9 ms·

What a disgrace. Abysmal leadership in this country.

by wilburx3 20d ago

shimman 20d ago
This seems pretty inline with our leadership tho. This country has always put profits above people.
- bayindirh 20d ago
  > This country has always put profits above people. Please, the correct word is "value". Using the word p-word makes people understand and get irritated.
  - shimman 20d ago
    The easiest way to radicalize workers is to simply tell them what profit is.
    - Muromec 20d ago
      You are not radicalized enough.
      - shimman 20d ago
        I'm at the stage where I still believe in elections + resistance.
- lanstin 20d ago
  Allowing more carbon dioxide sources is going to be distinctly harmful to profits in the mid-term. As with racial bias, strict gender roles, anti-vaxxing, and being anti-science, being pro-carbon burn is ultimately a foolish anti-truth stance as silly and ill-outcomed as any three year old insisting that they can stay up all night.
  - sailfast 20d ago
    Do the octogenarians in power not remember when they couldn’t breathe because of the lead in the gas in the 60s and the lack of emissions controls on everything? Do they yearn for the mines and coal dust of early industrial England? Everybody loves clean air and water but apparently forget why they have it in the first place.
    - metalliqaz 20d ago
      no, they don't
    - triceratops 20d ago
      > Do the octogenarians in power not remember when they couldn’t breathe because of the lead in the gas Lead causes brain damage and memory impairment...
      - bayindirh 20d ago
        ...and lead was standardized only because it was patentable. Otherwise ethanol was enough to achieve the same thing. Brought you proudly by Thomas Midgley, Jr., who solved science problems by making bigger ones. - https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/thomas-midgley-and-the-toxic-legacy-of-leaded-fuel/4014684.article https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/thomas-midgley-and-t... - https://www.ehn.org/thomas-midgley-jr-lead-poisoning https://www.ehn.org/thomas-midgley-jr-lead-poisoning
        triceratops 20d ago
        > and lead was standardized only because it was patentable That doesn't make much sense to me. It would be more profitable to sell gasoline without lead tetraethyl because you wouldn't be forced to buy a patented product. Just pour a shot of pure grain spirit in your tank on every refill (or however much is needed). It's more plausible that engine technology today has improved to the point that ethanol alone can eliminate knocking. The link you provided gives more context. > One already-known remedy was replacing a substantial proportion of the gasoline fuel with ethanol – though ethanol’s lower energy content made the engines less efficient...[General Motors and Standard Oil] claimed that ethanol – often used in automobile fuels before the war – was an unsatisfactory alternative. and > Unless the fuel producers themselves get into this work of investigating the properties of their fuels, there is a good chance that they may have to pay tribute to others Translation: anti-knock compounds was a good business for Standard Oil to be in themselves. Instead of paying another company for a patented product.
- browningstreet 20d ago
  Go research the green house gas emission projections for the end of Biden's term and the projections for Trump's administration. Hand-waving dismissiveness doesn't serve when there were, in fact, significant (and yet not sufficient) efforts written into law. We can have better things, but we as a people certainly need to do better. There are Mamdanis and there are Trumps. There's a difference.
  - shimman 20d ago
    Okay? That has nothing to do with what I said, what about the Biden admin helping run cover for the Gaza genocide? Was that not a case of putting profits, the military industrial complex, above people? What about when Clinton signed NAFTA and condemned swaths of the US to poverty (rustbelt is not a term of endearment)? I mean this country's founding document had carveouts for slavers and some of the first laws signed into Congress was the fugitive slave act. Sorry but it's not US leadership that cares about Americans, it has always been Americans themselves fighting for justice + a better a life. I am not hand waving anything, this is the reality of neoliberalism and has been a core American trait since our founding: some Americans are more equal than others, elites deserve more money. There was only a small period of time in our country's history, 1940s to late 1960s, where workers had a true say at the table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Compression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Compression We have yet to return to the only period of history that not only improved the lives of workers materially, but also spiritually by increasing civil rights and making it so that the first time in our nation's history that every American had the legal right to vote. I mean FFS our leaders are literally allowed to engage in insider trading and legalized bribes, you're trying to tell me with a straight face that these same ghouls somehow have a soul and want to save the planet?
    - ceejayoz 20d ago
      Whataboutism works a lot better if you don't literally start sentences with "what about..."
      - shimman 20d ago
iso1631 20d ago
This is exactly what the leadership wanted. And as they won the election. Not like in 2016 (where more people voted for the other guy but they won due to the difference in power of votes), or in 2020 (where they lost), they won a clear outright victory, it's exactly what the USA wanted.
- jjuel 20d ago
  If you are talking about the billionaires and trillionaire who spent as much as they could to get this elected then you are correct it is what THEY wanted.
  - inigyou 20d ago
    They got what they wanted by making half the country's idiots want it too
    - iso1631 19d ago
      Only half? So you're saying half the country's idiots voted the other way? That suggests more non-idiots voted Trump than Harris.
- ceejayoz 20d ago
  I'm not sure it's fair to characterize 49.8% of the vote as a "clear outright victory". Harris got 48.3%; that's a pretty close to even split. The majority of voters didn't vote for this.
  - s3p 20d ago
    The majority of voters who voted for president got the president they wanted. With a president comes admin of all these agencies. So yeah they voted for this.
    - ceejayoz 20d ago
      > The majority of voters who voted for president got the president they wanted. Again, no. 49.8% is not a majority. It is a plurality.
metalliqaz 20d ago
It's consistent leadership. Malevolent and stupid, but consistent.
- claytongulick 20d ago
  Are you sure you're aiming your ire in the right direction in this case? The EPA provided guidance that the CAA (Clean Air Act) itself was written to not apply in these cases. Shouldn't you be angry at the authors of the law?
  - pkilgore 20d ago
    Well the one thing I know about lawyers: Utterly impossible to get them to write a dishonest guidance document interpreting the law in a way that benefits them somehow. You got me. Check mate. No counterarguments here.
    - claytongulick 20d ago
      The law was specifically written to exclude things like independent power sources and backup generators etc... From 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(17)(A) [1] which defines the power generation units that are covered by the law: "(17) (A)The term “utility unit” means— (i)a unit that serves a generator in any State that produces electricity for sale, or (ii)a unit that, during 1985, served a generator in any State that produced electricity for sale." The key phrasing there is "for sale". The clarification from the EPA simply restated that these units don't fall under the regulatory authority because under a plain reading of the law, they are not generating power for sale. [2] The EPA certainly cites Trump's power agenda several times, but that doesn't make the plain text interpretation of the law wrong. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 [2] https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guidance-further-president-trumps-agenda-promoting-data-centers https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guida...
  - inigyou 20d ago
    The EPA is currently run by MAGA people.

What a disgrace. Abysmal leadership in this country.

shimman 20d ago

This seems pretty inline with our leadership tho. This country has always put profits above people.

bayindirh 20d ago
> This country has always put profits above people. Please, the correct word is "value". Using the word p-word makes people understand and get irritated.
- shimman 20d ago
  The easiest way to radicalize workers is to simply tell them what profit is.
  - Muromec 20d ago
    You are not radicalized enough.
    - shimman 20d ago
      I'm at the stage where I still believe in elections + resistance.
lanstin 20d ago
Allowing more carbon dioxide sources is going to be distinctly harmful to profits in the mid-term. As with racial bias, strict gender roles, anti-vaxxing, and being anti-science, being pro-carbon burn is ultimately a foolish anti-truth stance as silly and ill-outcomed as any three year old insisting that they can stay up all night.
- sailfast 20d ago
  Do the octogenarians in power not remember when they couldn’t breathe because of the lead in the gas in the 60s and the lack of emissions controls on everything? Do they yearn for the mines and coal dust of early industrial England? Everybody loves clean air and water but apparently forget why they have it in the first place.
  - metalliqaz 20d ago
    no, they don't
  - triceratops 20d ago
    > Do the octogenarians in power not remember when they couldn’t breathe because of the lead in the gas Lead causes brain damage and memory impairment...
    - bayindirh 20d ago
      ...and lead was standardized only because it was patentable. Otherwise ethanol was enough to achieve the same thing. Brought you proudly by Thomas Midgley, Jr., who solved science problems by making bigger ones. - https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/thomas-midgley-and-the-toxic-legacy-of-leaded-fuel/4014684.article https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/thomas-midgley-and-t... - https://www.ehn.org/thomas-midgley-jr-lead-poisoning https://www.ehn.org/thomas-midgley-jr-lead-poisoning
      - triceratops 20d ago
        > and lead was standardized only because it was patentable That doesn't make much sense to me. It would be more profitable to sell gasoline without lead tetraethyl because you wouldn't be forced to buy a patented product. Just pour a shot of pure grain spirit in your tank on every refill (or however much is needed). It's more plausible that engine technology today has improved to the point that ethanol alone can eliminate knocking. The link you provided gives more context. > One already-known remedy was replacing a substantial proportion of the gasoline fuel with ethanol – though ethanol’s lower energy content made the engines less efficient...[General Motors and Standard Oil] claimed that ethanol – often used in automobile fuels before the war – was an unsatisfactory alternative. and > Unless the fuel producers themselves get into this work of investigating the properties of their fuels, there is a good chance that they may have to pay tribute to others Translation: anti-knock compounds was a good business for Standard Oil to be in themselves. Instead of paying another company for a patented product.
browningstreet 20d ago
Go research the green house gas emission projections for the end of Biden's term and the projections for Trump's administration. Hand-waving dismissiveness doesn't serve when there were, in fact, significant (and yet not sufficient) efforts written into law. We can have better things, but we as a people certainly need to do better. There are Mamdanis and there are Trumps. There's a difference.
- shimman 20d ago
  Okay? That has nothing to do with what I said, what about the Biden admin helping run cover for the Gaza genocide? Was that not a case of putting profits, the military industrial complex, above people? What about when Clinton signed NAFTA and condemned swaths of the US to poverty (rustbelt is not a term of endearment)? I mean this country's founding document had carveouts for slavers and some of the first laws signed into Congress was the fugitive slave act. Sorry but it's not US leadership that cares about Americans, it has always been Americans themselves fighting for justice + a better a life. I am not hand waving anything, this is the reality of neoliberalism and has been a core American trait since our founding: some Americans are more equal than others, elites deserve more money. There was only a small period of time in our country's history, 1940s to late 1960s, where workers had a true say at the table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Compression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Compression We have yet to return to the only period of history that not only improved the lives of workers materially, but also spiritually by increasing civil rights and making it so that the first time in our nation's history that every American had the legal right to vote. I mean FFS our leaders are literally allowed to engage in insider trading and legalized bribes, you're trying to tell me with a straight face that these same ghouls somehow have a soul and want to save the planet?
  - ceejayoz 20d ago
    Whataboutism works a lot better if you don't literally start sentences with "what about..."
    - shimman 20d ago

iso1631 20d ago

This is exactly what the leadership wanted. And as they won the election. Not like in 2016 (where more people voted for the other guy but they won due to the difference in power of votes), or in 2020 (where they lost), they won a clear outright victory, it's exactly what the USA wanted.

jjuel 20d ago
If you are talking about the billionaires and trillionaire who spent as much as they could to get this elected then you are correct it is what THEY wanted.
- inigyou 20d ago
  They got what they wanted by making half the country's idiots want it too
  - iso1631 19d ago
    Only half? So you're saying half the country's idiots voted the other way? That suggests more non-idiots voted Trump than Harris.
ceejayoz 20d ago
I'm not sure it's fair to characterize 49.8% of the vote as a "clear outright victory". Harris got 48.3%; that's a pretty close to even split. The majority of voters didn't vote for this.
- s3p 20d ago
  The majority of voters who voted for president got the president they wanted. With a president comes admin of all these agencies. So yeah they voted for this.
  - ceejayoz 20d ago
    > The majority of voters who voted for president got the president they wanted. Again, no. 49.8% is not a majority. It is a plurality.

metalliqaz 20d ago

It's consistent leadership. Malevolent and stupid, but consistent.

claytongulick 20d ago
Are you sure you're aiming your ire in the right direction in this case? The EPA provided guidance that the CAA (Clean Air Act) itself was written to not apply in these cases. Shouldn't you be angry at the authors of the law?
- pkilgore 20d ago
  Well the one thing I know about lawyers: Utterly impossible to get them to write a dishonest guidance document interpreting the law in a way that benefits them somehow. You got me. Check mate. No counterarguments here.
  - claytongulick 20d ago
    The law was specifically written to exclude things like independent power sources and backup generators etc... From 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(17)(A) [1] which defines the power generation units that are covered by the law: "(17) (A)The term “utility unit” means— (i)a unit that serves a generator in any State that produces electricity for sale, or (ii)a unit that, during 1985, served a generator in any State that produced electricity for sale." The key phrasing there is "for sale". The clarification from the EPA simply restated that these units don't fall under the regulatory authority because under a plain reading of the law, they are not generating power for sale. [2] The EPA certainly cites Trump's power agenda several times, but that doesn't make the plain text interpretation of the law wrong. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 [2] https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guidance-further-president-trumps-agenda-promoting-data-centers https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guida...
- inigyou 20d ago
  The EPA is currently run by MAGA people.