Watch Republicans argue that lead is good for kids.
this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
300 points (99.3% liked)
politics
19072 readers
3769 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The children yearn for the lead
It has what kids crave
Nah. That's not the playbook.
Whenever kids (actual, post birth kids) need protecting, it's all about "who's going to pay" or "taxes are already high" or "but that will be really inconvenient to the ~~upper~~ middle class".
The best excuse I've heard for a bill that would protect kids from pedophiles was "the bill would unfairly target conservatives". I can't remember if this was a federal bill or a local bill but I remember it coming up and people saying "You're telling on yourself."
Yo, what??? 😂😂😂😂😂
I'd be interested to see map of lead pipe concentration vs one of political affiliation.
States with the most lead pipes, most at the top
- Florida
- Illinois
- Ohio
- Pennsylvania
- Texas
- New York
- Tennessee
- North Carolina
- New Jersey
- Wisconsin
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/states-with-the-most-lead-pipes
You're going to see a map of older areas, that is, urban cores and inner-ring suburbs. In other words, I don't think you're going to find the correlation you're probably hoping for.
To be fair, though, the official government line -- uh, until today, I guess -- is that lead water mains weren't actually a problem because of the large volume of water flowing through them relative to the rate of corrosion, unless you did something stupid (like the Republican governor-appointed emergency manager did to Flint) to cause them to corrode abnormally rapidly. Hopefully there isn't much of a widespread correlation between political affiliation and brain damage from exposure to lead via plumbing at all.
I'm pretty sure lead is what makes people conservatives. Look at when there was lead in things like paint and every car burned leaded gas.
Biologist here, it gives you adhd (60% chance), autism, and cerebellar Hypodysplasia (cant remember the incidence rate for these last two, but want to say CH is 8%). Child abuses causes conservativism lol, but lead causes developmental defects starting as early as the embryo.
Source: “Half of US Population Exposed to Adverse Lead Levels in Early Childhood,” Michael J. McFarland, Matt E. Hauer, Aaron Reuben. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, March 7, 2022. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2118631119
To believe what current US conservatives are claiming now, you have to be developmentally defective at this point.
Flashbacks to watching republican politicians eat that pink goo filler crap they put into meat that was controversial for a minute.
This?
Reminder these kids are all adults now. Though they are about 60 years away from being politicians.
I had lead when I was a kid and I turned out just fine!
Eating lead paint chips made me the man I am today!
That's SOCIALISM!! - Lead affected Republicans.
We. Need. More. Lead.
"The founding fathers had lead pipes and they turned out fine! If they didn't intend for us to have lead pipes, they wouldn't have put them in. Getting rid of them is simply un-American!"
Cant wait for republicans to mix Ivermectin-Horse-Dewormer with Lead to drink it on camera as a symbol of their patriotism. It would be a Christmas Miracle come true...
“Let’s get rid of EPA” - Lead affected repubes
Snowflake generation strikes again! Back in my day we were tough enough to resist lead poisoning.
Although the infrastructure law dedicated $15 billion for lead pipe removal, the largest investment ever, there is still a shortfall. While advocates and federal officials estimate the total cost for lead removal at about $45 billion, the drinking water industry’s estimate runs as high $60 billion.
So, who's going to foot the bill for replacing the pipes while Marxists turn kids trans with their critical race pedagogy? Is replacing lead pipes really protecting kids?
Okay, but really, this is probably a strategically good idea. My proposed solution is to get the richer areas of the city/state to help pay for the poorer areas. Everybody has skin in the game as far as the benefits, so why not the costs?
There's a solid line of argument here. Lead toxicity creates more psychopaths. And if they turn into serial killers, they don't care if you're rich or poor. We also don't have good mental health services available everywhere, so prevention is the most plausible solution.
This leverages fear, which is the primary lens some people view the world through. "You don't want more serial killers like we had in the 70s, do you?" basically.
The politicians won't care because they have gated communities and armed guards, and you'll never get through to the voters because Faux and the even worse places like OAN will be bombarding them with propaganda about how this is horrible big government overreach.
Because you're not thinking like a kleptocrat Republican. The government is only allowed to spend money when it can be used to increase the bank account of someone rich, and never under any circumstances if it benefits poor people (unless someone rich receives a significantly greater benefit).
Republicans will fight this tooth and nail because the rich receive no direct or immediate benefit from this. Also they'll denounce any suggestion of rich areas subsidizing poor areas as the dreaded socialism which they'll argue is the same thing as communism which is the same thing as fascism. No that doesn't make any sense at all, but that's never stopped them before.
The government is only allowed to spend money when it can be used to increase the bank account of someone rich, and never under any circumstances if it benefits poor people (unless someone rich receives a significantly greater benefit).
So, the EPA's (and other people who want lead pipes removed, their) communication strategy should be convincing Republicans that the removal of leads pipes directly causes their wealth to increase.
That shouldn't be that hard. Make it a business analogy, their favorite.
Like, in the same way business make capital investments to increase production, take advantage of economies of scale, and pay lower taxes, so too does making a capital investment in the removal of lead pipes, which lead to increased production, a happier workforce, and more trainable employees.
Or some soul-sucking shit like that.
That's SOCIALISM! I want my Tax Dollars used ONLY to force WOMEN to give birth! I DON'T want my Tax Dollars used to actually Protect Children's Lives!
I'm utterly amazed this isn't already a rule.
To be fair, America’s pipes need cleaning. A complete overhaul is even better.
Wait, someone doing something for the kids that’s actually for the kids?
You know if they say it's for the good of the children they are up to something
In this case, removing lead pipes so that kids don't get brain damage.
Not exactly getting the joke huh
Those cases are usually easy to point out the ulterior motive.
I see no downside to this effort though.
Space age stuff. Really at the forefront.
Lead is soooooooo bad for you