Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air is racist

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Air is racist




    A study produced by the University of Minnesota concluded that race is a determining factor in who is most affected by air pollution. Specifically, non-white people breathe air that is substantially more polluted than the air that white people breathe.
    Damn whitey takin' all the good air!

    [....]

    “We were quite surprised to find such a large disparity between whites and nonwhites related to air pollution,” Marshall told the Minnesota Post. “Especially the fact that this difference is throughout the U.S., even in cities and states in the Midwest.”
    Because, you know, the rest of the country is all racist and everything, natch.

    [....]

    Air pollution is not the only health issue that race factors into, as public health is riddled with racial implications on a broader level. Racial bias plays a role in doctor-patient interactions, and some groups, namely African-Americans, live with chronic diseases stemming from racial discrimination.


    You gotta be shittin' me! HHHHAHAHAAHAHAAHAAHAHA!!!

    "You, negro, are not allowed at the Woolworth's lunch counter, which means that you're going to develop diabetes."


    Holy crap, what lunacy!






    It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
    In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
    Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
    Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

  • #2
    I have come to the conclusion that conservatives are stupid about two things while liberals are stupid about a dozen things.
    The year's at the spring
    And day's at the morn;
    Morning's at seven;
    The hill-side's dew-pearled;
    The lark's on the wing;
    The snail's on the thorn:
    God's in his heaven—
    All's right with the world!

    Comment


    • #3
      I know something about this issue. In air pollution/air quality circles we have been dealing with social justice issues on this topic for 15 years at least. I have attended more than one conference on this issue. Oh, yes.

      There are three parts to this issue. Here's the upshot:

      1. In the industrial past (in this country), workers were exposed to pollution levels which directly affected their health and longevity. Exposure to lead, asbestos, SO2, etc., materially degraded lives. Most of those affected were poorer than people who worked in offices at the time.

      2. Prior to RCRA and the many other remediation programs that have been in effect since 1970, poorer people lived and played in areas where pollutants permeated the soil or the air since these areas were naturally less desirable to more affluent people.

      3. The vast majority of air pollutants today are found in significant amounts in densely urban areas which are also the areas where the majority of poor, non-white people live.

      Here's the reality:

      1. Air pollution, even in inner city areas in the USA is so far below what was detectable 30 years ago, it's a constant point of laughter among those of us who monitor this in conjunction with government entities. Seriously.

      Your great-grandfather's home and farm was such a swirling cesspool of air pollution that it would instantly be condemned today. I'm not exaggerating. The levels of various air pollutants considered "acceptable" today, by law, are much, much lower than anything your country-living ancestors experienced.

      2. Despite the legacy of the 1960s, the reality is that lily white people constantly move into formerly industrial sectors of inner cities and they do just fine. They are not impacted by the former industiral pollutants. This is not because they are white or rich, it's because remediation has been successful and the toxic effects of some pollutants have been overstated. Small, white toddlers live in the same exact locations as small, black toddlers. They do have different health outcomes but not because they are differently exposed.

      3. All urban areas have a much higher air pollution level than all suburban or rural areas. More poor, minority people live in dense, urban areas. Duh. More cars, more industry, and more heat sinks cause more inversions and more particulate levels. However, it's all relative. With the exception of a few Eastern cities (sometimes), all cities in the USA have much better air quality today than in 1987. You are breathing cleaner air in downtown Detroit today than you could have breathed in downtown Denver in 1980. By a long shot.

      We can detect at lower limits today. The standards have been cranked down to the point that we are calling levels unacceptable today that we could not detect in 1996 with conventional equipment used by State agencies or by consultant groups. Yay!

      4. We have now identified pollutants that were not known as such 15 years ago. 15 years ago, you had no problem. Today, you do.

      So, the problem is that all urbanites (not just poor minorities) have poorer air quality than most suburban or rural people today but that poor air quality is WAY better than Great-Grandma had on the farm or that Grandma had in her suburban split-level or that Mom had in her 3-story walk-up or that the average urban hipster had in an industrial loft 10 years ago.
      "Alexa, slaughter the fatted calf."

      Comment


      • #4
        We all know that President Bush and the Koch brothers are the ones making sure that white people have better air.

        Comment


        • #5
          Frisco is affluent.

          Just one story but it probably explains alot.
          Colonel Vogel : What does the diary tell you that it doesn't tell us?

          Professor Henry Jones : It tells me, that goose-stepping morons like yourself should try *reading* books instead of *burning* them!

          Comment


          • #6
            Texas might end up with California's Sriracha Plant

            Other states will take the jobs.

            Comment

            Working...
            X