President Joe Biden announced Thursday $3 billion toward identifying and replacing theĀ nationās unsafeĀ leadĀ pipes,Ā a long-sought move to improve public health and clean drinking waterĀ that will be paidĀ for by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
Biden unveiled the new fundingĀ in North Carolina, a battleground state Democrats have lost to Donald Trump in the past two presidential electionsĀ but are feeling more bullish toward due to an abortion measure on the stateās ballot this November.
ā¦
The Environmental Protection Agency will invest $3 billion in theĀ leadĀ pipe effort annually through 2026, Administrator Michael Regan told reporters. He said that nearly 50% of the funding will go to disadvantaged communities ā and a fact sheet from the Biden administration noted that ālead exposure disproportionately affects communities of color and low-income families.ā
Again this arrogant stupidity.
Define ālowā and explain how would you make that something objective for this your sentence to not look awfully stupid.
My friend, the recognized āsafeā level of lead is literally no lead. Any more than literally 0ppm is above safe lead levels.
Just because it isnāt considered lead poisoning, doesnāt mean itās safe.
Do some research before you pop off about stuff you donāt understand:
You will find no evidence that lead at any level is safe. In fact, previous research which suggested that lower levels were fine are being refuted by more recent studies, that show quite the opposite.
Thatās not what Iām talking about and this sentence too reaches the āSoviet lecture for kolkhozniksā level of cringe.
By 0 do you mean āunder 10^(-10)ā, or āunder 10^(-13)ā, or what?
I know what lead is.
Youāre being pointlessly semantic and making no actual argument here.
Didnāt have an opportunity to make it clearer due to opponentās smartassing tone, so: the argument was that it does matter how much probability there is of lead getting into your water.
Since, as even people under this post explain, it happens differently with different water composition, whether there is vibration, whether some sharp item floats through the pipe etc.
So a lead pipe doesnāt necessarily poison all water passing through it. Just sometimes does that.
Same as a punctured cast iron pipe doesnāt leak always, only when the pressure is right, when some coating of various nature over the puncture gets dissolved or damaged by vibration, etc.
A single molecule of lead in a human body is too much. Does that answer your question?
And Iām aware the chances of a specific person consuming lead are slim for most pipes, the problem is there are so many lead pipes throughout the country, that Iād be willing to bet money there are a number of people drinking lead contaminated water right now.
Itās like the lottery, just because the chances are exceedingly small that you will win, doesnāt change the fact that itās almost guaranteed someone will win.
OK.
Ooh, nice. Coming in hot with the ethnic slur against Ukrainians, and then continuing on with some delightfully obnoxious pedantry.You should stop while youāre behind.It is a different word, and I misread it; as was pointed out, itās a Russian cultural anecdote/idiom that non Russians would not necessarily understand. My apologies for starting a kerfluffle with my misunderstanding.
You shouldnāt write anything on subjects requiring knowledge of Russian without that knowledge.
ŠŠ¾Š»Ń Š¾Š·Š½ŠøŠŗ means, naturally, someone living and working in ŠŗŠ¾Š»Ń Š¾Š· .
And āŠ»ŠµŠŗŃŠøŃ Š“Š»Ń ŠŗŠ¾Š»Ń Š¾Š·Š½ŠøŠŗŠ¾Š²ā is a reference to a well-known (in ex-USSR) anecdote.
And you are an idiot.
So I was going to apologize for my misinterpretation and express some appreciation for giving me some new knowledge, but then that last sentence happened.
Sorry for insulting you.
But how else do you call a person who finds an ethnic slur in a word they donāt understand? Iād understand if Iād say anything about Ukrainians at all.
If I do something like that (happens regularly) I admit that Iām an idiot. Iām actually glad to discharge some of the frustration through that.
Well, if you liked the clarification part, the anecdote itself is:
"Thatās a skull of Alexander when he was 5, thatās when he was 25, thatās when he was dead. Any questions?
How can one person have 3 skulls?
And youāre what?
A dachnik (that is, a person with a garden and now usually, then maybe a house without utilities in the countryside, living in the city).
Then go to hell, the lecture is for kolkhozniks."
The anecdote refers to the expected intelligence level of typical Soviet brochures, like of an enthusiast worker who offered to reduce the acceptable percentage of discarded product to ānoneā instead of some percent and similar.
And, well, maybe to how Soviet officials viewed their population.
For what itās worth, I do actually appreciate the anthropological background. And yes, I was being rather foolish in my initial comment.