This kind of "Chicken Little" comment is the cause of us losing manufacturing and heavy industry jobs overseas. And losing them causes the infrastructure that goes with them to also wither and die.
I read a paper in 1991 that discussed "the coming strangulation by regulation", and that is what is happening. You will not die from arsenic levels in the water, the regulations are based on drinking a certain amount for 70 years causing cancer in 1 in a million cases. So even if you drink this water every day of you whole life, you have 999,999 other ways to die.
Aluminum manufacturing is going to China (#1 in the world now). Iron and steel are going there. Nickel is going over there to make stainless steel. It's hard to find metal plating industries here, almost every iron and other metal foundry has moved out because of regulations. China is growing their economy be leaps and bounds, and well they might to better the life style of their people and make them less willing to accept the tyranny of their current government. But this does not need to happen at the expense of our own security and standard of living.
In short, we are losing our national security by losing these industries, and they are going because they are being strangled by regulations here in the US. EPA environmental actifists make their effort seem beneficial by using paranoia generating terms to define wastes, to word regulations, and the media emphasizes these PGC's (paranoia generating compounds) and PGR's (paranoia generating regulations) to generate, you guessed it, paranoia. It's not science, it's not fact, it's bureaucratic toxity, not chemical, not medical, not scientific.
We won WW II partly because we did a better job than Germany and Japan in bringing technology and management to bear in weapons development. We did better than they because of our democratic system - not just top down, but bottom up as well. The autocratic systems were only top down command and control (read Vanaver Bush's Modern Arms and Free Men).
Well, we need the same approach to regulations. But we don't have it. We also need to have regulators take sensitivity training in real world business. Some might call that Econ 101. It would help as well to be better trained in real science rather than bureaucratic science. Global warming is a lie, Kyoto is a travesty. Toxic isn't toxic. Hazardous is not hazardous. Not in real terms, only in the mind of a bureaucrat.
If the country put the regulatory agencies on a diet of science, truth and reality, then we wouldn't be losing all the good jobs. It's not a question of transferring pollution overseas, since the plants here are not polluting. Not in real terms. Their replacements in China may be polluting, which if we're honestly into making the world a cleaner place to live, then it's better building them here. We need the metals (our precious computers won't run without them), the oil (ditto our SUV's, home heating and airconditioning, electricity), the chemicals (clothing), etc. etc.
Thus what we need is to have regulations be run on a democratic basis. Set goals, and work together to find a way to achieve them. No command and control, no environazis setting agendas, no politicians using paranoia to demagogue their way into office.
Then our world will not only be a cleaner place, but a safer place as well.
This kind of "Chicken Little" comment is the cause of us losing manufacturing and heavy industry jobs overseas...
I can't believe you took that seriously. I was joking.:)