3 ms·
>They know this stuff is bad but they are confident their wealthy town or county will not allow it to impact the drinking water supply. that is the strangest r
by serf 6y ago
>They know this stuff is bad but they are confident their wealthy town or county will not allow it to impact the drinking water supply.
that is the strangest re-telling of the Flint water-quality story that i've ever heard.
Nearly everything indicates that the steps in Flint were cost-saving measures that the citizens either 1) didn't know about, 2) were told that there wouldn't be problems, and 3) were promised health concerns wouldn't be a factor.
Where exactly does this 'wealthy town that's overly confident" narrative fit? That hasn't been my perception at all with Flint.
- SECProto 6y agoFlint is not a wealthier town. They are one of the "someone else's problem" poorer places that the wealthier towns don't care about.
- sokoloff 6y agoFlint's water problems were not inflicted by some nearby or upstream wealthier town. They were inflicted by Flint city (mis-)management. Even as detailed by the left-leaning NPR: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/20/465545378/lead-laced-water-in-flint-a-step-by-step-look-at-the-makings-of-a-crisis https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/04/20/465545378...
- SECProto 6y agoYes, but the whole issue was caused by them switching to a new water source because it was cheaper. And old lead pipes that hadn't been replaced. And inadequate water treatment to prevent these conflicts. Root cause would be mismanagement, but even more root is trying to spend less money without properly assessing dangers.
- sokoloff 6y agoYes, but none of that is related to someone else foisting their pollution off onto a poor area. It's entirely an own-goal.