= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
buybuydandavis comments on Politics Discussion Thread February 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (146)
If this was intended as a response to me, I don't see the relevance to what I said.
As for the lead story, that's been going around for a long time, and don't really see the relevance to most US political discussions. Childhood lead exposure can cause developmental problems leading to adult behavioral changes. Believable to me.
Quite recently under Obama the EPA did make a decision to limit mercury polution which got opposed by the Republicans.
If you accept that lead should be regulated then why not mercury? The EPA did a pretty good calculation that estimated the costs and benefits of mercury regulation.
Sorry about that, it wasn't. I misclicked, and the retract button's line crossing seemed even worse than just leaving it there.
The relevance to US political discussion is in policy decisions. With the information we have in this article, it's a better long term investment to get rid of lead usage in industrial and commercial settings that risk such exposure, if one is trying to reduce crime in cities, instead of building more prisons, "cracking down on crime", etc.