Board 8 > What happens when you push out a regulated industry to unregulated countries.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/15/delhi-blanketed-by-smog-so-toxic-it-cant-be-measured

This is what happens. You have regulated ennvironmental plants in the United States. The more you squeeze them and they go to countries without regulations, the more pollution you actually create.

Too many are, well, if it doesn't happen at 1/1000th of the rate in my area it is better. Instead realizing you are causing more pollution by forcing these industries to unregulated areas. That is the fallacy of the drive to stop pollution. Countries that skirt pollution controls are just going to eat up the industry and make it worse.

It is much better to help those industries regulated for environmental controls compete with those who skirt these rules to try and drive those offenders out of business. Not to try and put the controlled industries out of business to drive more business to those offenders.
---

It's almost like globalists don't actually care about the environment, but about getting ever richer at the expense of everyone else. Wow, what a revelation.
---

Vlado posted...

It's almost like globalists don't actually care about the environment, but about getting ever richer at the expense of everyone else. Wow, what a revelation.

Yet the nationalists are the ones giving them massive tax breaks and bending over while corporations run amok. Shocker.
---

You're making some major assumptions here, Corrik. Mainly that the source of the pollution is somehow American-owned industry and not local factors such as construction, power plants, car exhaust and agricultural fires.

The Guardian article doesn't mention US business in there at all, that's just something you pulled out your ass
---

DeepsPraw posted...

something you pulled out your ass

Corrik? Doing that? Well, I never!
---

At least this implies that he thinks climate change is real.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

At least this implies that he thinks climate change is real.

He says pollution is real, which it is. Large-scale man-made climate change is lel-worthy, and yet another example of the epic proportions of liberal arrogance.
---

If its not affecting the whole planet, why should I care if pollution happens somewhere else?
---

You decide what you care about. As for me, of course, pollution is not as bad if it does not affect me directly, but, as a good man, I am not happy about any part of the planet being hit by it. Not out of egoism, but because I am human, i.e. I believe in something higher than the self.
---

Vlado posted...

You decide what you care about. As for me, of course, pollution is not as bad if it does not affect me directly, but, as a good man, I am not happy about any part of the planet being hit by it.

If only there was some ideology that allowed people to care about and try to fix problems in other parts of the world from their homeland...
---

You don't need an ideology to care about anything.
---

Vlado posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

At least this implies that he thinks climate change is real.

He says pollution is real, which it is. Large-scale man-made climate change is lel-worthy, and yet another example of the epic proportions of liberal arrogance.

lel isn't a word, son
---

Vlado posted...

You don't need an ideology to care about anything.

No, but your idealogy is created by the things you care about it.
---

A corrik topic thats actually somewhat correct, and one of the issues that pushed me toward the right. Basically whats happening is a large scale NIMBY. By being offended instead of trying to fix a problem, americans have always chosen to push the problem away to somewhere they cant see it instead of trying to fix the problem. Once these companies are further out of public eye, they're free to do whatever they want.
---

Sure. If you make production of drugs illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

Also, if you make production of child pornography illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

Lastly, yes, if you make production of ridiculously cheap goods via pollution illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

The fact that all three of these situations are wildly different means that there isn't a one size fits all solution. You have to use evidence based policy and work toward goals

Start with the facts and then make your way towards policies.

I find folks who start with policy stances and then try to massage the facts in their favor to be extremely irritating.
---

banananor posted...

Sure. If you make production of drugs illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

Also, if you make production of child pornography illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

Lastly, yes, if you make production of ridiculously cheap goods via pollution illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

The fact that all three of these situations are wildly different means that there isn't a one size fits all solution. You have to use evidence based policy and work toward goals

Start with the facts and then make your way towards policies.

I find folks who start with policy stances and then try to massage the facts in their favor to be extremely irritating.

You can give incentives to produce with environmental controls to offset the cost.

Our strategy now is... Put all these controls on that other places don't have while we fine your ass nonstop until you get to where we want you to be and you go out of business.

Which is like El oh El thanks for the production, buds. Signed sincerely, biggest polluting countries in the world who don't give a shit and we're going to laugh to the bank once a Paris Accord was signed cuz it sends them even more production.
---

I definitely agree that we should have financial incentives for companies to stay here and be eco-friendly.
---

SantaRPidgey posted...

A corrik topic thats actually somewhat correct, and one of the issues that pushed me toward the right. Basically whats happening is a large scale NIMBY. By being offended instead of trying to fix a problem, americans have always chosen to push the problem away to somewhere they cant see it instead of trying to fix the problem. Once these companies are further out of public eye, they're free to do whatever they want.

You'd have to think that big companies wouldn't seek to increase margins by moving out anyway. I see where you are coming from but I don't think companies would stay here forever if it's cheaper to move elsewhere.

I do agree that we don't really look at root cause and I'm sure I'm not immune to that
---

neonreaper posted...

SantaRPidgey posted...

A corrik topic thats actually somewhat correct, and one of the issues that pushed me toward the right. Basically whats happening is a large scale NIMBY. By being offended instead of trying to fix a problem, americans have always chosen to push the problem away to somewhere they cant see it instead of trying to fix the problem. Once these companies are further out of public eye, they're free to do whatever they want.

You'd have to think that big companies wouldn't seek to increase margins by moving out anyway. I see where you are coming from but I don't think companies would stay here forever if it's cheaper to move elsewhere.

I do agree that we don't really look at root cause and I'm sure I'm not immune to that

Not every company is global.
---

What happens when you push out a unregulated topic subject without regulated topic tags.

---

pjbasis posted...

Vlado posted...

You don't need an ideology to care about anything.

No, but your idealogy is created by the things you care about it.

https://goo.gl/images/N2KkYa

banananor posted...

Sure. If you make production of drugs illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

Also, if you make production of child pornography illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

Lastly, yes, if you make production of ridiculously cheap goods via pollution illegal, production will tend to move outside the country and continue.

The fact that all three of these situations are wildly different means that there isn't a one size fits all solution. You have to use evidence based policy and work toward goals

Start with the facts and then make your way towards policies.

I find folks who start with policy stances and then try to massage the facts in their favor to be extremely irritating.

I mean we can talk justice system reform too if youd like. Addressing the reason people turn to crime instead of reactively punishing those who are pushed into the life also sounds like a good idea
---

India has had one of the strongest environmental movement and still does. It might even be the strongest beyond China's. That just goes to show how much more terrible it used to be.
---

Also the US does have massive domestic environmental credits and such to encourage local companies to go green and also new green companies to be formed.

But of course any type of credit like that becomes massively weighted towards the big monopolizers who use their team of lawyers to do the absolute minimum required to get all the funds, leaving only scraps for the legitimately green companies. It always backfires. Same as tariffs.
---

foolm0r0n posted...

India has had one of the strongest environmental movement and still does. It might even be the strongest beyond China's. That just goes to show how much more terrible it used to be.

I have seen videos of Mills that are set up exactly the same way as mine and them nonchalantly showing it smoking out of 34 ovens with full blown fires and it not being a concern to them. We would be shutdown no questions asked.
---

Corrik posted...

foolm0r0n posted...

India has had one of the strongest environmental movement and still does. It might even be the strongest beyond China's. That just goes to show how much more terrible it used to be.

I have seen videos of Mills that are set up exactly the same way as mine and them nonchalantly showing it smoking out of 34 ovens with full blown fires and it not being a concern to them. We would be shutdown no questions asked.

Just to be clear, are you asking to be allowed to do that, or some compromise in between the extremes?
---

Corrik posted...

I have seen videos of Mills that are set up exactly the same way as mine and them nonchalantly showing it smoking out of 34 ovens with full blown fires and it not being a concern to them. We would be shutdown no questions asked.

How about 5 years ago?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

foolm0r0n posted...

India has had one of the strongest environmental movement and still does. It might even be the strongest beyond China's. That just goes to show how much more terrible it used to be.

I have seen videos of Mills that are set up exactly the same way as mine and them nonchalantly showing it smoking out of 34 ovens with full blown fires and it not being a concern to them. We would be shutdown no questions asked.

Just to be clear, are you asking to be allowed to do that, or some compromise in between the extremes?

I am saying we are pushing from sound plants to ridiculous ones.
---

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/393213-trump-rescinds-obamas-policy-on-protecting-oceans

A step towards what you want?
---

I mean, I suppose one alternative would be not having the environmental regulations here and having the smog problem here, but am I right in assuming thats not what you were asking for?
---

FakeAccount3000 posted...

I mean, I suppose one alternative would be not having the environmental regulations here and having the smog problem here, but am I right in assuming thats not what you were asking for?

I have already said what you should do. If you both want to keep ignoring it to say stupid shit, then be my guest. I can continue just not responding to nonsense.
---

One problem is that the same group that hates these regulations also despises any subsidies for people to follow them.
---

It is much better to help those industries regulated for environmental controls compete with those who skirt these rules to try and drive those offenders out of business. Not to try and put the controlled industries out of business to drive more business to those offenders.

I barely understand the first sentence for some reason. But Im assuming you mean the subsidies discussed earlier then?
---

Sounds like a good cop bad cop routine. "Our company wants to help the environment, but if you regulate us too much then China here might have something to say about it..."
---