3 ms·
> They weren't "poisoned" and it's just as bad in other places, sure. Now can we fix the damn problem already? Or do you just want to keep making excuses? Oh y
by candiodari 8y ago
> They weren't "poisoned" and it's just as bad in other places, sure. Now can we fix the damn problem already? Or do you just want to keep making excuses?
Oh yeah, just dig up all parts of the water supply that haven't been touched in 50 years, nationwide, and replace them.
In other words, can we fix the problem ? No. Aside from the cost, there's practical problems: we don't even know where half of it is, for one. Parts of it are under streets, bridges, buildings, etc ... They should be torn down
The problem was created by "our grandfaters" saving a buck and now the government "must" fix it.
Okay, but that's just the start. Next up, cleaning all riverwater nationwide of corrosive chemicals.
> It's a matter of principle, of morals.
It could be a matter of life and death, for all the good it'll do. It's impossible. If it was a matter of life and death, we'd be dead.
This cannot be done, for obvious reasons.
- freehunter 8y agoSo I guess it's all hopeless and we should all just die then. What's the use in doing anything if everything is a mild inconvenience? >The problem was created by "our grandfathers" saving a buck and now the government "must" fix it. No, the problem was created by the existing Flint/Michigan government, and yes, it's their problem to fix. This isn't some nebulous "it happened in the past and we're just getting the bill now". But you're right, it's completely impossible to replace water pipes. No one in the history of ever has ever replaced a water pipe.
- candiodari 8y agoIf digging up all existing water infrastructure, regardless of not knowing where it is or what is built on top of it is a "mild inconvenience" ... why don't you just quickly take care of it ? Hell, I'll help you. We should be done in an afternoon, right ?