(03-13-2017 10:24 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  and the EPA sets the guidelines.

There was no EPA in 1940 or 1962 when the act was introduced and added other eagles.

(03-13-2017 09:21 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  You wouldn't have to run out of money if you tax the the entities making the profit from the activity. Take the current problem of phosphates in our waterways. Look at the groups responsible and tax that group for monitoring. It's too important. It's crazy that you guys tolerate it. It's unfortunate for those people that value a healthy ecosystem. A buddy of mine who is a big GOPer was marveling at a family of bald eagles who set up shop in his back yard. Put it on his facebook. All these Trumpers were marveling at it and commenting. I texted him. Thank God for the EPA huh. He didn't type back. We wouldn't have bald eagles again without the EPA. People enjoy nature. There is a value in nature.

Taxing polluters would be a market solution. The EPA doesn't like market solutions. If people found out that market solutions work, they might put two and two together and figure out that we don't need so many bureaucrats. And God knows, that would be disaster of the highest magnitude.

The EPA doesn't like for people to try to restore endangered species, because if they're no longer endangered then that's one less hammer for them to swing. The EPA permitting processes are at the same time both vague and unnecessarily complex; but that creates a lot of jobs for bureaucrats to provide interpretations for the general public. Only problem is that if you ask 10 different bureaucrats what something means, you'll get 11 different answers. And EPA won't stand behind any of them. But the more confusion, the more jobs for bureaucrats. And what they really like, the more possibilities that innocent and well-meaning people, relying reasonably on authoritative interpretations given to them, will inadvertently screw up and give those bureaucrats a chance to destroy them. Screwing innocent people is what bureaucrats really enjoy. It proves how powerful they are.

And oh, by the way, the EPA had little to nothing to do with the restoration of the bald eagle. They don't like for endangered species to become unendangered because that take away a tool that they can use to screw people. And they don't like not screwing people.