Originally Posted By: Rainman


What my experience with government has shown is that those directing enforcement in agencies like the EPA, COUNT on beliefs like you have. Beliefs that there is nothing you can do as an individual, that if you try not rocking the boat, you'll stay off their radar, that it will take years before they work their way down to little guys like us...Maybe I am wrong in seeing that as your view on this rule...if so, I apologize.






Rex, you absolutely nailed this part. What was that old line from the TV series? A wise man walks with his head bowed? I subscribe to this philosophy heart and soul.

Everything negative that has been mentioned concerning the new and more powerful EPA could come to pass. I do believe that. But, I also believe in playing the odds. And by my reckoning the odds are in my favor....by a wide margin.

You can build the biggest, meanest, highest horsepower engine possible, but it won't do you any good if there's no tires on the car. This goes back to the HBG example I used earlier. The EPA will continue to make new laws, just like my HBG will continue to reproduce, Drafting a new law isn't the actual problem, just like HBG reproducing isn't the problem....it's dealing with the aftermath that defines our skillset.

With my HBG, I know what to expect and have taken steps to curb any potential issues. In the case of the EPA however, we don't yet KNOW what will happen. I realize many think they know, but in reality, none of us have the answer. All we have is "this is what happened *****", and "back in ***** they did this to ****". And even then, it's always the same few cases over and over. In no way shape or form is this proof of what will happen now. Evidence for possible future action, okay. A sure thing? No way.

As I see it, the unfortunate, uncomfortable truth of the matter is that someone, somewhere, will need to be the guinea pig for this new mandate, PROVIDED this thing ever reaches that state. I'm certainly not convinced that it will, but for the sake of discussion let's assume the worst.

Chances are, very good chance actually, that the poor guinea pig will not be me...I know that's harsh, but it's the truth. Some unfortunate soul's pond will be the proving ground, and from that we will finally be able to gather some idea of what may lie in store, and be able to formulate a response. Until that happens, IF it ever happens, we're guessing and speculating, nothing more.

And I see nothing wrong with that, in fact speculation can be a prudent course of action in and of itself. But I think we should acknowledge the notion that it is in fact, just speculation. Like I said last night, time will tell.


"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.