Flint Officials Could Have Prevented Lead Crisis for $80 a Day | Hacker News Reader

Flint Officials Could Have Prevented Lead Crisis for $80 a Day

mintpressnews.com

11 pointsjayess4 comments

The problem is the lead in the pipes. Flint was mis-managed years before Snyder appointed an emergency manager.

Even kwami kilpatrick, the ex-mayor of detroit who is now in prison, said he knew about the water problems when he was in office.

You've probably lived somewhere with leaded pipes. They are very common. Across the country we are working to replace leaded pipes when we can, but the problem is very complex. As it turns out, it's much more cost-effective to treat water than embark upon giant infrastructure projects. Simply put, the MDEQ, and the EPA should have known to treat the water, which would have kept the lead from leeching into the water. Unfortunately, this wasn't done, and now the pipes are damaged - perhaps beyond repair.

Despite the above, the water problems in Flint can't be attributed to a single thing, but rather a culmination of failures in state and local government best described as a problem of culture. Instead of a culture of openness and communication, there are indications the state, and to a lesser degree, the local government embraced a culture of only communicating good news and spinning or squashing bad news - even internally.

So they didn't follow the rules, and bad things happened? Each of us can probably think of a time when we didn't follow the rules, usually for more minor things (speed limits, etc).

Something about politicians/bureaucrats makes them bold enough to think that rules don't apply to them, but on a totally different scale. I would like to understand why -- does anybody know?

It's not just "the rules", but a cascading set of rules, and deliberately ignoring or rejecting the feedback mechanisms which identity that "bad things" happened.

It would be more like breaking the speed limit, ignoring the flashing sign telling you your speed, outrunning the cop car, crashing through the barricade set to stop you, not making the corner because you were going too fast, and crashing into the schoolyard, all while on the phone explaining to the press that the radar detector and speed cameras were miscalibrated and you were going at the speed limit.

> "I would like to understand why."

That is too complicated for HN. Why are people loyal to a sports team, and in some cases willing to overlook a coach's child molestation or player who is a rapist or thief? Why did the US switch from the spoils system to a civil service system? Why is there organizational retaliatory behavior towards whistle-blowers or those that file sexual harassment complaints?

Even without a definite "why", I think these are all expressions of frequent human tendencies. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_of_reciprocity for one starting place.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com