What is Digg?Sponsored by Rockstar Games
Grand Theft Auto: Episodes from Liberty City view!
rockstargames.com - Out Now on Disc for Xbox 360. Includes The Lost and Damned plus the all-new The Ballad of Gay Tony.
75 Comments
- b0ngsm0ke, on 12/30/2008, -1/+24One more reason not to go to jail.
- BassMastr, on 12/30/2008, -3/+22This is what happens when you can't stick to a budget. I'd feel sorry for them if they didn't have a 1000 plus miles long coast covered in mansions.
- pjpete, on 12/30/2008, -1/+11I bought land on the border in Nevada so I can have beach front property once that one big quake shakes CA loose!
- PCGUY112887, on 12/30/2008, -0/+8If those levels were indeed safe, I am sure the federal limits would then be raised to allow more water to flow. There is a reason behind the federal limits of contamination for drinking water.
- BassMastr, on 12/30/2008, -0/+6California has SOLD a lot of their resources and the vast wealth that California now has is due to money earned from all over the world. I'm not saying they don't deserve their wealth. I'm saying I don't feel sorry for a state that would have the 6th largest econ in the world by themselves and they can't balance a ***** budget. I say let them drink dirty water. It's not like the levels they are drinking are anywhere near the levels that have been allowed for...well forever.
Himthatspeaks - As a Democrat you should totally understand the concept of taking a larger chunk from the rich to provide for the masses. I'm not saying its right or wrong...I just don't understand how stevemans concept is foreign.
Sry if I don't feel sorry for those that can't keep within a budget. - av4rice, on 12/30/2008, -0/+6Can they add a little iocaine powder too? I need to build up my immunity
- Hobo97, on 12/30/2008, -1/+7Despite his delivery, HimThatSpeaks is correct:
"California is responsible for 13% of the United States' gross domestic product (GDP). The state's GDP is at about $1.7 trillion (as of 2006)."
"The economy of California is often cited for how it would compare to other countries if California was an independent nation. The statistic quoted varies widely (usually placing California between 7th and 10th)depending on the source, but also depending on the year. [11] The most recent estimates (provided by the CIA's Factbook) put California tenth."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_California - inactive, on 12/30/2008, -2/+6Wow, they give you Internet access in Kern Valley State Prison? You guys got it made...besides the whole arsenic thing of course.
- satanatnmtedu, on 12/30/2008, -1/+5$600,000 is an excessive amount for the design of arsenic plant. If CA wants to award such a contract to my company, we would be happy to take it.
The article is sensationalized, but the threat is there. If you can go from a cancer rate of 1 in 100 (old standards) to 1 in 500 (new standards), then I think it is reasonable to do it. - cerealjynx, on 12/30/2008, -1/+5Brita FTW!!!
- WeylandYutani, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3We're gonna need a bigger boat.
- cowsgonemadd3, on 12/30/2008, -1/+4It would be more like canal front property.
- satanatnmtedu, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3It isn't in all tap water.
- topgigmedia, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3I feel sorry for the kids and pets that don't have a say in the matter.
- WhiteHatTrick, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3I don't think Brita type filters can remove arsenic. I'd research it or check out reverse osmosis systems or the type where it pulls water out of the air.
- inactive, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3Melamine, arsenic, flouride, chlorine, all safe to consume according to the government, have they ever done us wrong in the past, NOM NOM NOM NOM
- BassMastr, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3I doubt they allow kids or pets in the prisons...
- HimThatSpeaks, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3I am a Democrat and even at that I believe the people with mansions should not be paying to clean the state's water. What logic are you using mrsteveman1?
- minuslars, on 12/30/2008, -0/+3A professor at my school invented a water filter specifically designed to filter out heavy metals including arsenic as well as organic material. It costs about $35 to manufacture and can process up to 50 liters of water per hour for 5 years before it needs to be recharged. It has outperformed water purification systems costing thousands of dollars and requires much less maintenance. On top of that, the more water you process, the more efficient it gets. It was intended for use in areas of Bangladesh, Nepal, and India, where high levels of arsenic naturally occur in well water. But it'd be extremely useful for emergencies or situations like this as well.
http://www.nae.edu/nae/grainger.nsf/weblinks/MKEZ- ... - inactive, on 12/30/2008, -2/+4That'll put some hair on your chest.
- mrsteveman1, on 12/30/2008, -2/+4Because the people who live in those mansions can't afford to clean their ***** states water.
- satanatnmtedu, on 12/30/2008, -0/+2Except your "reality" is just your opinion rather than facts. I did think the story was sensationalized, but the arsenic hazard is real.
The old system of 50 ppb led to a cancer rate of 1 in 100 from arsenic exposure. The new rules are estimated at 1 in 500, if you drank 2 liters of water each day. - inactive, on 12/30/2008, -0/+2your statement doesnt make sense. How are they going to pay for that, by sacrificing more enviroment? the clothes off your back didnt just arrive at your doorstep.
- thefoxbox, on 12/30/2008, -0/+2It's the state of California. Everything causes cancer in that state, in case you didn't notice...
- pjpete, on 12/30/2008, -0/+2No wonder CA is financially in the Red.
- BassMastr, on 12/30/2008, -0/+2The same thing I do in my personal budget or people do in businesses they cut back on non critical functions. Cut budgets across the board...yes you can say workers are going to be over whelmed...tell me a decent profession where you don't feel over worked. We all know that the govt is full of all sorts of "fat" now would be a great time to get to trim it. If the people of CA aren't happy with how their budget is being spent then they should elect new officials.
- fallentree, on 12/30/2008, -14/+15why won't california just fall into the ocean already
- gls350, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1Yes there is a reason: they're playing it on the safe side which I don't disagree with. They're being overly cautious with the numbers to ensure that we never let ourselves even get close to the point of danger which is fine by me. All I'm saying is that its a little disingenuous to report things like this without talking about the real limits. Reading this article without the knowledge of the actual safety limits might make people think that they're in imminent danger when they aren't.
- pagit, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1and believe me you need it in prison
- Midtowner, on 12/30/2008, -1/+2Illegal's?
LERN ENGLISH YOU MORAN!!!
GO USA!!! - dhVyse, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1Oh, just another reason not to murder someone.
- gls350, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1Just to be clear, my issues are with the sensationalistic aspects of the article, not the effort to reduce arsenic levels. Like I said, it's preferable to remove it all, but such trace amounts of the substance is nothing to get overly worried about. Operating on this idea of preventative action in any case of risk, you would have to say that your chances of dying on the way to work in your car from an accident are phenomenally higher than getting cancer this way. Thus, you shouldn't drive cars to work, which makes no sense.
I'm not saying there is no danger, but please lets keep things in perspective.
Also, using your numbers, even if the chance were 1 in 100 (which sounds a little high but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt), using the current US population as of december this year, your "chance" of increased cancer are 0.01%. - spleeyah, on 12/29/2008, -5/+6Maybe CA is waiting for a bailout?
- THREETWOONEZERO, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1Hindsight is 20/20...
- deff, on 12/30/2008, -1/+2Wait... What?
- whiteboyfunk, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1Who else will be healthy to rob our gas stations and shoot our neighbors?
- Prototek, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1Maybe they can use those rust-like crystals from the related story on Digg.
- inactive, on 12/30/2008, -1/+2They said California. I'm in LA.
- mrcoderga, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1What does not kill me, makes me stronger.
Right?
Right?? - shodanx, on 12/31/2008, -0/+1they're trying to sap and impurify the precious bodily fluids of the American people
- palehorse864, on 12/31/2008, -0/+1P-O-E
|
O
|
E-O-P
- wlfldy, on 12/31/2008, -0/+1IN 1966, the price of eggs rose to a level that President Lyndon Johnson judged, God knows how, was too high. There were two culprits - supply and demand - and Johnson's agriculture secretary told him there was not much that could be done. LBJ, however, was a can-do fellow who directed the US surgeon general to dampen demand by warning the nation about the hazards of cholesterol in eggs.
From the same article:
"How do you make sure the government doesn't meddle too deeply in day-to-day operations and bring politics - like a push for green cars - into the equation?" Frank replied: "Oh, well, a push for green cars is very much a part of what we're involved in. We don't think that's politics." So, when the government, its 10 thumbs stuck deep in the economy, uses its power to compel an industry to pursue the objectives of the political party that controls both of the government's political branches, that is not politics.
Business Week: "Does Congress realize how few hybrids have been sold, as it pushes Detroit to make them, and will Congress give consumers greater incentives to buy these cars?"
We are manipulated no doubt. - asgardshill, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1No. You want it too much.
- j.carcinogen, on 12/31/2008, -0/+1What about Sodium Fluoride (to supposedly help our teeth though on the back of any toothpaste it says: DO NOT INGEST)?
Or hormones and other prescription drugs http://revver.com/video/438601/prozac-in-the-drink ... - Archer007, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1Iocaine powder! I'd bet my life on it.
- mrsteveman1, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1This story is about a state prison. Those prisoners were put in that prison on behalf of the people of California, who are responsible for their well being, regardless of how they feel about the prisoners. That means it is the people of California and the state government who are responsible for ensuring there is clean water in that prison, regardless of how it happens or who pays for it.
So yes, while people sit in million dollar houses, their state facility has poor drinking water. It's absurd. - inactive, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1I believe this guy is also a strong advocate of the clay/colloidal silver water filters as well. Funny how clay a silver could give the entire world fresh drinking water.
- whiteboyfunk, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1That's what Dave Mustaine said, and I believe it!
- whiteboyfunk, on 12/30/2008, -0/+1You're right. The reason, however, is politics - not hard science.
- htomfields, on 02/11/2009, -0/+0Idaho National Laboratory just licensed a technology (N-CAS) that removes arsenic from water. Here's the link.
https://inlportal.inl.gov/portal/server.pt?open=51 ... -
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is