Should the FDA and EPA exist? Or should "freedum" prevail?

Of course right wingers "love freedom" and see regulation as going against their freedoms, so im curious, should we get rid of the EPA and FDA? I bring this up because I see people in the freedom thread talking about how we can only eat the food the government allows us to eat blah blah blah, clearly eluding to the FDA, so should we just get rid of it? Wouldnt that be freedom? If you want to keep it, wouldnt that impede on corporations freedom to sell whatever they want? What about the EPA, should corporations be FREE to pollute however much they want and dump toxic waste in nearby rivers to save money?

Obviously for any rational person, freedom has its limits, but for Right Wingers all that matters is profits, so if they can use freedom as an excuse to destroy the environment and make some quick cash they jump right on it.

 

Right wingers are not against regulation, they are against over regulation.

Liberals on the other hand want every single thing regulated and prefer to turn their entire lives over to the government. They don't want to even decide when to take a s**t in the morning without the government dictating it to them.

 

No. Moderate cojnservatives are like that. For the most part, the far right simply want all regulated ended. They haved called for an end to all government regulation for years, claiming that private companies automatically regulate themselves when left alone, but we know this is a lie, since their lack of self regulation is the reason the government had to step in to begin with. Human greed corrupts all things.

 

Show me a single right winger that has claimed they want all regulation ended.

I will wait.

 

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...-to-ensure-health-air-and-water-for-our-kids/
"Last month, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich became the first high-profile conservative to champion one of the most extreme environmental positions in recent memory: total elimination of the EPA.
Still, there are few policies too far right for the modern GOP, and dismantling the EPA is no exception. Over the past few weeks, ThinkProgress spoke with various members of Congress to get their thoughts on abolishing the EPA. Many, including freshmen Reps. Joe Walsh (R-IL) and Rich Nugent (R-FL), vigorously joined Gingrich in his anti-EPA mission.
Watch a compilation video:
[video=youtube;H-a5bt-dJaA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-a5bt-dJaA#t=24[/video]
"

There you go

 

I did not see them promoting the elimination of regulation, simply the removal of a useless agency. It is like saying that by getting rid of the Department of Education that you no longer want any regulation of how kids are taught. You simply provide regulation, probably at a local level, or in the case of the environment, at the state level.

Fail

 

Getting rid of the EPA and the department of Educations ends all regulation exactly how? Given that there would still remain more than forty federal agencies writing and enforcing legislation.

 

Exactly, the EPA is simply over regulation.

 

so you are saying republicans want a epa in each state, would that not be harder on national corporations then a national epa, one where every state has it's own rules?

 

I am not saying anything like that, I am saying that just because you get rid of the national EPA that it does not mean there will be no more regulation whatsoever.

 

"Newt Gingrich has been upfront about his call to dismantle the EPA and return that power to the States, do you agree with him thats a power we should preserve more for the State?"

Tim Heulskamp - "I would just roll back the power, a lot of what the EPA does I dont think the State should be doing those either"

So they talk about dismantling the EPA entirely, and than he says he doesnt think the States should be doing it either. Nice job playing semantics though dodging the video anyway. Fail.

- - - Updated - - -

It will be just like you guys did with slavery, "Let the States decide!!"

 

I never claimed that the power WOULD go to the states, I said it may. The point is that there will still be regulation in some form. Remember that all EPA regulations are laws written by Congress. Not by the body themselves because they have dictated their power to the EPA so by eliminating the EPA you put the regulation back into the legislatures to directly control thereby giving the population more control over what is passed.

Right now, the EPA is out of control and operating independently of congressional oversight.

 

Dude there already is an EPA in each state in fact there are usually several of them as a lot of major cities have their own version of the EPA. This is the US where in what ever one level of government does another level will hop on board as soon as possible after all it's all about power the more rules and regulations you have the more power you've got. I knew a guy a few years back who was a compliance officer for a small company. He said at least 75% of his job was figuring out which set of rules and regulations took precedence in a given circumstance.

This isn't Europe where in you have at most two regulatory bodies to deal with The EU and the national body. Here you get state federal city and county. And it is damn easy to get caught in a jurisdictional dispute that has to get solved by the courts 10 years down the road if you are lucky. For instance there are Gas additives that are perfectly legal every where else in the US but not in California.

 

Good, the congress is full of obstructionists I think the EPA should operate independent from those morons.

Ok so you guys want the absolute bare minimum regulations and in some areas, none at all. So yes, for the most part, you guys are against regulations and are fine with abolishing the EPA. Yes, you guys are ok with rare regulations, but the point still stands you guys are adamantly opposed to regulations in general unless they are absolutely necessary.

 

Blah blah gross over simplefications, blah blah partisan circle jerking. That's all you offer.

Everyone wants clean air and water. Nobody wants to live in a toxic waste dump. That being said, nobody wants overbearing regulation .

Your all or nothing approach is retarded.

Maybe I should report you to the EPA for the amount of partisan sewage you dump on this forum.

 

Where did we say "bare minimum" at all?

We are saying common sense regulations that actually do something instead of things like this.

http://www.dairyherd.com/e-newsletters/dairy-daily/Dust-pollution-regulations-still-worrisome-129623573.html?ref=573

 

Did you forget about the Dust Bowl? Scary stuff man

 

Fine reform the CCC and let the young guys go plant trees on the farms again.

Problem solved.

 

Which had absolutely nothing to do with what he's talking about. Soil erosion and drought caused the dust bowl.

 

Corporations love to dump illegally and pollute our waters and lands. The government seems to be the only way to prevent this. The EPA literally prevents people from being poisoned. Why is this a problem?

 

Changing one master for another is not freedom. Most states have their own versions of every federal agency. So if conservatives want smaller government let them start in their own states.

 

Have Congress write a law then.

 

Poisoning the water don't cost a corporation anything...cleaning up the poisoning costs the corporation their bottom line.

 

They already have, Texas has made it legal to teach creationism along with evolution in public schools. My dad who was raised here never even learned about Evolution in school and is still a Christian to this day. Luckily I did learn about it though, I had some great public school teachers.

- - - Updated - - -

We can do both

- - - Updated - - -

The same congress that is being paid by the very corporations we are trying to regulate?

At least you have a good sense of humor