Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
Wow. This is so obviously false that I hardly have to post to refute it.
Why bullshit so hard, man? Why is that your first instinct? I'm here calling you on bullshit and you defend your bullshit with more bullshit.
|
I left off the direct positive economic impacts of the environmental programs of the 1970s (not to mention the indirect positive health impacts which also contribute to greater productivity).
Much the same argument was made about the Clean Air Act and other environmental regulatory programs of the 1970s – it will be too burdensome on businesses; it will cost too much and jobs will be lost and the economy will be crippled.
And that was the bullshit, much like you are spreading now.
What we learned from the environmental regulatory programs of the 1970 was that they helped grow the economy in a forward thinking manner, spurring investments in design, manufacturing, installation and operation of new pollution-reducing technologies.
And those technologies, developed in the US with support from govt R&D and govt subsidies made the US the world leader in anti-pollution technologies and generated a $multi- billion export economy for US companies that still plays a significant role in the US trade balance.
If we dont act soon and more decisively , we will effectively give the clean energy technologies future, from battery technology to nanotechnology applications for renewables to China, the EU, Israel, India and it will be companies in those countries that will replace the 1970s US companies as environmental technology leaders.
OR we can just "Drill Baby, Drill"