• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

american water crisis

norseamd

Lifer
Dec 13, 2013
13,990
179
106
In Flint hundreds if not thousands have been poisoned by lead and other contaminants as a direct result of the corrupt incompetency of the Michigan governor. But it is not the only water crisis in America. All across reservations in America there is a severe crisis with the quality and safety of the water available to residents.

Here is a nice example of the reservation water supply in action.

https://vine.co/v/h7lVzFFd1Zr

And here are some of the many news articles on the subject.

http://national.deseretnews.com/article/17818/did-you-think-the-water-in-flint-was-bad-the-water-is-even-worse-for-native-americans.html

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/02/15/flint-native-americans-worry-water-poisoned-worse.html

http://www.voanews.com/content/native-americans-ask-what-about-our-water-supply/3188737.html

Not only has it hit Flint and indigenous reservations, but it has also hit many small towns especially those near coal.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/environmental-racism-coal-ash-explainer
 
Last edited:

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,897
638
126
In Flint hundreds if not thousands have been poisoned by lead and other contaminants as a direct result of the corrupt incompetency of the Michigan governor.
I lost you right there and read no further. If you're trying to make a point, it's always best not to insert your bias that is centered around leftist talking points based in bullshit.
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,628
4
81
Well if we would just send more/all manufacturing overseas then our rivers would be fine, we can just let them pollute theirs instead.



This will never come back to haunt us, water stays in one place.

Least we have trade agreements now to help this along.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,091
9,965
136
I lost you right there and read no further. If you're trying to make a point, it's always best not to insert your bias that is centered around leftist talking points based in bullshit.
You are correct. It is complete bias and bullshit to state the Governor ordered Flint's water supply switched.
 

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,176
135
106
The Michigan governor? lol So the michigan governor is supposed to wave a magic wand and replace billions of dollars worth of infrastructure to provide clean water to a bunch of people who are already leeching billions off the taxpayer. And just where is the money supposed to come from after he waves this magic wand? States cannot run deficits like your loving and gracious federal government.

First, you ship away all the jobs and leave the city broke and destitute. Then you placate the survivors with endless welfare which turns them into lazy slobs ensuring their children will also be broke and destitute. Then you wonder why the city cannot bring in enough money to maintain its infrastructure. Then you blame the frickin governor.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,177
18,977
136
You are correct. It is complete bias and bullshit to state the Governor ordered Flint's water supply switched.
Instead, it was switched by the person he appointed as a result of the law that he passed, twice, in the face of community vetoes. That's much better.
 

Hugo Drax

Diamond Member
Nov 20, 2011
5,649
47
91
Well we have no money to fix it. 110,000,000,000 dollars have gone to Fix Afghanistan infrastructure instead of American infrastructure.

And I am only talking about 1 country.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,525
42
86
a direct result of the corrupt incompetency of the Michigan governor.
Let's make sure this statement is accurate. The key piece of information is whether the governor was informed prior to the decision that the new water source was going to erode lead water pipes.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,525
42
86
Instead, it was switched by the person he appointed as a result of the law that he passed, twice, in the face of community vetoes. That's much better.
Was the community aware prior to the switch in water sources, that the water pipes under the ground were made with lead?

If not, then their opposition is unrelated to the situation that happened.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,177
18,977
136
Was the community aware prior to the switch in water sources, that the water pipes under the ground were made with lead?

If not, then their opposition is unrelated to the situation that happened.
Their opposition was to the appointment of the person who made the decision so it is most certainly related.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,525
42
86
Their opposition was to the appointment of the person who made the decision so it is most certainly related.
Indirectly related to the lead pipe issue. For you to make your original point, more supportive information needs to be supplied.

Otherwise it's just more unproductive partisan bickering.

Please do supply more information on what was known by whom on the lead pipe issue, as well as standard procedure other towns and government officials go through to ensure quality controls over water delivery, that this appointee did not perform.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,525
42
86
The decision to change water supplies is not the "incompetency". The problem was the failure to fully investigate the effects of the new water supply on the old pipes. That's where you need to look to determine who failed. What standard procedures do other towns and governments go through which would have found this problem, that Flint's government neglected to perform?

Damn this forum and their "Elite" members can be quite stupid sometimes...
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,183
60
91
If you have 100 year old pipes in the ground that were soldered together with lead then maybe it is not a good idea to use water that is very corrosive in those pipes. All pipes with lead should be removed from the ground. Lots of older cities have old pipes that should all be replaced. This is a possible problem in any large metropolitan area.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,177
18,977
136
The decision to change water supplies is not the "incompetency". The problem was the failure to fully investigate the effects of the new water supply on the old pipes. That's where you need to look to determine who failed. What standard procedures do other towns and governments go through which would have found this problem, that Flint's government neglected to perform?

Damn this forum and their "Elite" members can be quite stupid sometimes...
Making a decision to change water supplies without looking into the effects of that change is basically the dictionary definition of incompetence. GM notified the city that the water was corroding car parts in their factory and they did nothing.

If you can show me that other municipalities have procedures that tell them to ignore complaints of water corroding industrial metals I'm open to hearing it. Maybe if you can pull off that rhetorical feat you can become an Elite Member as well as that seems to be important to you for some reason.
 

Ventanni

Golden Member
Jul 25, 2011
1,421
127
106
This is why whenever someone complains about the President of the United States that I ask them these three questions:

1. Who is your mayor?
2. If you don't have a mayor, what government type is your city?
3. Where does your water come from?

Why? Because your local government has much, much more effect on your day-to-day life than the US president does. If you can't answer those 3 questions, then you better get to finding out.

It's like people who complain about having no choice of internet service provides and bandwidth caps in their area. That's a local government issue. But hey, blame Obama...
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,211
8,054
136
Let's make sure this statement is accurate. The key piece of information is whether the governor was informed prior to the decision that the new water source was going to erode lead water pipes.
The answer was yes. A study was done prior to the switch and it was known that a chemical additive was needed to prevent corrosion of the pipes. This was covered in my flint thread.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,630
181
106
If you have 100 year old pipes in the ground that were soldered together with lead then maybe it is not a good idea to use water that is very corrosive in those pipes. All pipes with lead should be removed from the ground. Lots of older cities have old pipes that should all be replaced. This is a possible problem in any large metropolitan area.
No. Not soldered with lead, but solid lead pipes that should have been replaced fifty years ago when the dangers of lead in paint, petroleum additives, plumbing leaching where found to cause brain damage to children.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,947
2,323
126
If you have 100 year old pipes in the ground that were soldered together with lead then maybe it is not a good idea to use water that is very corrosive in those pipes. All pipes with lead should be removed from the ground. Lots of older cities have old pipes that should all be replaced. This is a possible problem in any large metropolitan area.
What about the old houses with old pipes from the street to the house? What do you do about all of those pipes?
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,630
181
106
The decision to change water supplies is not the "incompetency". The problem was the failure to fully investigate the effects of the new water supply on the old pipes. That's where you need to look to determine who failed. What standard procedures do other towns and governments go through which would have found this problem, that Flint's government neglected to perform?

Damn this forum and their "Elite" members can be quite stupid sometimes...
Cover up from top to bottom, boobs appointing boobs for political reasons with no qualifications for doing the job. The Governor ignored two years of complaints of water quality and tests showing astronomical lead levels in favor of his appointee's excuses and FIXED tests where they run the faucets for twenty four hours before a test to purge the lines of lead contamination. Plus any fool with a litmus test could tell the water was acid and you do not run untreated acid water that can corrode the pipes.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
18,896
1,803
126
You are correct. It is complete bias and bullshit to state the Governor ordered Flint's water supply switched.
Instead, it was switched by the person he appointed as a result of the law that he passed, twice, in the face of community vetoes. That's much better.
Actually, the Flint City Council (7-1 vote), Flint Mayor, Emergency Manager and Treasurer all agreed to switch the water. The DWA then shut off the water years too early and would only agree to continue providing the water under drastically higher rates - rates Flint can't afford.

So what do they do? They look at reports from Rowe Engineering showing that the Flint water would be safe to drink if treated properly and decide it might be a good intermediate step until the KWA was ready.

A new engineering firm was hired to do another report and met with the Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality, Genesee County and Flint’s water department. During this meeting all agree that the Flint River can be used as a water source.

So two independent engineering firms (one brought in by the city of Flint before the emergency manager was even put in place), the MDEQ and Flint water authority all agree that Flint's water can be made safe to drink and the MEDEQ certifies the water plan but somehow its the Governor's fault? If everyone agrees something is possible including a firm brought in by the City of Flint (Something the Governor had absolutely no control or influence over) seems like blaming Snyder is a stretch
 
Last edited:

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
18,896
1,803
126
No. Not soldered with lead, but solid lead pipes that should have been replaced fifty years ago when the dangers of lead in paint, petroleum additives, plumbing leaching where found to cause brain damage to children.
Flint does not have an accurate map of what pipes contain what materials as previous government officials were sloppy enforcing contractual requirements\record keeping
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,177
18,977
136
Actually, the Flint City Council (7-1 vote), Flint Mayor, Emergency Manager and Treasurer all agreed to switch the water. The DWA then shut off the water years too early and would only agree to continue providing the water under drastically higher rates - rates Flint can't afford.
This is incorrect. First of all, the Flint City Council had no power to decide that. What they voted for didn't matter.

Secondly and more importantly, the statement that the Flint City Council voted to switch to the Flint river is false. What the City Council voted for was to switch to the Karegnondi Water Authority, which was in the process of building a pipeline to Flint to carry it.

After that happened Detroit sent a letter of termination to Flint, which would take effect after a year. They could have renegotiated that contract at any time to take them all the way until the pipeline was built.

The emergency manager appointed by the state decided to switch to water from the Flint river immediately in order to save money. At no time did the Flint City Council EVER vote to draw water from the Flint river.

I'm basically paraphrasing this:
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/01/michigan_truth_squad_who_appro.html

So what do they do? They look at reports from Rowe Engineering showing that the Flint water would be safe to drink if treated properly and decide it might be a good intermediate step until the KWA was ready.

A new engineering firm was hired to do another report and met with the Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality, Genesee County and Flint’s water department. During this meeting all agree that the Flint River can be used as a water source.

So two independent engineering firms (one brought in before the emergency manager was even put in place), the MDEQ and Flint water authority all agree that Flint's water can be made safe to drink and the MEDEQ certifies the water plan but somehow its the Governor's fault?

Regardless I think the NPR reporter Lindsay Smith put it best:
When the state government takes control of a city and makes decisions for it then they own the consequences of those decisions.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,211
8,054
136
Except you are forgetting one tiny, teeny, piece of info and that is that it was known that the switch would have required a chemical additive.

Later it became publicly known that federal law had not been followed. A 2011 study on the Flint River found it would have to be treated with an anti-corrosive agent for it to be considered as a safe source for drinking water.

Adding that agent would have cost about $100 a day, and experts say 90% of the problems with Flint's water would have been avoided.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/11/health/toxic-tap-water-flint-michigan/

Actually, the Flint City Council (7-1 vote), Flint Mayor, Emergency Manager and Treasurer all agreed to switch the water. The DWA then shut off the water years too early and would only agree to continue providing the water under drastically higher rates - rates Flint can't afford.

So what do they do? They look at reports from Rowe Engineering showing that the Flint water would be safe to drink if treated properly and decide it might be a good intermediate step until the KWA was ready.

A new engineering firm was hired to do another report and met with the Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality, Genesee County and Flint’s water department. During this meeting all agree that the Flint River can be used as a water source.

So two independent engineering firms (one brought in before the emergency manager was even put in place), the MDEQ and Flint water authority all agree that Flint's water can be made safe to drink and the MEDEQ certifies the water plan but somehow its the Governor's fault?
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
18,896
1,803
126
Except you are forgetting one tiny, teeny, piece of info and that is that it was known that the switch would have required a chemical additive.
We've argued this before. If you look at the emails released by the EPA via a FOIA request EPA-R5-2015-01129900000241.pdf shows the EPA did not know if their requirements actually required the treatment or not in this situation

Thats why they had to release a new memorandum in November 2015 requiring corrosion control for situations like Flint:

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/occt_req_memo_signed_pg_2015-11-03-155158_508.pdf

Note that they specifically call out the situation in Flint and say
This type ofsituation rarely arises and the language of the
LCR does not specifically discuss such circumstances.
and as such its not legally assertable that the EPA required Flint to to use corrosion control

(This ignores the part where the MDEQ claimed they were using corrosion control when they actually weren't)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY