Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/index.php)

- Political Threads (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/forumdisplay.php?f=66)

- - Throw away your gear....... (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/showthread.php?t=91867)

Throw away your gear.......

Scott Pruitt is now head of the EPA.

Pollution from mining runoff, global warming, overharvesting resources??
Nah, that's fake news.
Not catching any fish?
You're just unlucky.....:spin:

these appointments are to make America great again..

Greater pollution

Greater schools (privatization)

Greater worker rights (less is better)

Greater banks (more profit)

Greater Tax plan (for the rich )

Greater USA ( on the world stage ??)

Make healthcare great again .. ( funny not even enrolled in ACA) out of pocket just went from 750 to 1k meds had zero deductible 200 year in a plan with over 50 thousand enrolled in the group ) and yet the GOP and Trump haven't an idea what they are going to do ...

Even many dont know ACA and obama care are the same thing More than one-third of Americans are unaware that ObamaCare and the Affordable Care Act are the same law.

Not sure how much greater the us can be than it all ready is

Greater stock market over 20k (trump take credit )no one it praised when O was at 19k (wasnt him)

unemployment 4.9 percent Trump said it was like maybe as high as 42% now he is happy with 4.9 O no credit

And Trump claims he ‘inherited a mess.’

Trump’s attempts to lower expectations don’t really hold up with reality.
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/...herited-a-mess

but again the truth and facts have no influence on Trump and those who support Him

What are you talking about, it's a finely tuned machine Trump has running, you must be ready fake news to think like that:laugha:

Notice the lack of comments defending this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1117124)

Notice the lack of comments defending this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not worth commenting on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1117126)

Not worth commenting on.

You don't give a #^&#^&#^&#^& about the enviroment? Got it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It is what it is, I can't control it so what is a comment going to do?

I don't defend destroying the environment, the opposite actually.
But the President is what he is. I would like to see some of the uber rich people sacrifice something before we sacrifice environmental damage.

It goes back to middle America felt their voice did not count and a lot of other stuff resulted in Trump being nominated , then elected. If anyone other than Hillary were nominated, Trump might not have won.

So Pruitt is the head of EPA, at least there is still an EPA. I don't think the sky is falling and somehow the fish are going to all die.

You can take all the money you're going to save not fishing and invest it for your retirement. Just know the investment advisor can now be more concerned with how much money he can make off you rather than how much money you will make.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1117133)

You don't give a #^&#^&#^&#^& about the enviroment? Got it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Throwing out a bunch of unexamined talking points are not worth discussing. If you want to flesh out your objection to Pruitt in a rational objectively examined way . . . and if you wish to discuss the effect of giving unelected regulators the power to create laws . . . that might be worth discussing. Otherwise it can just be hurling general political nonsense back and forth then going away after the ruffled feathers smooth out when both sides are done venting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1117124)

Notice the lack of comments defending this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's all Obama's fault. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by justplugit (Post 1117148)

It's all Obama's fault. :)

Um.....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by justplugit (Post 1117148)

It's all Obama's fault. :)

Yeah... he left...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian (Post 1117155)

Yeah... he left...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

A mess for sure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by justplugit (Post 1117182)

A mess for sure.

Obama did leave a mess in the form of social unrest. The whole idea that it was sort of acceptable for black lives matter protests to get out of hand was BS. Same with standing rock protests. But Obama was a steward for the enviroment. Trump will be a rapist.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by justplugit (Post 1117182)

A mess for sure.

In what way?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nebe (Post 1117183)

Agree with the message of black lives matter, disagree with the delivery.

Standing rock i have no issues with... move the #^&#^&#^&#^&ing pipeline
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Less regulations, potential for more beaches, land, opening for access to sportsmen. The last 8 years have been too kind to the greenies in getting areas closed, marine sanctuaries, etc. I'm hopeful this will end.

Quote:

Throwing out a bunch of unexamined talking points are not worth discussing.........

You know, when you tilt your head back and look down your nose at us, all we see are your boogers.

Scott Pruitt has made a career of suing environmental groups and agencies to block regulations and enable the fossil fuel industry to continue to operate with as little responsibility as possible for clean up and reclamation of mining sites and fracted(sp?) oil and gas wells polluting water tables as well. Another doubter of global warming (don't any of these guys ever go outside!!??) he's no fool and knows which side of the cracker has the jam. Trump wanted to do away with the EPA completely, let big business regulate themselves. While that might not be possible at first, I think that he(Puitt) will certainly weaken and and try to completely eliminate any regs that might slow big business down. Conversely though, I do support his stance that private industry should not be able to use federal eminent domain laws in a for profit enterprise.

He has stated he wants to do away with the Waters of the United States Rule. How I feel this might affect us is if the EPA regulations are weakend or loosely enforced is there will be increased pollution at all points, runoff will destroy breeding grounds for fish and habitat for their food base. Or, big companies like Omega Protein will be allowed to take every last menhaden, herring and groundfish left, sell the ground up meal to India or China, and then go belly up and make the Fed bail them out. In the mean time, the stocks of market fish will (continue to) crash.
We have to give the ocean time to heal, we've been beating the crap out of it for too long IMHO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DZ (Post 1117191)

DZ you really believe that? I foresee more privatization of lands, which rarely increases access.

I am no in favor of how the last few marine sanctuaries were decided, however, there is science out there that having no go/take areas, particularly for mobile gear (dragging) is definitely a benefit to surrounding areas in terms of recruitment and survival of juveniles....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by DZ (Post 1117191)

I can appreciate the spirit behind the message, but in practice, reduced regulation in this country in areas that have proven themselves vulnerable to abuse, rarely results in anything positive.

On paper, communism sounds really enticing too!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Letting oil and coal companies regulate them selves is like saying that after you take the fence down, you trust the fox to only take 1 chicken.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justfishin' (Post 1117193)

You know, when you tilt your head back and look down your nose at us, all we see are your boogers.

I didn't want to respond at all. Not to the first three posts which were just general negative snarky remarks about Pruitt's appointment. I didn't see anything in such remarks worth commenting on. I did so only because Nebe pointedly noted the lack of comments on the matter (from the opposition I presume.) I apologize if that offends you.

Scott Pruitt has made a career of suing environmental groups and agencies to block regulations and enable the fossil fuel industry to continue to operate with as little responsibility as possible for clean up and reclamation of mining sites and fracted(sp?) oil and gas wells polluting water tables as well.

That certainly is more specific than your original comment, but still too general and more one sided opinion rather than argued fact. Suing an environmental group might be bad or good. One would have to argue the facts. Same goes for blocking regulations. Might be the right thing to do. Enabling someone to have as little responsibility as possible for clean up may be proper depending on the circumstance. Allowing the pollution of water tables doesn't sound good, but maybe it is worded to specifically make it sound bad--again what are the details.

Another doubter of global warming (don't any of these guys ever go outside!!??) he's no fool and knows which side of the cracker has the jam.

He has stated that he believes there is warming but is not certain how much is due to specified human activity.

Trump wanted to do away with the EPA completely, let big business regulate themselves.

If the EPA was eliminated, business, big or small, would still be regulated. I'm sure the Trump administration thinks it would be over-regulated. In many ways I agree with that.

As for environmental regulation, the states would take on a more complete role in regulation. And Congress can assume its proper federal role of regulator rather than giving unelected officials the plenary power to do so.

While that might not be possible at first, I think that he(Puitt) will certainly weaken and and try to completely eliminate any regs that might slow big business down.

My suspicion is that he will try to make regulation more constitutionally defensible. Make Congress more directly responsible rather than giving unelected regulators total control of making laws regarding the environment. I get the impression that he wants more state input in the regulatory process as well.

Conversely though, I do support his stance that private industry should not be able to use federal eminent domain laws in a for profit enterprise.

He has stated he wants to do away with the Waters of the United States Rule.

My limited understanding is that he wants it to be re-written with more specificity and practicality. And, again, have more state input in the writing and enforcing, etc. The Waters rule is too vague to properly apply. It's lack of clarity renders it open to abuse by regulators who desire to "overreach." Here's a good article that details its problems and various ideas on what it needs:

[http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060049868//

How I feel this might affect us is if the EPA regulations are weakend or loosely enforced is there will be increased pollution at all points, runoff will destroy breeding grounds for fish and habitat for their food base. Or, big companies like Omega Protein will be allowed to take every last menhaden, herring and groundfish left, sell the ground up meal to India or China, and then go belly up and make the Fed bail them out. In the mean time, the stocks of market fish will (continue to) crash.

That sounds like a scenario that Trump would not want. Doubt if that would be allowed to happen.

We have to give the ocean time to heal, we've been beating the crap out of it for too long IMHO.

Well the Ocean might be another matter. Certainly the rest of the world wants their input. Don't think the EPA has the power to regulate the world's waters.

For me, the proper question is should regulation be state responsibility or Federal. And whatever regulation the Federal government should, constitutionally, have the power over, should that power be delegated to agencies. And should those agencies have plenary power to regulate--to legislate, enforce, and adjudicate their regulations--or should they be merely advisory agencies which advise on their appointed matters and/or recommend various regulations to Congress which should have the final responsibility of legislation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaulS (Post 1117139)

That seems to have been the case with me since I began investing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i was rather shocked that trumpet said absolutely nothing about the 12 tornado's
that ravaged the south recently - so natural disasters aren't news worthy i guess

and this is with regulations

An underground pipeline that runs through multiple Midwestern states has leaked an estimated 138,000 gallons of diesel fuel, according to the company that owns it, Magellan Midstream Partners.

Another pipeline operated by Magellan leaked near Decatur, Neb., last October, according to the Omaha World-Herald, which reported that a ruptured pipe carrying anhydrous ammonia killed one person and led to the evacuation of 23 households.

In 2010, the company agreed to pay a $46,200 penalty for violating the Clean Water Act, after an estimated 5,000 gallons of diesel spilled into a creek near Milford, Iowa. That year, Magellan was also fined $418,000 for a 45,000-gallon gasoline spill in Oklahoma.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1117235)

and this is with regulations

I know right...look what has happened despite all of our immigration laws and regulations ......

And now they've begun- today he's asking for deep cuts to the EPA and the State Department, looking to bolster the military war chest. This sucks- this A**hole is looking to start a fight somewhere- probably the Mideast or N.Korea- to get us to look the other way while he and his pals make billions ...........