Post

Human health benefits are by far the largest benefit from most environmental regulations. By not monetizing these benefits moving forward, the Trump EPA is essentially saying there are no human health benefits to reducing air/toxic/climate pollution, improving drinking water quality, etc. 1/

nytimes.comE.P.A. to Stop Considering Lives Saved When Setting Rules on Air Pollution

12/1/26, 6:39 pm7 reposts9 likes

Grant McDermott

@gmcd.bsky.social

12 Jan

Jeez. Just when you think these goons have reached the bottom of the intellectual barrel...

Kyle Meng

@kylemeng.com

12 Jan

This runs counter to how cost-benefit analyses have been conducted by the U.S. government for decades, across both Republican and Democratic administrations. 2/

Kyle Meng

@kylemeng.com

12 Jan

And it obviates the very reason why the EPA even exists, which is to balance the public health benefits and compliance costs of U.S. environmental policies. Why do anything to clean up the environment if one assumes there are no benefits? /n