iran-Contra much, and also because the trillion dollar wars and deficits to come were unimaginable. After the invasion of Iraq, let alone the ACA, and what's happened post 2016, it seems to me like hollow propaganda. It's fundamentally no longer possible to have a productive d…

>two generic white guys running

Two generic white people ran in 2016.

Obama left in 6 or 7 wars/major conflicts. He dropped 26000 bombs in 2016 alone [1]. He used the espionage act against journalists more than any president in history [2]. He let protestors get their heads smashed in by oil companies in North Dakota right before he left [3]. He expanded the surveillance state [4]. Obama seemed sincere and then ended up selling out the American people even further.

Schumer wont whip the vote to block Kavanaugh [5]. Democrats recently overwhelmingly backed the largest defense budget in US history [6].

It still makes sense. It's not "hollow propaganda". Both parties are war, oil, and business parties. Neither are in favor of helping the worker.

[1] https://www.cfr.org/blog/how-many-bombs-did-united-states-dr...

[2] https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/10...

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/21/dakota-acces...

[4] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/01/obama-expands-surveill...

[5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/schumer-plays-long-...

[6] https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2018/06/20/house-an...

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#339

Post by prolikewh0a »

khazhou wrote: post #337
prolikewh0a wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing that I agree with isn't enough to get me to drop my morals and vote in favor of endless wars, low wages, unaffordable healthcare, unaffordable college, keeping marijuana illegal, privatization of our schools, more oil drilling & fracking, more income inequality, more anti-union rhetoric, doing the favors of Wall St., surveillance state, etc. I voted for Obama in 2012, and even though his public image was fa…

This is on your hands, too. I mean, it's probably not even worth me making the same cliched points about responsibility to vote, that you can read anywhere else. I'll just note this: the disappointment in Obama, the lack of perfect (or often, even "good") candidates, the general disappointment in the actions by government... none of that is new, unique to this cycle, unique to the U.S., or unique to you.

I'm sorry, but it's not on my hands. Nothing is really different, just a never ending slow decline for the majority of the country.

You should put blame in the right places, such as campaign finance laws and mainstream media which undoubtedly played a bigger role than non voters...since people who abstained literally did nothing. Maybe the system is broken and people see nearly the same candidate over and over and have no real way to vote outside that?

Re: EPA is allowing asbestos back into manufacturing

#340

Post by manicdee »

dmix wrote: post #187
nemacol wrote: post #147

Having just lost a father-in-law to mesothelioma (June 2018), this makes me incredibly sad. I understand this is not an actual rule change and blah blah blah. 3,000 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year. What a slow and horrific way to go. Slowly losing your breath. Lungs filling with fluid and being rushed off to ER to drain. Endless breathing treatments. Never sleeping more than an hour without waking up…

It does say it's only being approved in special cases. I wouldn't expect the building industry to suddenly start using it again. How many of those 3000 are a legacy of the previous eras misunderstanding of the chemical? I doubt any company would ignore that risk and produce a product that put people at a direct and unknown risk, especially given the legal liability since we now know the full risks of the chemical and…

What is the oversight for approvals? Is it just the 45th president and his mates saying, “Vladimir says it’s okay to put asbestos in brake pads and drywall”?
Post reply on HN