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

EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

earthjustice.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 508 posts

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#271

Post by adrr »

flkiwi wrote: post #262
adrr wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name a purity test. Stop dancing around the question.

Name a meaningful victory of the American left's approach in the last 25 years. Stop dancing around the question.

The conservative masquerading as an independent blaming the left for fake issues of why as you can't support them. Trope is as old as time.

Strongest economies are from blue states. Poorest are red states. Same with crime. Health out comes(Life expectancy, infant. mortality). Who was the only president to run a surplus in recent history.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#272

Post by avazhi »

zzzeek wrote: post #211
avazhi wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You told me to go read a satirical work of fiction to understand why real life executives might make certain decisions. This is like telling me to read Lord of the Rings to understand, by analogy, what insert politician you hate here is thinking and how it's informing his use of policy. Fiction is fiction. I prefer non-fiction for informing what I think about other (actual) people and their decision making processes.

Animal Farm uses metaphor to make statements and observations about non-ficticious events. a non-fiction version of Animal Farm might be: "Authoritarianism is bad. Consider the case of the Russian Revolution leading to the rise and rule of Stalin. Imagine it's like the story of a farm taken over by authoritarian pigs: " the word "fiction" here is doing work for your argument that it's not qualified to do. the US Gove…

> the US Government is making the decisions they are in order to crush the population into submission.

Now we have what you're really trying to get at here: some tinfoil hat conspiratorialising where the US government is out to mind control/'crush' its population (or something). At least if you aren't telling me to read a subversive Socialist novel instead of just saying it outright it saves us both the time of trying to figure out what you really mean. I get it, big oppressive authoritarian government bad.

Look, I'm not a fan of much that the Trump admin is doing (certainly not this), I've never voted for him (I haven't lived in America in 20 years), and I'm fully aware of the US government's long history of pulling dodgy shit vis-a-vis medical research (pretending to treat syphilis in black people, anyone?) Nevertheless, I don't see everything that happens in the world, whether it involving US law or even ethically questionable administrations), as necessarily emanating from farsighted and ingeniously devious governmental planning. If anything, the last 10 years have demonstrated that federal governments are less competent and more inept than we ever thought they could be in the modern Big Brother world.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#273

Post by Workaccount2 »

chung8123 wrote: post #33
Apreche wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This debate style is pretty frustrating to me. Use a talking point for the other side and act like it is why the reason it the decision is made. It really does not lend itself to getting to the root of issues and finding what compromise is. In my opinion this added nothing to the conversation when in theory the op asked for a real answer.

The media would have a much harder time collecting ad dollars if they didn't use strawman arguments and misrepresentation to lock in an audience.

Ask a liberal about conservatives or a conservative about liberals and they have abso-fucking-lutely no idea what the ideals of the other side are. None whatsoever. Thanks silo'd media.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#274

Post by Workaccount2 »

he0001 wrote: post #4

Does anyone know why this is done? What is the reasoning here? Is this defendable in any way?

The answer is likely that the treatment is expensive, and most people aren't drinking tap water anyway.

My town completed it's pfas filtering system and water bill costs increased about 25% to cover it. I don't know one person in this town though who doesn't drink filtered water.

That being said, I do still support the filtering.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#275

Post by estearum »

tyleo wrote: post #264
estearum wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct, which as I said: " At least a SCOTUS decision," where "amend the Constitution" is a significantly higher bar to meet. If you think we're going to amend the Constitution to ban gender affirming care for inmates you're living in outerspace, but I suppose your position is that politicians are supposed to just say shit that has the correct hate-valence and then it's as-good-as-accomplished? Inmates received this…

> you're living in outerspace, but I suppose your position is that politicians are supposed to just say shit that has the correct hate-valence and then it's as-good-as-accomplished Your reaction proves the point that this is a purity test. I’m not taking a stance one way or the other but you aren't able to engage without arguing against points I didn’t make.

What?

Your argument: It is a purity test for politicians to say that transgender inmates should receive care (which Kamala passed, to the detriment of her electability)

My argument: It is actually SCOTUS who decides this (or would require a Constitutional amendment, which is obviously absurd)

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#276

Post by PartiallyTyped »

ReptileMan wrote: post #248
PartiallyTyped wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doritos even have different ingredients between EU countries. I have tested this in Denmark, Poland, Cyprus, Ireland and Germany.

That is mostly because the same brand made for Eastern europe tastes like shit compared to the stuff for western. Worst offenders are nutella and coca cola. but there are many others.

Indeed, Doritos in Poland tasted garbage compared to those in Denmark, Ireland, and Germany.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#277

Post by dylan604 »

NewJazz wrote: post #221
BoredPositron wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like a band-aid solution for bad governance.

No, it is not a band aid, it is the gold standard for water filtration. And not all water issues stem from bad governance. Sometimes there is just unwanted minerals in the water for natural reasons.

Like all of those yummy chemicals introduced to your well water after your neighbors allowed gas wells to be drilled on their property.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#278

Post by tyleo »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #257
tyleo wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. It’s the appearance of dying on hills.

The people making up that appearance are actually republicans, though, and I think it is utterly bizarre to feed into that appearance as the fault of democrats. It’s the republican strategy to say and do extreme histrionic shit as red meat for their base and then blame the democrats for doing it.

I’m not sure what your point is. This still seems like a purity test. Whether democrats wanted it to be a purity test or not republicans were able to successfully paint it as one.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#280

Post by SamoyedFurFluff »

tyleo wrote: post #278
SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people making up that appearance are actually republicans, though, and I think it is utterly bizarre to feed into that appearance as the fault of democrats. It’s the republican strategy to say and do extreme histrionic shit as red meat for their base and then blame the democrats for doing it.

I’m not sure what your point is. This still seems like a purity test. Whether democrats wanted it to be a purity test or not republicans were able to successfully paint it as one.

My point is that it is bizarre to blame democrats for making purity tests when republicans are making up purity tests. It’s like I deleted db in prod and then said how dare my co worker be pro prod db manipulation, when the co worker in question had stfu the whole time.
Post reply on HN