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

EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 197 posts

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#111

Post by Sammi »

mahirsaid wrote: post #102

The whole idea of polarized opposite parties in the U.S. has gotten out of hand. like science is needed for humanity to further progress. To say the left needs to do this, and the right needs to do that is delusional in its own right. The joint effort comes first or should come first along with logical decisions not based on whether you like the opposite party or not. its about the nation as a whole.

It's because of the First Past The Post voting system that is used in the US, which means winner takes all.

If you want to understand why the US seems so uniquely politically divided, then you will understand once you understand how FPTP voting works and how it inevitably leads to binary politics. Most countries have a voting system that leads to broader representation. US politics will always be black and white and divided so long as FPTP voting is used.

There's a great video by cpg grey explaining FPTP: https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#112

Post by wqaatwt »

cogman10 wrote: post #104
wqaatwt wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair Ceasar was replaced by a few even more oppressive wannabe tyrants. He never posted lists of his political enemies to be murdered and was generally pretty lenient. Probably led to his downfall. Augustus made sure to squash all potential sources of opposition before taking over.

For sure. Julius ultimately just paved the way for the future tyrants. He consolidated the power into himself which made it a lot easier for his predecessors to take things further.

Another thing is that I’m not sure he really ignored the will of the people. “The people” were severely oppressed and the policies they supported ignored and rejected for the past 80+ years by the tightly knit oligarchy at the top. The overwhelming majority of its citizens probably had no real reasons to do anything to “protect” the republic.

Also it’s not like Caesar was the first to do what he did. He followed in the steps of a much more brutal and oppressive conservative/reactionary tyrant who almost had him executed a few decades ago.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#113

Post by mothballed »

cogman10 wrote: post #99
mothballed wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is a bad idea. Let's start off with the first point "They are just easements on private property" That's what most public roads are. They are still owned by the public (the government) and maintained by the public (the government). Where I'm from, we have plenty of dirt and gravel roads just like this. Once every 10 years or so the county comes in and re-gravels them. They are mostly only ever used by private in…

Honestly I will just thank my lucky stars most people believe this fiction you present, because it's keeping the more libertarian areas cheap and without too many busybodies. It seems you've not heard of public access private easements or private trash service, and you haven't learned how to shoot a bear.

I pay like $50/month in property taxes and that's basically exclusively for public school and college, which while I'm not thrilled to be paying anything above $0 at least basic education has a massively positive ROI.

We don't have any sort of effective police/fire presence, public roads, any public utilities, or really any government services besides grade school education and it's been that way for 50+ years without any sort of apocalypse or us all being eaten by bears. Which is amazing because I don't have to worry about some asshole coming along to choke me out on the pavement were it I would have the bad judgement to sell a loose untaxed cigarette.

So far the place hasn't turned into a trash heap, and I've gotten the services I used to get by public services in other areas for 1/3-1/2 of what I was paying before.

I'm happy to have it as my little secret, but I hate to see y'all suffering.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#114

Post by wqaatwt »

cogman10 wrote: post #110
wqaatwt wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The differences in population weren’t that massive in the early years, though.

The voting population difference was massive. The entire reason for the 3/5ths compromise was because the slave states would have almost no house representation.

Still not that massive in relative terms

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colonial_and_pre-Fed...

Virginia would had still been the most populous or at least second most populous state if only white people were counted.

Also there were plenty of small states in the Northeast with very small populations.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#115

Post by idontwantthis »

mahirsaid wrote: post #102

The whole idea of polarized opposite parties in the U.S. has gotten out of hand. like science is needed for humanity to further progress. To say the left needs to do this, and the right needs to do that is delusional in its own right. The joint effort comes first or should come first along with logical decisions not based on whether you like the opposite party or not. its about the nation as a whole.

There is only one party that runs on a platform of denying science. It’s not “polarization” it’s evil.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#116

Post by weberer »

cogman10 wrote: post #89
rectang wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, now that taker states have figured out how to hack the system and bleed giver states while doing things such as neutering the EPA without facing electoral consequences, attitudes seem to be changing amongst people who previously were all right with subsidizing taker states on humanitarian grounds.

This is something baked into the constitution from the beginning. The entire reason we have the senate is because the less populated slave states didn't want to get steam rolled by the the more populated northern free states. It was an anti-democracy measure to ensure low population regions get over-represented.

You have it backwards. It was mostly the smaller, Northern states like Delaware that were opposed to proportional representation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connecticut_Compromise

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#117

Post by steve_adams_86 »

Sammi wrote: post #111
mahirsaid wrote: post #102

The whole idea of polarized opposite parties in the U.S. has gotten out of hand. like science is needed for humanity to further progress. To say the left needs to do this, and the right needs to do that is delusional in its own right. The joint effort comes first or should come first along with logical decisions not based on whether you like the opposite party or not. its about the nation as a whole.

It's because of the First Past The Post voting system that is used in the US, which means winner takes all. If you want to understand why the US seems so uniquely politically divided, then you will understand once you understand how FPTP voting works and how it inevitably leads to binary politics. Most countries have a voting system that leads to broader representation. US politics will always be black and white and…

It's a problem in Canada as well. I believe FPTP's issues are exacerbated by modern developments like social media, but it's just a hunch

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#118

Post by steve_adams_86 »

sumeno wrote: post #77
reval wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, why does this have to be a left-leaning initiative? I personally don’t use these political labels as I’m often confused by how they are used.

Because the right is trying to dismantle all those things

I suspect it's a minority of people on the right, and frankly, I've known people on the left (in Canada, at least) who antagonize science and various institutions for no other reason than gut feelings. People on extreme ends of political spectrums are problematic, period. They've always been present, but the Internet amplifies their mania to all of us like never before

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#119

Post by notahacker »

mothballed wrote: post #70
notahacker wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine all the things we could get done if people donated only 1/3 of what our taxes currently are, and we just shit-canned the notion of taxes. About a third as much, and this is assuming that people actually donate that much, which as a rule they don't, not even where people don't pay taxes.

Even if they paid private enterprises and didn't donate, they could recreate much of government functions, this time not under a monopoly with a captive buyer. I presume many people would want many of those services even if they chose to buy rather than donate them.

You tried that with healthcare. Turns out lots of people want to buy it, it just costs a large multiple of what everyone else in the world pay because actually a bunch of private sector middlemen doing the same adminstrative roles the government does isn't automatically more efficient.

Re: EPA tells some scientists to stop publishing studies

#120

Post by doctor_radium »

layer8 wrote: post #40
goku12 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wind power is bad, and "clean coal" is good. Can somebody explain the psychology behind these beliefs? I'm pretty sure they know how coal is mined. They must surely have heard about the black lung disease and COPD. Where does this 'clean coal' concept come from? And if that's about the products of coal burning, is it too hard to imagine breathing in hot air containing soot, fly ash, some obnoxious oxides, some unbu…

It stands in the way of them making money, and making (lots of) money is psychologically fundamental to their identity, to them feeling superior, maybe because they don’t have much else to show for, or more charitably because they haven’t been taught more healthy values as children. Anything that limits their ability to make money is hard for them to reconcile with their self-image. It’s much easier to play down, dis…

I've begun wondering recently to what degree the American Psychiatric Association adding "the pursuit of money at all costs" to their book "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" would be both accurate, and a benefit to society:

https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm

Post reply on HN