• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New EPA rules will cost more than 800,000 jobs

apdst

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,925
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Hotair.com, found a prime example of how the Obama administration is doing more to kill jobs, than to help the private sector create jobs. This is proof positive that the government can only kill jobs, not create jobs.

Actually, it’s not just the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s minority contingent that fears the loss of nearly a million jobs from new EPA rules on greenhouse gases and other emissions issues. It’s also groups like the United Steel Workers, Unions for Jobs and the Environment, and experts like King’s College Professor Ragnar Lofstedt. Hot Air got an exclusive look at a report that the EPW minority staff will release later this morning detailing the economic damage that an activist EPA will do to the American economy, and which will come at perhaps the worst possible time, both economically and politically.

The executive summary spells out the stakes involved in the effort to rein in the EPA:

•New standards for commercial and industrial boilers: up to 798,250 jobs at risk;
•The revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone: severe restrictions on job creation and business expansion in hundreds of counties nationwide.
•New standards for Portland Cement plants: up to 18 cement plants at risk of shutting down, threatening nearly 1,800 direct jobs and 9,000 indirect jobs;
•The Endangerment Finding/Tailoring Rules for Greenhouse Gas Emissions: higher energy costs; jobs moving overseas; severe economic impacts on the poor, the elderly, minorities, and those on fixed incomes; 6.1 million sources subject to EPA control and regulation

Hot Air » Exclusive: EPW report shows new EPA rules will cost more than 800,000 jobs
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,090
Reaction score
32,916
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Your title should probably read "may/might cost" not "will cost", since the report quite clearly says that these are feared job losses, not actual.
Well, it's an easy step to take a fear to the sky is falling. the politics of fear is based on that exact premise. And it works.

Sadly.
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
35,113
Reaction score
12,035
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Yea, get rid of the EPA and all those rules!... It will make so many jobs! Screw that you cant breath the air or drink the water, and the soil your kids are playing in is giving them cancer.. we got jobs! well a few any ways. Guess the coffin business would be a good thing to go in.. after the materials are free... can just cut down random trees and dump the corpses wherever they want. Reuse coffins! or is that too environmentalist?
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Your title should probably read "may/might cost" not "will cost", since the report quite clearly says that these are feared job losses, not actual.
Something akin to "jobs created or saved"?
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Well, it's an easy step to take a fear to the sky is falling. the politics of fear is based on that exact premise. And it works.

Sadly.
I agree. The global warming nuts using fear to kill jobs seems to be working.
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
APDST said @
Hotair.com, found a prime example of how the Obama administration is doing more to kill jobs, than to help the private sector create jobs. This is proof positive that the government can only kill jobs, not create jobs.


Actually, it’s not just the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s minority contingent that fears the loss of nearly a million jobs from new EPA rules on greenhouse gases and other emissions issues. It’s also groups like the United Steel Workers, Unions for Jobs and the Environment, and experts like King’s College Professor Ragnar Lofstedt. Hot Air got an exclusive look at a report that the EPW minority staff will release later this morning detailing the economic damage that an activist EPA will do to the American economy, and which will come at perhaps the worst possible time, both economically and politically.

The executive summary spells out the stakes involved in the effort to rein in the EPA:

•New standards for commercial and industrial boilers: up to 798,250 jobs at risk;
•The revised National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone: severe restrictions on job creation and business expansion in hundreds of counties nationwide.
•New standards for Portland Cement plants: up to 18 cement plants at risk of shutting down, threatening nearly 1,800 direct jobs and 9,000 indirect jobs;
•The Endangerment Finding/Tailoring Rules for Greenhouse Gas Emissions: higher energy costs; jobs moving overseas; severe economic impacts on the poor, the elderly, minorities, and those on fixed incomes; 6.1 million sources subject to EPA control and regulation

Hot Air » Exclusive: EPW report shows new EPA rules will cost more than 800,000 jobs
***************************************************************************************************

From the site
“Tens of thousands of these jobs will be imperiled. In addition, many more tens of thousands of jobs in the supply chains and in the communities where these plants are located also will be at risk.”
Nor are steelworkers the only group at risk. New industrial standards for Portland cement threaten to stop all American production in the name of environmental protection — and send the work overseas to China, where ironically the standards are more lax and more pollution will result:

***************************************************************************************************

None of this is about saving the planet. It's all about lowering the standard of living in America.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I agree. The global warming nuts using fear to kill jobs seems to be working.
Sure, there are also some nuts in everything. But a major difference here is GW has scinece behind the claim, whereas deniers have industry duping them like the Tabbacco companies taught them how so long ago. Sadly.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
To fundamentally transform America.
In grand tradition of 9/11 nutters and birthers, one more conspiracy nutter effort takes root.


Wait a minute, this typs of fear mongering is as old as the country. Can't our nutters even be orginal?
 

roguenuke

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
42,938
Reaction score
14,706
Location
Rolesville, NC
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Where are the facts to back this finding up? It sounds like they took opinions and fears of what-might-happen, and wrote an official report on it. Many of the quotes are coming from the unions, not the companies themselves. Unions are known for making people fear for their jobs and resisting any change that doesn't directly benefit their workers. I want to know what the timeline is for the new standards to take effect. Are the companies being given time to actually implement the standards prior to facing heavy fines or shutdown? Are the companies willing to make the changes that will put them within standards? Have any of them started implementing the process to make their facilities up-to-standard or are they just complaining, hoping it will pass? And wouldn't the need to upgrade or attempt to upgrade create at least some jobs in itself? Were those jobs that it might create taken into account when figuring the possible job losses? How crucial are the businesses that were included in these numbers of possible lost jobs? Are these job overmanned, undermanned, or just at the amount needed, right now? If there are any from power-providing companies, then there shouldn't be as many jobs lost as there are increases in cost. And how big will those cost increases actually be? I remember about 2 years ago hearing that certain rules would double or triple the cost of power across the country within a few months to a year. I didn't see much of an increase, if any at all, to my own area's rates in the 2 years since hearing about that. Are there counter-incentives being put into place that might help to keep some of the less crucial jobs here in the US?

Does anyone have a link to the actual study, instead of just their conclusion?
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Sure, there are also some nuts in everything. But a major difference here is GW has scinece behind the claim, whereas deniers have industry duping them like the Tabbacco companies taught them how so long ago. Sadly.
And the science says shipping jobs to China for them to pollute instead of us will save the planet, how?
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
In grand tradition of 9/11 nutters and birthers, one more conspiracy nutter effort takes root.


Wait a minute, this typs of fear mongering is as old as the country. Can't our nutters even be orginal?
Those were Barack Obama's words.
 

hazlnut

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
11,963
Reaction score
3,543
Location
Naperville, IL
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Goddam I hate ****ing environmentalists.
Read the ****ing report... it's total crap.

It's from the minority dick, Jim Inhofe, on the EPW. The guy is a total ass and a shill for coal.

No credibility.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Read the ****ing report... it's total crap.

It's from the minority dick, Jim Inhofe, on the EPW. The guy is a total ass and a shill for coal.

No credibility.
It's only as good as the evidence that supports it. Can anyone believing it point to any verifiable evidence within the report? If we just have to take this person's word, I would agree with you that we shouldn't.
 

Boo Radley

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
37,066
Reaction score
7,028
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
And the science says shipping jobs to China for them to pollute instead of us will save the planet, how?
No one is arguing that, so nice strawman. Do you have any others?
 
Top Bottom