Reuters misses the real lesson to be learned from information

Now that our bloated government has shut down, we are getting reports from the DNC propaganda arm better known as the LSM about how horrible things are. Queue this article on the EPA which reveals that:

(Reuters) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will take one of the biggest hits of any federal agency if the government shuts down this week, operating with under 7 percent of its employees, according to guidance issued by the agency.

Among those furloughed would be most workers at the Office of Air and Radiation, which is in charge of writing and implementing most of the EPA’s major air pollution rules. The clock would also stop, for now, on the EPA’s eagerly-awaited proposal on renewable fuel volume standards for 2014.

The EPA said its plan for dealing with a shutdown would classify 1,069 employees, out of 16,205, as essential. These employees would continue to work if Congress fails to secure a budget deal by midnight Monday to avoid disruption to federal funding.

Reuters goes on to tell us what a tragedy it is that all these people are furlouged. Me, I see a bloated agency that could reduce its workforce of unessential employees by some 15K people, or even better yet, be done away with. Since the EPA is a hack of an agency that the left uses to straddle the country with bullshit that congress critters are afraid to pass – it would likely cost them their cushy seat as the voters kick them out – I think doing away with it would be the best option for American tax payers. Instead, I bet what will happen is that these people will all get a paid vacation that us tax payers can foot the bill for. When they come back they will also be extra motivated to do stupid things that cause more harm than anything else.

Comments are closed.

  1. Hal_10000

    See, I’m in the position of thinking the EPA needs to be reined in but needs to continue to exist and have authority. Funny me, I like there being no lead in my paint, my food and my air. And it was the EPA that made sure it was gotten rid of. As technology continues to advance, we will continue to be faced with new environmental dangers (such as the filth spewed in manufacturing batteries for “clean” hybrid cars).

    The incentives for polluters are simply too perverse to ignore. It becomes easy to persuade yourself that whatever it is you’re spewing into the air or water isn’t too bad when there’s so much money at stake. The companies that made lead spent decades sticking their fingers in their ears as their own employees literally lost their minds to lead poisoning.

    The big problem is not EPA; it’s Congress. They’ve delegated too much of their authority, they’ve tasked EPA with enforcing insane mandates on biofuels and they’ve punted on reviewing environmental law.

    Thumb up 4

  2. AlexInCT *

    Funny me, I like there being no lead in my paint, my food and my air.

    You think I don’t? The difference between me and you is that I know the EPA isn’t why that happened or who keeps it from happening Hal.

    The incentives for polluters are simply too perverse to ignore.

    What’s perverse is how the EPA enforces this haphazardly based on politics. And I can tell you for sure that the EPA shouldn’t be making their own regulations: that’s congress’ job.

    Thumb up 5

  3. Mook

    Funny me, I like there being no lead in my paint, my food and my air. And it was the EPA that made sure it was gotten rid of.

    Hal, please stop your phony bullshit posing as if you’re a libertarian. No one who is real libertarian could believe as you claim to believe.

    Thumb up 1

  4. CM

    “Hal, please stop your phony bullshit posing as if you’re a libertarian.”

    How do libertarians deal with lead in paint, food and air?

    Thumb up 1

  5. Mook

    How do libertarians deal with lead in paint, food and air?

    Only government, of course. Because there is no other known way to avoid excessive lead in our food! Government action is the only possible solution

    Thumb up 3

  6. Mississippi Yankee

    “How do libertarians deal with lead in paint, food and air?”

    I have it sent to New Zealand. That way I get to read your sillier and sillier comments.

    Thumb up 2

  7. Hal_10000

    You think I don’t? The difference between me and you is that I know the EPA isn’t why that happened or who keeps it from happening Hal.

    Hal, please stop your phony bullshit posing as if you’re a libertarian. No one who is real libertarian could believe as you claim to believe.

    Libertarianism ≠ Anarchy

    There are many points on which the EPA is doing the wrong thing. But there are few libertarians who think that we should have NO environmental regulation. Almost all of the improvements in EPA’s policies — such as cap-and-trade on SO2 emissions — have come from libertarian organizations like PERC (who do not think EPA should be abolished).

    CM asked a legitimate and important question and you guys just ignored him: how would you ban lead (which was actually banned by CPSC but other pollutants are regulated and banned by EPA). I like to use the example of lead because there was half a fucking century of evidence that this stuff was bad bad shit and it was ignored. The market is not a magical device for solving all our problems. It is preferable to solving them with government, but there are areas where it can not act. Pollution is a rare example. You can pollute the shit out of someone else’s air and water while living somewhere completely unaffected.

    Consumer pressure and the market have their place: Apple cleaned up their products to increase consumer appeal. But I’d just as soon not have kids choking to death and damaging their brains while we wait for the market to work its magic.

    LA’s air is clean; it wasn’t four decade ago. The Cayahoga no longer catches fire; that wasn’t true four decade ago. Lake Erie is recovering after being almost dead four decades ago. Cars don’t spew filth into the air and our homes aren’t filled with lead. To pretend that these improvement would have happened on their own belies decades of experience and any understanding of human nature.

    Thumb up 4

  8. Hal_10000

    To clarify a point: I don’t think the people who made lead or any other pollutant; or the people who insisted catalytic converters would cost thousands per car; or the people who said you couldn’t clean up Cayahoga did so because they were evil. They didn’t want people to suffer or the Earth to be polluted. But one thing I’ve learned is that human beings are just OK at reasoning. What we’re really awesome at is rationalizing. And it’s very easy — when prestige and money and power are at stake — to persuade yourself of something other than the obvious. It’s easy to persuade yourself that lead isn’t that dangerous. Or that catalytic converters will be outrageously expensive. Or that air bags are a bad idea. Or the ozone layer isn’t in trouble. It’s just too damned easy. That is why we need an outsider regulator — flawed thought they are. Because relying on people’s enlightened self-interest doesn’t always work.

    Thumb up 2

  9. CM

    Wow you’ve cooked your goose well and truly now Hal with that reasonable non-ideological response. Clearly you’re expected to just avoid, like Mook and MY have done.

    Thumb up 2

  10. Section8

    LP platform is and has been to abolish the EPA. Polluters should be held accountable via court rulings in trials and not bureaucrats. That has always been their stance. Don’t rely on Hal to educate you about the LP or libertarians. He’s a moderate Democrat, but I think we all know that.

    Thumb up 1

  11. Hal_10000

    1) Where? http://www.lp.org/platform

    2) I’ve always been a “small l” libertarian.

    3) There IS a lot of debate about this in the libertarian movement. Read P.J. O’Rourke’s book All The Trouble in the World (I think) where he points out that the property rights argument can only carry you so far. You can’t run around in traffic handing out torts to everyone in a car that’s polluting.

    Thumb up 1

  12. AlexInCT *

    There are many points on which the EPA is doing the wrong thing. But there are few libertarians who think that we should have NO environmental regulation.

    This is the whole if you think our government is bloated, corrupt, and inefficient, and needs to be rolled back big-time, you must want to live in Somalia argument writ large that progtards bring out whenever someone tells them we need smaller government, again Hal. Just because I want to do away with the EPA, or for that mater other useless departments like the department of education, doesn’t mean that I don’t want no environmental rules and controls, but especially harsh punishment for those that violate them, or want education to be done away with.

    To me the effect/effectiveness of what the EPA & the DOE do is like someone deciding we should be using 20KT nukes to kill mosquitoes. It is massive & ridiculous overkill, of the worst possible kind, and does far more harm than good. At this point I am hard pressed to feel there is anything positive coming from the EPA or DOE.

    Almost all of the improvements in EPA’s policies — such as cap-and-trade on SO2 emissions — have come from libertarian organizations like PERC (who do not think EPA should be abolished).

    If the EPA didn’t exist, congress would have done this work, as it was intended. I distinctly recall our constitution giving the power to make laws, including these sorts of laws, to our congress. Just because our political elite have abdicated that function so they can avoid the pain of making decisions that are costly, unpopular, and do people more harm then good, to avoid getting punished at the polls of all things, shouldn’t mean that an entity like the EPA gets to step in and circumvent the process and create its own laws. Especially since they are so totally politicized and corrupt about it. Even if what the EPA was doing was awesome, I would object to it doing it. And the EPA, like IRS, is a bunch of crooks and thugs. When you have a highly contagious and totally diseased entity and that disease is deadly, you kill that organism. And the EPA has been and continues to be worse for America and Americans at this time than the Bubonic Plague would be.

    Thumb up 1

  13. AlexInCT *

    LP platform is and has been to abolish the EPA. Polluters should be held accountable via court rulings in trials and not bureaucrats. That has always been their stance.

    ^^^THIS^^^^

    Thumb up 0

  14. Section8

    This is their 2000 platform archive, and you are correct that the current version does not specifically state the EPA should be abolished, but I have seen nothing to indicate they have backed away from that stance. I quit paying dues in early 2000 but still lean towards the party platform except for some issues such as immigration reform.

    2000 platform archive

    Current LP candidate EPA

    Regardless, we don’t need an EPA that like many of our other departments are simply a means for government corruption, but only if angels were in charge. Courts rulings, common law, and the individual states should be responsible. Hoping to vote the right people in to magically clean this corruption up just doesn’t work and it won’t. You have to cut it out.

    Abolish the EPA. I know it sounds wacky to most, but then again we’re dealing with a population that doesn’t seem to have any issue with a growing police state, crushing debt, and an economy that goes nowhere because of all the red tape. And as far as the most “educated” generation, they haven’t done shit other than learn the skills needed to move back in to mom and dad’s basement. I wonder what the reaction would have been if someone would have had that as their platform, but here we are.

    Thumb up 1

  15. AlexInCT *

    Abolish the EPA. I know it sounds wacky to most, but then again we’re dealing with a population that doesn’t seem to have any issue with a growing police state, crushing debt, and an economy that goes nowhere because of all the red tape.

    Some of us do worry and care, but we are basically shouted down with accusations of doing this because we want to kill people or live in a place with no government and that looks like Somalia.

    Thumb up 0