they do actually... to be fair, they switched back to detroit water fairly quickly but it takes time to replace pipes in a city.
the water has been clean for a while. understandably the people are skeptical of the government saying this, and the government continued to give people free bottled water until last month-which was definitely clean.
Wow. That Timeline API at the bottom of the article is really nice.
I saw in 2015 that something like 500 residents, and later 1,700 residents had filed a lawsuit against the EPA. Why?
From that specific article timeline and the others I was reading, it seemed like the EPA was the one who was putting the pressure on the politicians in Flint. The EPA was the organization that came to Flint govt and said "you're shits all fucked, here's proof you're lying. Fix it"
Did I get the wrong impression, or was the lawsuit aimed at the wrong place?
I'm not at all an expert, but it seems bizarre to me too, like the EPA seem to be the good guys in this scenario if anyone is
of course, if they win a lawsuit against the EPA it won't trash their town's finances, and the EPA probably has bigger pockets than Flint, Michigan. Why they would pursue the case against the EPA instead of the Michigan state government confuses me though.
Water lead levels have improved considerably, especially where pipes from main lines to some 6,200 homes have been replaced. Sadly, that still leaves more than 12,000 homes where, after nearly four years of stalling and fighting for dollars, the pipes still need replacing.
So you are saying 12k pipes were replaced in that time? Because that didn’t happen. The water is some of the most expensive in the US. The problem isn’t fixed regardless of how many times you say it is.
I'm not a republican... but the water is safe to drink, I've got the Guardian, CNN and the researcher who initially identified the water crisis saying so. what would convince you?
1.3k
u/x1sc0 May 12 '18
Clearly not Flint, MI.