rock jock
Member
Also untrue.In terms of worse violations of existing environmental laws? In terms of most damage to the environment? The answer to both is the same.
Also untrue.In terms of worse violations of existing environmental laws? In terms of most damage to the environment? The answer to both is the same.
My point is, if you don't trust the govt to accomplish these basic tasks, then you are a fool for ingesting anything they are responsible for inspecting. That would be the equivalent of buying a vehicle from a company that has the worst QA/QC in the world. Would you take such a car on the highway? Of course not. You would be taking your life into your own hands.Trusting??? That's a stretch. Just because they do it doesn't make me trust them or not trust them in any way shape or form.
That is not true at all. Most air, groundwater, and surface water contamination in the U.S. is associated with the historical practices of private industrial and commercial enterprises.
Also untrue.
My point is, if you don't trust the govt to accomplish these basic tasks, then you are a fool for ingesting anything they are responsible for inspecting. That would be the equivalent of buying a vehicle from a company that has the worst QA/QC in the world. Would you take such a car on the highway? Of course not. You would be taking your life into your own hands.
Interestingly enough I read an industry paper (some type of smelting process I believe) where they discovered that the EPA restrictions were actually delaying progress/updates in equipment and therefore prolonging and heightening level of air polution (arsenic I think). The gist was that most of these companies would have upgraded two or three times in the last decade to newer, faster and less poluting systems except that the EPA requirements are so strict that they would have had to upgrade the entire facility at the same time or be shut down.
Let's say I lived in a state like CA where they only allow us peasants to purchase one handgun per month anyway.