By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trump bans EPA employees from giving social media updates.

aikohualda on 25 January 2017
Baalzamon said:
Probably going to get a lot of hate for this, but there is a BIG BIG difference between banning free speech and banning a government agency from continuing to spout things that DO have a political agenda associated with them. No, I'm not saying global warming is necessarily a hoax. No, I'm not saying that there isn't an issue with us spewing too much shit into the atmosphere. But you absolutely cannot deny there are HUGE political agendas associated with global warming and climate control.

Tell me when he has banned private companies and private citizens from informing the public of facts/findings. THEN we have a problem.

i dunno... because government agency is kinda paid by taxpayers.... global warming is barely a political agenda... letting oil company support republican to say it is a hoax is a political agenda.



 

Around the Network
Baalzamon on 25 January 2017
aikohualda said:
Baalzamon said:
Probably going to get a lot of hate for this, but there is a BIG BIG difference between banning free speech and banning a government agency from continuing to spout things that DO have a political agenda associated with them. No, I'm not saying global warming is necessarily a hoax. No, I'm not saying that there isn't an issue with us spewing too much shit into the atmosphere. But you absolutely cannot deny there are HUGE political agendas associated with global warming and climate control.

Tell me when he has banned private companies and private citizens from informing the public of facts/findings. THEN we have a problem.

i dunno... because government agency is kinda paid by taxpayers.... global warming is barely a political agenda... letting oil company support republican to say it is a hoax is a political agenda.

Just because they are paid for by taxpayers doesn't mean they can say whatever the hell they choose to and represent it as the opinion/fact of the government. This is in no way limiting their freedom of speech on a personal level. My tax dollars pay for lots of things that I don't have access to, including I'm certain tons of studies the government has performed and not released to the public.

And how you can say global warming isn't political is astonishing to me (Keep in mind, big difference between something being a political issue and something being false). There are absolutely enormous tax complications that can come out of global warming, such as emission taxes. Numerous industries have been given mandates (such as MPG standards) that ultimately arise from global warming issues. The fact of the matter is, even if global warming is 100% legit (and to take it a step further, it is indeed caused by humans which is the important matter), there are a buttload of enormous political issues involved with it.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

fatslob-:O on 25 January 2017
Scoobes said:

They're not running their mouth though, they're talking about their work and presenting their data whilst also giving expert commentary to major events. It's essential for the pursuit of science and research. And as it's funded by tax payers, they have every right to know the results of the research they've funded, not some censored bullshit propaganda from high up. 

It's completely disproportionate and utterly disgraceful given the "alternative facts" the administration keep presenting. 

No they do not! 

I don't care much for the narrative that everyone here in this thread is going to push as just but don't even try to conflate your values of what's ethical when there are a set of protocols that big organizations have to follow including those working in public service. This is no different from a NDA agreement that employees have to follow regardless of whether they work in the private or public sector ... 

And for christ's sake people should learn what the actual obligations are from instead assuming that it's a free for all ... 



aikohualda on 25 January 2017
Baalzamon said:
aikohualda said:

i dunno... because government agency is kinda paid by taxpayers.... global warming is barely a political agenda... letting oil company support republican to say it is a hoax is a political agenda.

Just because they are paid for by taxpayers doesn't mean they can say whatever the hell they choose to and represent it as the opinion/fact of the government. This is in no way limiting their freedom of speech on a personal level. My tax dollars pay for lots of things that I don't have access to, including I'm certain tons of studies the government has performed and not released to the public.

And how you can say global warming isn't political is astonishing to me (Keep in mind, big difference between something being a political issue and something being false). There are absolutely enormous tax complications that can come out of global warming, such as emission taxes. Numerous industries have been given mandates (such as MPG standards) that ultimately arise from global warming issues. The fact of the matter is, even if global warming is 100% legit (and to take it a step further, it is indeed caused by humans which is the important matter), there are a buttload of enormous political issues involved with it.

what scare me is that what is accepted  by majority of scientific community is not accepted by government... and donald trump prohibiting them to tweet because it doesn't meet his criteria like i dunno tweeting about 3 million fraud voters without anything to back him is OKAY?

like i said i DID NOT Say it is not a political agenda... i said barely compare to the politician who are recipients of the oil and gas company... and guess what most of them are republican and apparently most republicans still do not buy the concept of global warming... could it be political? esp that the sitting president is from the GOP? could it be more political than a tweet about real numbers about global warming?????

but hey you are the one backing a guy who thinks global warming is hoax by chinese people...



 

Lawlight on 25 January 2017
Baalzamon said:
Lawlight said:
And for the record:

http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/obama-gag-order-on-federal-workers-like-those-under-bush.html

This is actually hilarious. I'm going to go on a limb and assume this didn't bother the (generally) liberal media at all under Obama.

It's not just the media that this didn't bother - it didn't bother the posters on thai forum.



Around the Network
DonFerrari on 25 January 2017
Scoobes said:
DonFerrari said:

Ok so bring the TOP 500 companies and how much they allow their employees to talk about the company without prior authorization from the company.

Nope, it isn't private but also isn't the right of any employee under it to run their mouth as they see fit, and if the overseeing power over that agency decides that only the official mouthpieces are allowed to talk to the public about agency related stuff then so be it.

In Brazil most public employees aren't there on social media talking about their internal affairs, most that are involve judicial system

They're not running their mouth though, they're talking about their work and presenting their data whilst also giving expert commentary to major events. It's essential for the pursuit of science and research. And as it's funded by tax payers, they have every right to know the results of the research they've funded, not some censored bullshit propaganda from high up. 

It's completely disproportionate and utterly disgraceful given the "alternative facts" the administration keep presenting. 

Expert commentary on social media... sure... that is certainly the forum for cientific discussion.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Mr Puggsly on 25 January 2017
Baalzamon said:
Probably going to get a lot of hate for this, but there is a BIG BIG difference between banning free speech and banning a government agency from continuing to spout things that DO have a political agenda associated with them. No, I'm not saying global warming is necessarily a hoax. No, I'm not saying that there isn't an issue with us spewing too much shit into the atmosphere. But you absolutely cannot deny there are HUGE political agendas associated with global warming and climate control.

Tell me when he has banned private companies and private citizens from informing the public of facts/findings. THEN we have a problem.

Agreed.

People will still be informed on the topic. This is just an excuse to call him a tyrant.



Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

FIT_Gamer on 25 January 2017

TBH I wouldn't mind if the "Good Lord" "calls him home" in the near future.



Baalzamon on 25 January 2017
aikohualda said:
Baalzamon said:

Just because they are paid for by taxpayers doesn't mean they can say whatever the hell they choose to and represent it as the opinion/fact of the government. This is in no way limiting their freedom of speech on a personal level. My tax dollars pay for lots of things that I don't have access to, including I'm certain tons of studies the government has performed and not released to the public.

And how you can say global warming isn't political is astonishing to me (Keep in mind, big difference between something being a political issue and something being false). There are absolutely enormous tax complications that can come out of global warming, such as emission taxes. Numerous industries have been given mandates (such as MPG standards) that ultimately arise from global warming issues. The fact of the matter is, even if global warming is 100% legit (and to take it a step further, it is indeed caused by humans which is the important matter), there are a buttload of enormous political issues involved with it.

what scare me is that what is accepted  by majority of scientific community is not accepted by government... and donald trump prohibiting them to tweet because it doesn't meet his criteria like i dunno tweeting about 3 million fraud voters without anything to back him is OKAY?

like i said i DID NOT Say it is not a political agenda... i said barely compare to the politician who are recipients of the oil and gas company... and guess what most of them are republican and apparently most republicans still do not buy the concept of global warming... could it be political? esp that the sitting president is from the GOP? could it be more political than a tweet about real numbers about global warming?????

but hey you are the one backing a guy who thinks global warming is hoax by chinese people...

You are really stretching your argument a lot here. First off, I don't think I said anywhere that Donald Trump should be sending tweets about 3 million fraudulent voters, whether it should be allowed or not, etc. It is, quite frankly, completely irrelevent to the argument (if donald trump was a murderer, it doesn't mean its then ok for everybody else to be a murderer)

Also you are going on some huge ass tangent about Republicans not believing in global warming. Pretty sure I am with a lot of people that aren't necessarily denying global warming, but rather the cause of it, and whether the solutions are worthwhile/reasonable.

You then make a final comment about backing Donald Trump. Keep in mind the difference in backing a candidate versus trying to shut down an argument that I find foolish against him.



Money can't buy happiness. Just video games, which make me happy.

Puppyroach on 25 January 2017
DonFerrari said:
Puppyroach said:

Except the US government isn't a company. The job of all departments is to work for the people through the constitution, not to be a loyal slave to the president whatever he does.

So any personnel working for the government can talk in the name of it?

And one of the problems with governement is that they aren't managed as companies, so much drains and inefficiencies.

 If taxpayer money goes into public research for example, of course the results should be shared with the masses, for examples in cases of environmental research, infrastructure research and so on. This is the attempt by an administration to control information that belongs to the public. I'm not talking about employees having the right to bash the government, but rather their obligation to share public information.

Regarding your second part: generally, government entities are more complex and ineffective than private counterparts (with some exceptions, the private health care and insurance system in the US seems like the most ineffective system I've ever seen). The reason they are less effective is because their job is to work for the people, not s small group of private shareholders. Yes, it would likely be more effective to run a country like a company, but that's because a company is not a democracy, it is rather more like a dictatorship where you can also increase your power by owning more of the vote. That works for a company but is the opposite to a democracy.