December 7, 2006

Did you want a five-minute argument, or the full half-hour?

Filed under: Laws and Sausages — tomemos @ 2:10 pm

From Introduction to Republican Logic, Sixth Edition (New York: Houghton-Mifflin, 2006):

U.S. environmental regulators are considering removing lead, a heavy metal linked to learning problems in children, from a list of regulated pollutants because past rules have greatly reduced levels of the toxin.


The EPA said that from 1980 to 2005 the national annual lead concentrations have dropped more than 90 percent. Lead levels in air have mostly fallen because it was banned as a gasoline additive starting in the 1970s.

Just so we’re all on the same page here, the EPA is considering unregulating lead because the regulation has been so effective.

I guess the delicate balance must be preserved. How will future generations look at us if we let them grow up in a world with insufficient lead in the air?

(thanks to Sadly, No!)



  1. Wow. I did a story about delisting endangered species when they’ve sufficiently recovered, and that makes sense, but lead? Not so much.

    Comment by Katherine — December 8, 2006 @ 12:30 pm

  2. Will this make my Heavy Metal stocks on trendio rise?

    Comment by Robertco — January 21, 2007 @ 2:34 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: