SCOTUS: The Supreme Court just handed Obama a significant loss on one of his biggest environmental initiatives

[gotbeer]

The Supreme Court just handed Obama a significant loss on one of his biggest environmental initiatives

 

Pretty much, people's health is secondary to costs.  for instance, if a coal burning plant emits enough pollution to cause $100 billion in health damage, but it will cost $110 billion to fix that emission, then they shouldn't need to fix it since the cost exceeds the benefit.  

[Adam]

Suck it, Libs!

[TobiasFunke]

Obama 2 - 1 Scalia

[Adam]

Try marrying a dude when you're dead from global warming

[nate]

Republicans: This is a win for us all.  Now we need to focus on lowering their taxes and giving them subsidies so they can afford to pollute even more!

 

Corporations: We also need the government to clean up the dirty lakes in our city, they are ruining our business!

[mtangelsfan]

One of the problems with politics today is that there is rarely any compromise or middle ground.  Obama, as has been his way, trying to circumvent the legislature again by using the EPA as a law making entity.

 

This cannot work.

 

On the other hand, the legislature needs to get its act together and pass some stuff. 

 

There should have been some middle ground that we could have come to.  Major tax breaks that would supplement the cost of the the regulations for the companies that follow them.

[TobiasFunke]

Or how about those companies either figure out a way to make their product/do business without ruining our country or tell them to GTFO?

 

Give these assholes more money in their pockets? nah that's ok.

[nate]

I agree by the way.  Without penalties or incentives these companies will never innovate and find more environmentally friendly methods.

 

I actually prefer the penalties.

[mtangelsfan]

Or how about those companies either figure out a way to make their product/do business without ruining our country or tell them to GTFO?

 

Give these assholes more money in their pockets? nah that's ok.

 

Not a fan of more government law (as you know) but if this is going to happen, it needs to happen the right way.

[Schildog]

any suggestions mt?

[mtangelsfan]

I made one.  Give major tax breaks to companies that voluntarily comply.

 

Of course that would mean that all of the stupid corporate tax breaks already out there be nixed.

 

Also, if you want law passed.  It should go through the legislature, as the constitution was designed.

[mtangelsfan]

I find my own use of punctuation to be offensive.

[nate]

I made one.  Give major tax breaks to companies that voluntarily comply.

 

Of course that would mean that all of the stupid corporate tax breaks already out there be nixed.

 

Also, if you want law passed.  It should go through the legislature, as the constitution was designed.

 

I just don't think giving tax breaks works.  They will do the minimum required to get the tax break and there will be too many loopholes.

 

I think a fine works best because it drives competition.  The first company that innovates a way to avoid the fine will be able to provide lower prices and significantly improve business.

[mtangelsfan]

I just don't think giving tax breaks works.  They will do the minimum required to get the tax break and there will be too many loopholes.

 

I think a fine works best because it drives competition.  The first company that innovates a way to avoid the fine will be able to provide lower prices and significantly improve business.

 

Wouldn't the same motivation apply?  Wouldn't the company do the minimum required to avoid the fine?

 

Make the tax break progressive to the amount of voluntary compliance. 

[nate]

As the innovation occurs you have to progressively change the standards for the fine in order to keep moving in the right direction.

[mtangelsfan]

Same with the fines.  The fines would have to be updated with innovation as well, or they wouldn't be useful.

[Angelsjunky]

Suck it, Libs!

 

Suck it, world and breathing organisms!

[Spirit]

Or how about those companies either figure out a way to make their product/do business without ruining our country or tell them to GTFO?

 

 

 

They have.  They make their products/do business and ruin other people's countries.  

 

Suck it, China! 

 

 

Go 'Merica! 

[mtangelsfan]

Bottom line, I want to be nice......... "tax breaks"

 

nate wants to be mean.............."fines"

 

 

 

 

suck it atheists!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

j/k nate. 

[nate]

Eh, I will accept it.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

There should have been some middle ground that we could have come to.  Major tax breaks that would supplement the cost of the the regulations for the companies that follow them.

 

Incentives for complying rather than punishment for not. What a concept.

[arch stanton]

Incentives make it seem optional.

[Jason]

Incentives make it seem optional.

Not much option when it comes to money.

[arch stanton]

Not much option when it comes to money.

Using tax incentives won't work as long as they can twist the tax code to their liking by other means. The only way seems to be to point at the pile on the rug and run their noses directly into it as you smack them with the newspaper. Doesn't work on puppies but might work on corporations.

[fan_since79]

I made one.  Give major tax breaks to companies that voluntarily comply.

 

Of course that would mean that all of the stupid corporate tax breaks already out there be nixed.

 

Also, if you want law passed.  It should go through the legislature, as the constitution was designed.

 

It seems lately that two of the three branches are legislating. The president and the courts are legislating at will, while the Congress is

asleep.

Edited June 30, 2015 by fan_since79