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

391–400 of 508 posts

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#391

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #365
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it’s framed differently. The Democratic base don’t consider themselves to have thrown a “shitfest” over Keystone XL, and don’t consider Biden’s day 1 executive order killing it to be “red meat”.

Biden day 1 executive order was over 4 fucking years ago. About a week ago a bunch of Koreans were rounded up and deported out of the country. Less than 48h ago republicans were saying the Charlie Kirk killer was a trans and his body wasn’t even cold yet. Cmon bro, these are not comparable. The democrats simply don’t do red meat shitfest fight stuff.

It's not comparable because you agree with the Democrats' positions! When it comes to immigration, for example, I'm sure you'd agree with me that Trump's efforts to end various TPS designations are "red meat shitfest fight stuff" - if he succeeds, he'll get to deport quite a lot of people. But Biden's extensions of those very same TPS designations (some of which have been "temporary" for decades now) weren't "red meat", because you agree with Biden that the designations are correct and the people protected by them should not have to leave the US. The Democratic base just isn't very interested in framing politicians as brave disruptive fighters for doing the right thing.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#392

Post by wtfwhateven »

whatever1 wrote: post #66
he0001 wrote: post #4

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

[flagged]

How do you suggest this is implemented for mains water supply? Should miles and miles of new water pipe be laid down for every new water supply company on the area and the customer is given a key from Water Corp to turn on their Water Corp supply valve and Water 4 U Corp sends a guy to turn off their valve?

Have you ever even paid a water bill in your life or spent a few seconds thinking about how water is actually supplied?

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#393

Post by smegger001 »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #274
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.

Most people low and middle class people I have met my whole life drink unfiltered tap water unless there is a reason not to (safety or particularly foul taste). you might be in a bit of bubble. Not that it matter though as most bottled water is just bottled tap water anyway.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#394

Post by mindslight »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #273
chung8123 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What are the current ideals of so-called conservatives? Being a libertarian who can entertain both left and right approaches to problems, I thought I had a decent handle on where they were coming from. But then they seemingly went bat-shit insane during Covid. I try to appeal to what I thought were some of the underlying values (eg belief in institutions, America as a force for good in the world, individual liberty, slow and measured change), and always get written off like I just don't understand or something. But never any explanation for what I'm actually missing. The best I've been able to come up with is that they've set aside actually living those values in favor of thinking that we need some massive societal cataclysm to get back to a place where those values have more of a draw, but that's clearly not itself conservative.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#395

Post by rickydroll »

mandeepj wrote: post #341
rickydroll wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One possible solution is to get all the liberal/progressive voters to register as Republicans and run liberal/progressive candidates as Republicans. Built on the Eisenhower platform of 1956 and his record as a military commander. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-p... Granted, it's not ideal, but coming in the back door may be necessary.

> get all the liberal/progressive voters to register as Republicans Sorry, didn’t quite follow that! You can vote for anyone regardless of who you Registered for? Or, was that suppose to give a misleading signal to Republicans that they have way too many voters? :-)

Sorry, you have to register as a republican so you can vote in the primary. Primaries are frequently the only competitive race in an election.

Also, running as a republican gets past the automatic "reject liberal/democrat" reflex

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#396

Post by yndoendo »

teddyh wrote: post #208
yndoendo wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also a social water cooler like aspect. Historically brakes were only provided to those that smoke so people took up smoking so they could get a brake. Some companies still follow this asinine ideology and do not provide brakes to non-smokers.

(You mean “break”, not “brake”.)

Yes, unable to edit to fix typos.

And no I do not condone smoking. It was to point out system design flaws in the business world.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#397

Post by sgnelson »

yaroslavvb wrote: post #172
sgnelson wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well shit, we can really lower water bills by getting rid of all clean water regulations and simply stop water treatment. Think of the cost savings!

Stricter (but not looser) standards can be imposed on state level. Canada has no binding national drinking water law, they leave it to territories/provinces to decide how to implement guidelines.

Watersheds don't follow political boundaries.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#398

Post by cogman10 »

tombert wrote: post #381
cogman10 wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because big oil money juices right wing media and guess what industry finds keeping water and air clean to be a negative in their bottom line? Get enough money and you can buy a party position.

Are PFAS's a by-product of stuff like teflon and plastic production and the like? I know big oil is evil but I'm not sure that they're the boogieman in this case.

In this specific case, no they aren't the main villain. They are more the catalyst that turned the republican party into the anti-environment party (and thus anti-clean water).

The EPA regulating PFAS means it can also regulate the effects of fracking.

That's the context to understand how Republicans went from the Nixon party who created the EPA to today's party that hates all parts of the EPA.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#399

Post by OutOfHere »

tyleo wrote: post #17
he0001 wrote: post #4

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

I would guess normal corruption. Companies making a profit here simply fund the politicians in power and are getting their kickbacks.

Corruption is normally illegal. There is nothing normal about this legalized form of corruption. It is a core structural failure.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#400

Post by beAbU »

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.

Thanks for calling this out. I share your frustration.

As a non-american it's becoming more and more difficult to tell the two sides apart with all the shit flinging going on.

Post reply on HN