Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

earthjustice.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 508 posts

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#461

Post by tomrod »

nozzlegear wrote: post #428
vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing. Trump would be eminently beatable if the democrats bothered running good candidates and had the courage to stand for something. But they are perfectly content collecting tons of money which probably goes to connected "consultants" who then spend 20 million on figuring out how to talk to people.

I think Harris was a good candidate who did stand for something, but she didn't get enough time to run her own campaign :) But I'm not interested in having a "she wasn't pure enough for my brand of politics" debate, I was only pointing out that almost half of those who voted did in fact vote for her – not Trump.

She was no Obama or Bill Clinton. At best a weak 80s style Democrat.

Dan Carlin says it best. Political parties are built to win, and Democrats sometimes forget that.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#462

Post by greenhat76 »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #274
he0001 wrote: post #4

Does anyone know why this is done? What is the reasoning here? Is this defendable in any way?

The answer is likely that the treatment is expensive, and most people aren't drinking tap water anyway. My town completed it's pfas filtering system and water bill costs increased about 25% to cover it. I don't know one person in this town though who doesn't drink filtered water. That being said, I do still support the filtering.

This is the reason. My city is struggling to fix its water supply that was broken over a decade ago (our water supply comes from a temporary system) since FEMA sent our funds to other things under the first trump admin.

They don't want to put the cost on the consumer, but there is no other choice. If our government was smart (it's not) they would make these rules and fund the changes.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#463

Post by tstrimple »

Nifty3929 wrote: post #440
softwaredoug wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re going to end with a strong red/blue state divide on regulatory frameworks. I wonder if the vaccine guideline coalitions point to emerging regulatory consistency among blue states on this as well.

I like this actually - let different states try different things, and see how they work out. As the results become more certain, states will feel pressure to adopt the policies that are working well. And there's still room for different states to retain different policies that are better suited to them individually.

Exactly. Just like the pressure of being the last state in basically every single metric has empowered Mississippi to turn things around. Oh wait what? Mississippi is more fucked up than ever and shows zero signs of ever joining a civilized nation? Maybe they just haven’t hit rock bottom quite hard enough. Surely then conservative politics will turn things around!

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#464

Post by tstrimple »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #374
Herring wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually about tribal belonging. https://bigthink.com/articles/how-tribalism-overrules-reason...

I didn’t realize until after social media how a lot of people’s whole lives revolve around the community of the church and how lost they would be without their church community. That’s not by itself meant to be an insult. But I saw it in real time with her. Everything I knew about her as a person was at odds with her support of the current MAGA movement. I thought she would be bemoaning that Republicans didn’t choose…

[dead]

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#465

Post by tstrimple »

nozzlegear wrote: post #428
vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing. Trump would be eminently beatable if the democrats bothered running good candidates and had the courage to stand for something. But they are perfectly content collecting tons of money which probably goes to connected "consultants" who then spend 20 million on figuring out how to talk to people.

I think Harris was a good candidate who did stand for something, but she didn't get enough time to run her own campaign :) But I'm not interested in having a "she wasn't pure enough for my brand of politics" debate, I was only pointing out that almost half of those who voted did in fact vote for her – not Trump.

It’s actually the opposite. Immediately after Kamala got the nod there was an enormous amount of energy surrounding her nomination that she managed to entirely squander. If Kamala had less time as the main candidate she would have done better. She ran a shit campaign and bled support the entire time. I can’t imagine why anyone wasn’t impressed with her promises to maintain the status quo and her ability to campaign with war criminals from the Bush era.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#466

Post by malnourish »

tombert wrote: post #171
sedawkgrep wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's much bigger than racism. Take a look at the administration's first term and all the involvement and ties (financial, political, etc.) there are to Russia (and Russian-related objectives like Ukraine). It sounds bonkers, but the more you dig in and see how closely tied the relationships have been, and then see how totally soft Trump has been towards Putin/Russia - including direct actions towards Ukraine…

I have no doubt that the administration's motivation are weird and Russia-oriented. I was referring to the voters. I think a lot of the voters claimed grocery prices were the reason, but a lot of them really wanted to get rid of Mexicans. Trump used a lot of racist rhetoric during all three of his campaigns. The fact that conservatives seem unwilling to condemn the president and ICE for detaining naturalized citizens…

Can you explain the growth in Republican Latino votes?

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#467

Post by tstrimple »

jjani wrote: post #356
hedora wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right managed to succeed with their electoral reforms. Gerrymandering is legal, and the president is now above the law. The left should use the same tactics: Focus on state and local elections then use those positions to fix elections so that the national majority of voters decide who runs the federal government (instead of the current 25-30% of voters). Doing this is completely legal now that the Supreme Court h…

> If the democrats fail to do this, it’s not mere incompetence. It’s probably because their financial backers actually support the changes being made by Trump. This has been clear for very long. Hence why they're still not doing it, and have for the last 9 years been and still [1] continue to push for Clinton-like candidates rather than whatever candidate has the biggest chance of winning elections. It isn't incompet…

To liberals a “socialist” like Mamdani is way worse than conservatives like Trump. They are more than happy to support a sexual predator over a socialist. Trump and the DNC largely have the same donors to keep happy. Capitalism and how to make a select few fabulously wealthy isn’t a power either the democrats or republicans want to give up. Unfortunately due to the first past the post voting system we have to align to one of the two fucked up corporatist political parties. One which pretends to care about things like equality and fairness and one who has removed their mask and fully embraces all the worst aspects of humanity. I’d still much rather have a Target that pretended to care about things than a Target who fully embraces late stage capitalism.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#468

Post by tstrimple »

odie5533 wrote: post #73
the__alchemist wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why the left puts up with it. They are too easily distracted by hot-button issues. These are some of the most important issues facing the present and future of our civilization and biosphere. I wish I had a solution, or knew the step to take. I suspect one of the root causes is the narrative, e.g. from news agencies, is being controlled by the propagators of the problem.

The human brain can not handle social media. It has melted our brains and completely controls the Main Signal with its algorithms. The right is better at controlling the media in such a system, and is ascendant. We live in meme world now. Nothing is serious. It's all just memes.

There have always been shitty conservatives in the world. The US fought a civil war against them. Civilized people fought against them and won civil rights and women’s suffrage and the right for gay folk to get married. These assholes have always existed in society and unfortunately always will. This is not a problem of social media but of acceptable antisocial behavior and beliefs.

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#469

Post by binoct »

BoredPositron wrote: post #438
binoct wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does Germany use to manage microorganism growth in it's water distribution system? As I understand cloramine/chlorine is used to keep the small amounts of microorganisms that will always be present in water and pipes from growing into a problem while it travels/sits in the distribution system.

https://utilityweek.co.uk/the-future-of-chlorine/

Thanks!

Re: EPA Seeks to Eliminate Critical PFAS Drinking Water Protections

#470

Post by dylan604 »

BoredPositron wrote: post #433
dylan604 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I have no say in the plumbing used to get the water from the source to my home. Some of that infrastructure is older than I am. Whole home RO systems would still possibly flow through plumbing I wouldn't be happy with. Undersink RO systems at the primary place providing water that I ingest seems like the best place for me knowing the details about the plumbing from this new source.

That's also a bad governance problem.

And? You keep saying this like it's an answer to a question, but it's just not a useful one. Do you go through all of life deciding that you're going to do nothing because it's a bad governance problem? Do you honestly never make changes to things you can control just because it technically should be someone else's problem? Personally, I don't have time for that. If I can make improvements for things as a band-aid fix to something that will never get fixed in any other fashion, I do it. I don't have time for BS and lazy "but it's not my problem" type of people, and you're quickly moving into that column
Post reply on HN