Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

  1. #1
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    (snip)"MONTGOMERY, Ala. – For farmers, this stinks: Belching and gaseous cows and hogs could start costing them money if a federal proposal to charge fees for air-polluting animals becomes law.

    Farmers so far are turning their noses up at the notion, which is one of several put forward by the Environmental Protection Agency after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases emitted by belching and flatulence amounts to air pollution.

    "This is one of the most ridiculous things the federal government has tried to do," said Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks, an outspoken opponent of the proposal.

    It would require farms or ranches with more than 25 dairy cows, 50 beef cattle or 200 hogs to pay an annual fee of about $175 for each dairy cow, $87.50 per head of beef cattle and $20 for each hog.

    The executive vice president of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation, Ken Hamilton, estimated the fee would cost owners of a modest-sized cattle ranch $30,000 to $40,000 a year. He said he has talked to a number of livestock owners about the proposals, and "all have said if the fees were carried out, it would bankrupt them."

    Sparks said Wednesday he's worried the fee could be extended to chickens and other farm animals and cause more meat to be imported.

    "We'll let other countries put food on our tables like they are putting gas in our cars. Other countries don't have the health standards we have," Sparks said.

    EPA spokesman Nick Butterfield said the fee was proposed for farms with livestock operations that emit more than 100 tons of carbon emissions in a year and fall under federal Clean Air Act provisions.

    Butterfield said the EPA has not taken a position on any of the proposals. But farmers from across the country have expressed outrage over the idea, both on Internet sites and in opinions sent to EPA during a public comment period that ended last week.

    "It's something that really has a very big potential adverse impact for the livestock industry," said Rick Krause, the senior director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation.

    The fee would cover the cost of a permit for the livestock operations. While farmers say it would drive them out of business, an organization supporting the proposal hopes it forces the farms and ranches to switch to healthier crops.

    "It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat consumption and recoup environmental losses," said Bruce Friedrich, a spokesman in Washington for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals."(snip)

  2. #2
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    12
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    Oh thanks for that! I needed a good laugh today ...

    I especially love the PETA spokesman quote, "It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat consumption and recoup environmental losses"!

    Hmmmm, I wonder if the cows and pigs can get a union started ... maybe the 'UAA'?

    Narcissus

  3. #3
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    961
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 17 Times in 17 Posts

    Default Re: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    BBQ's create soooo much pollution too.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Snark View Post
    But then I suppose the sort of people who write this kind of crap generally don't allow their opinions to be tainted by things like "facts" and "reality".
    Distortion becomes somehow pure in its wildness
    The note that began all can also destroy

  4. #4
    Senior Member Lucy in the Sky's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    150
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Default Re: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Narcissus View Post
    Oh thanks for that! I needed a good laugh today ...

    I especially love the PETA spokesman quote, "It makes perfect sense if you are looking for ways to cut down on meat consumption and recoup environmental losses"
    Ok, while there is a bit of logic to that if those are the goals but even I think this case is going too far. And that is coming from someone who is really big on the whole go green/save the planet stuff.

    There are other things we can do to accomplish the same goals that make a hell of alot more sense.

  5. #5
    God/dess threlayer's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    5,921
    Thanks
    369
    Thanked 419 Times in 290 Posts
    My Mood
    Fine

    Default Re: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    Fines. Just another pointless TAX which would fix nothing. Well, that is just silly.

    Now look at what other facilities exhausting airborne pollutants are doing, siting plans using wind roses etc. A more appropriate ruling would be to keep such airborne effluent sources away from locations where it is prone to people not profiting by its presence.

    WHAT'S THAT SMELL???

    Believe me, a hog farm close enough will bring tears to your eyes. I believe this is primarily due to hog feces not being separated and treated, bu decaying and becoming airborne. Then the hogs wallow in it. (Disgusting, yes absolutely, but I am not a hog.) This is just the (STUPID) common practice. Occasionally those mud effluents escape the coffer dam systems built to contain them and then they ruin adjacent crops, like lettuce, onions, etc. Somewtimes that is unknown to the farmer; guess he's used to that smell. A more appropriate ruling to provide coffer dam minimal standards and periodic testing. I say this because of the occasionally disastrous effect on our food supplies.
    I loved going to strip clubs; I actually made some friends there. Now things are different for the clubs and for me. As a result I am not as happy.

    Customers are not entitled to grope, disrespect, or rob strippers. This is their job, not their hobby, and they all need income. Clubs are not just some erotic show for guys to view while drinking.

    NOTE: anything I post here, outside of a direct quote, is my opinion only, which I am entitled to. Take it for what you estimate it is worth.

  6. #6
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    12
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucy in the Sky View Post
    Ok, while there is a bit of logic to that if those are the goals but even I think this case is going too far. And that is coming from someone who is really big on the whole go green/save the planet stuff.

    There are other things we can do to accomplish the same goals that make a hell of alot more sense.
    The reason that I found that so funny was the fact that the PETA spokesman saw an air pollution consideration and instantly skewed it to include a measure to reduce meat consumption. The sheer audacity to make that leap in logic is hilarious.

    It isn't often that we agree, but I give you a thumbs up on this one. There are a million things that, as a country, we could/should do to protect the environment, but this is simply not one of them.

    Narcissus

  7. #7
    Newbie
    Joined
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    12
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    Quote Originally Posted by threlayer View Post
    Fines. Just another pointless TAX which would fix nothing. Well, that is just silly.
    Maybe, maybe not ... depends on what you believe a 'fix' could include.

    I believe that there would be a good chance that our meat prices would go down after such a measure was taken. Why? Because farmers here would 'go under' and then suppliers (whom employ insanely cheap labor, have no concern to what they feed their animals or what drugs they load them up with) from other countries (whom don't have such a ridiculous measure as a 'flatulence tax') would ship low quality meat to us.

    Quote Originally Posted by threlayer View Post
    Believe me, a hog farm close enough will bring tears to your eyes.
    I have never been around a hog farm, but I have been around dairies and chicken coops ... the smells from those two types is virtually unbearable. Projectile vomiting anyone?

    Narcissus

  8. #8
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: more unintended consequences of 'liberal' court rulings ...

    Because farmers here would 'go under' and then suppliers (whom employ insanely cheap labor, have no concern to what they feed their animals or what drugs they load them up with) from other countries (whom don't have such a ridiculous measure as a 'flatulence tax') would ship low quality meat to us
    Arguably, this is exactly what has already happened in regard to many US manufacturing industries thanks to similarly expensive environmental compliance costs. Also, as you point out, addressing a 'source of pollution' at the local level actually does nothing to reduce pollution at the global level ... because the bankrupt US producer's 'pollution' is simply replaced with (usually nastier) pollution by the offshore producer that takes his place. However, what isn't replaced are the lost jobs and lost US tax revenues formerly provided by the US producer.

Similar Threads

  1. Unintended Consequences of ethanol
    By Vamp in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-17-2012, 09:54 AM
  2. Unintended consequences
    By Deogol in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-15-2010, 02:44 PM
  3. law of unintended consequences at work ?
    By Melonie in forum Member Boards
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-11-2007, 01:43 PM
  4. Unintended Consequences
    By cherryripeboy in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 07-24-2006, 09:11 AM
  5. Supreme Court Rulings and unrulings
    By Melonie in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-29-2005, 12:19 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •