# epa poll



## WiseGuys Painting (Feb 22, 2010)

the more i think of it the more pissed i get. it is already hard to find work here in texas with all the "undocumented workers" to compete with here, add the bad economy, and now i have to comply with this crap. theres no way i can give a bid to cover myself for all the extra labor involved in being compliant and hope to have a chance of getting a job competing with someone who doesnt comply. noone even knows about it around here so i know they wont be compliant.


----------



## Wolfgang (Nov 16, 2008)

You may be mad for a long time; I dont foresee this having any chance of being rescinded for at least the next two and a half years. Might just as well bite the bullet, pay the fees, and get legal...or you can take your chances.


----------



## johnthepainter (Apr 1, 2008)

nothing you can do about it, get used to it. 

maybe learn how to make it work for you.

(im no big fan of this crap either)


----------



## RCP (Apr 18, 2007)

Wiseguy, I get the feeling you are a little po'd over RRP!:jester:
I think most of us felt/feel the same way and there has been a lot of complaining about it. 
Yes, the EPA has done a miserable job promoting it, but many of the procedures have been OHSA Rules anyways, this has been a long time coming.

So you have a few choices,
Learn and comply, figure as the cost of doing business
Don't learn and comply and risk the consequences
Just say no to pre 1978 work.

But it is here to stay, like it or not.


----------



## Workaholic (Apr 17, 2007)

People typically hate change. The laws were already in place but have been restructured and just like anytime you are required to change your routine there is the anxiety and stress to come, add that with the confusion of still getting the laws adjusted and the common feeling is resentment. 
Think about when the government first told the public about how they were going to pass an income tax or when they started taxing to build the interstates people cursed and stomped their feet and years later it is just the norm. I am sure the laws will get adjusted after the flaws are clear and then in 5 years it will just be the way it is done.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

Workaholic said:


> People typically hate change. The laws were already in place but have been restructured and just like anytime you are required to change your routine there is the anxiety and stress to come, add that with the confusion of still getting the laws adjusted and the common feeling is resentment.
> Think about when the government first told the public about how they were going to pass an income tax or when they started taxing to build the interstates people cursed and stomped their feet and years later it is just the norm. I am sure the laws will get adjusted after the flaws are clear and then in 5 years it will just be the way it is done.


I love change, especially underwear ..... about once a week :thumbup:

Not sure folks have warmed up to the income tax concept yet.:whistling2: However they do love their highways, although now they all need extensive repairs. I love people who demand safe highways yet grouse at gas taxes, toll roads, and govt programs.


----------



## Workaholic (Apr 17, 2007)

daArch said:


> I love change, especially underwear ..... about once a week :thumbup:
> 
> Not sure folks have warmed up to the income tax concept yet.:whistling2: However they do love their highways, although now they all need extensive repairs. I love people who demand safe highways yet grouse at gas taxes, toll roads, and govt programs.


I agree and imagine how much they groused when the programs were first implemented.


----------



## WiseGuys Painting (Feb 22, 2010)

daArch said:


> I love change, especially underwear ..... about once a week :thumbup:
> 
> Not sure folks have warmed up to the income tax concept yet.:whistling2: However they do love their highways, although now they all need extensive repairs. I love people who demand safe highways yet grouse at gas taxes, toll roads, and govt programs.


i do love those potholes...lol. the bottom line is the federal government is not good at running anything. everything they touch is crap compared to private sector. this should be a decision between the homeowner and the contractor. the government should not be able to control what you do or hire someone to do in your home. this is just the latest power/money grab they could muster up quietly. if the law was: you must offer the homeowner the necessary warnings in writing and they have the choice , then i would support it. btw the irs is just the same as this new law, only the honest ones pay the bill while the dishonest and illegals reap all the rewards.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

without getting political, yes it is true that by nature bureaucracies are horribly ineffective. YET, not too many successes have been realized when the greedy private sector takes over. Usually when the private sector takes over managing something was once run by a bloated government bureaucracy there is no competition, no incentive to cut the fat, waste, and greed. And now we're right back with the same old problems.

And still, where is the money going to come from? Pay for use? That's just a euphemism for "tax".


----------



## WiseGuys Painting (Feb 22, 2010)

RCP said:


> Wiseguy, I get the feeling you are a little po'd over RRP!:jester:
> I think most of us felt/feel the same way and there has been a lot of complaining about it.
> Yes, the EPA has done a miserable job promoting it, but many of the procedures have been OHSA Rules anyways, this has been a long time coming.
> 
> ...


it is not so much the fees i am worried about. i am worried that you tell someone about all the new laws. they say the lead containment failed, they sue you, best case senario you lose alot of time and money defending yourself, worst case you lose your business. if a painter showed up in my house to paint a door and had a full body suit, respirator, and had to plastic off and filter air to just paint a door i think i would start to feel sick if i saw any dust come out. 
im not sure of all the requirements because i havent taken the class yet but i can only imagine how many hoops you have to jump through just to sand a doorjamb.
and then i have to pay for all my employees to take the class, and if they mess up on the job here comes another lawsuit. i know some of these laws are already in effect, and if im working on a house that is obviously old i tell them there is a risk the paint contains lead. but i dont ask everyone what year their building was erected and pass out brochures. does everyone else do this already?


----------



## WiseGuys Painting (Feb 22, 2010)

daArch said:


> without getting political, yes it is true that by nature bureaucracies are horribly ineffective. YET, not too many successes have been realized when the greedy private sector takes over. Usually when the private sector takes over managing something was once run by a bloated government bureaucracy there is no competition, no incentive to cut the fat, waste, and greed. And now we're right back with the same old problems.
> 
> And still, where is the money going to come from? Pay for use? That's just a euphemism for "tax".


there is always competition in the private sector. with the exception of a few things like water companies and gas companies mostly owned by city govs but sometimes in the country they are privately owned. fed ex ups dhl all can turn a profit. the post office is in debt and is stopping saturday deliveries. the epa is one of the main reasons california is bankrupt and i dont want what california has here in texas.


----------



## RCP (Apr 18, 2007)

WiseGuys Painting said:


> it is not so much the fees i am worried about. i am worried that you tell someone about all the new laws. they say the lead containment failed, they sue you, best case senario you lose alot of time and money defending yourself, worst case you lose your business. if a painter showed up in my house to paint a door and had a full body suit, respirator, and had to plastic off and filter air to just paint a door i think i would start to feel sick if i saw any dust come out.
> im not sure of all the requirements because i havent taken the class yet but i can only imagine how many hoops you have to jump through just to sand a doorjamb.
> and then i have to pay for all my employees to take the class, and if they mess up on the job here comes another lawsuit. i know some of these laws are already in effect, and if im working on a house that is obviously old i tell them there is a risk the paint contains lead. but i dont ask everyone what year their building was erected and pass out brochures. does everyone else do this already?


Spend some time reading the threads in the Lead section, most of this has been discussed. 
You only have to have one employee be a CR, he can train others on procedure, suits and respirator not necessarily mandated.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

WiseGuys Painting said:


> there is always competition in the private sector. with the exception of a few things like water companies and gas companies mostly owned by city govs but sometimes in the country they are privately owned. .


Yes, when competition is there, the system can work. 

Many utilities that are privately owned are regulated. Here in Mass we voted for removal of regulation for the electrical suppliers. It was toted as the best thing ever for consumers, prices would plummet. I'm still waiting. Many cable companies enjoyed a monopoly for years. Gee that was fun ...... NOT. 

If something like the Mass Pike were privatized, there could be no competition. It would become another Amtrak. 

Not saying govt bureaucracy works, but without competition, neither does privatization.


----------



## vermontpainter (Dec 24, 2007)

Bill 

Just a friendly reminder, political discussions are expressly forbidden on this forum. For your convenience, discussion of politics is clearly addressed in the posting rules:

*PLEASE READ: PaintTalk.com Posting Rules* 
*Forum Posting Rules: *
The following is a list of basic guidelines about what is and is not allowed while posting on our site. These rules are in addition to what is listed in our Terms Of Service , and Advertising Rules. Please read through all of these sections before using our site and contact us if you have questions..

Users shall treat each other with respect at all times on PaintTalk.com. Name calling, personal attacks, or other inappropriate behavior will not be allowed and may cause you account to be banned.
As stated in our Advertising Rules, you may not post advertisements on our site unless your a local painting contractor displaying your business info. Members who try to sell products and/or services to painting contractors will have their accounts revoked.
No pornographic material or links to pornographic material may be posted on this site. EVER!
Profanity shall be kept to a minimum.
You may only post material and content that you own. Posting copyrighted material, trademarks, and other violations of the DMCA is prohibited..
These rules may be altered at anytime without notice so please check this page often. Thanks. 

__________________


----------



## johnthepainter (Apr 1, 2008)

they have definetly emboldend ho's to sue you.

be very conscious of who you do these rrps for.

you know the types.


----------



## daArch (Mar 15, 2008)

vermontpainter said:


> Bill
> 
> Just a friendly reminder, political discussions are expressly forbidden on this forum. For your convenience, discussion of politics is clearly addressed in the posting rules:


Really? No politics on PT? When was that rule instigated? And who's about to enforce it?

















Scott, I thought long and hard about the wording and subject. I really did not think competition and privatization was a political subject. IMO, it's a discussion of workable business practices. I'm sorry if others felt it stepped over the political line.


----------



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

I personally don't think its that big of a deal, specially for the painters, most of the stuff they are asking is stuff we do anyways. except the documentation and photo crap. I think this will have a greater effect on other trades that never carry plastic in their trucks, or leave messes for others to clean up. Simply keeping the HO away from your work area will prevent any type of law suit, No way in hell they can get lead poison. I doubt they can even get it standing right next to you if your just sanding a door frame. Most paint jobs we do, are not restoration jobs where things can get messy. Typical re-paints should not be a issue at all.

Pat


----------



## vermontpainter (Dec 24, 2007)

daArch said:


> Really? No politics on PT? When was that rule instigated? And who's about to enforce it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just messin with ya Bill. Whats funny is, I dont see in the rules where political discussion is forbidden, or even discouraged. And yet it has been such a divisive issue lately! :blink:


----------



## johnthepainter (Apr 1, 2008)

vermontpainter said:


> Just messin with ya Bill. Whats funny is, I dont see in the rules where political discussion is forbidden, or even discouraged. And yet it has been such a divisive issue lately! :blink:


wow, whats up with that???


----------



## RCP (Apr 18, 2007)

vermontpainter said:


> Just messin with ya Bill. Whats funny is, I dont see in the rules where political discussion is forbidden, or even discouraged. And yet it has been such a divisive issue lately! :blink:


It is not set in stone, maybe it needs to be if it is going to be an issue?



Nathan said:


> We have always had a running rule among the mods that we discourage political discussions on our sites. If the political discussion is on topic (meaning its a conversation directly related to painting) and it remains civil we will keep it open but if it goes off at all we just close it. It's just not what this site is about and people get to riled up about politics. We have a politics area on CT and it's a mess. People don't seem to be able to control themselves when talking about politics and often times it bleeds over into the on topic conversations.
> I'm not saying anything specific about that thread, just a general rule of thumb.
> 
> As far as "censorship" is concerned... yes we "censor" this site if that's what you want to call it. We don't allow ****, excessive cursing, verbal attacks, and a few other things including politics. Yes, we live in (well, most of us) America and it's a great country that allows all of that stuff. But in order to keep this site productive and on topic we limit discussion on a few things and this is one of them.
> ...


----------



## parodi (Mar 15, 2010)

Workaholic said:


> Think about when the government first told the public about how they were going to pass an income tax or when they started taxing to build the interstates people cursed and stomped their feet and years later it is just the norm. I am sure the laws will get adjusted after the flaws are clear and then in 5 years it will just be the way it is done.


When the federal government first imposed an income tax in 1913 it was not on income from labor but only on income from investment instruments. And it was promised by the legislators at the time that it would never increase above the 1%.

The first time anyone in the US was taxed on their income from labor was in 1942 and it was called the Victory Tax and it was limited ,as I recall, to a maximum of 3%. Of course no one complained because Pearl Harbor had just occurred.

The level of taxation from income tax went up and up until the top marginal rate was 90%

If you want to calm people down about the lead law IMO I wouldn't use the income tax as an example of benign government involvement.


----------

