You probably need to know a bit about logic to point out logical errors, and you'll need to name the fallacies, not just a generic "logical errors", that's meaningless.
I'll count it as a win for knowledge that you now know that A-76 exists. Is it effective? Again I've seen a bunch of cases where we self-initiated an A-76 review and no-one even surfaced to do the job. Why? All the low hanging fruit, stuff that's amenable to privatization, has already been picked. What's left is stuff that's just inherently hard and expensive, with most of that expense due to inherent risk. If a private company prices in that risk, it often becomes prohibitively expensive. I'd again caution that you're just assuming "stupid lazy government employees" without knowing the first thing about the processes or innovation that's currently going on. That's a jackass move, not to mention, in your words "illogical".
I've worked in soup kitchens, have you? Our clients were largely suffering from mental illness, often untreated and/or significant substance abuse issues. They weren't at the soup kitchen because pollution controls killed their jobs, that's just an idiotic assertion. Again, it's a named logical fallacy you're engaging in, the "either/or" fallacy. You've provided no evidence that the 14% hunger rate in the U.S. is caused by controlling pollution. And no, the fact that autocratic third world countries allow pollution to the detriment of their population is not proof that hunger in America is caused by pollution controls. I've shown that in fact it's the opposite, pollution is a drag on the economy. I'd be happy to hear you address that, you're quite studiously avoiding it.
