Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by gjs4786 802 days ago
Why should I have to pay money to a avoid incuring an incurable disease?

I can understand, possibly, possibly, fronting the cost. But, only while they sort out the details with the installers. The first contaminant to make it through on a federally recognized level...9 billion dollars in funding. Holy shit. And this is just getting started.

This, after looking just now ( https://www.google.com/search?q=pfas+funding+sources&oq=pfas... ), Seems to be in addition to a 10 billion dollars that was earmarked in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of '21, and 2 billion from the EPA.

That's in addition to the up to 12.5 billion that 3M has agreed to pay directly to water providers through 2036. I didn't know there was a tort case, either. It finished last year.

33.5 billion dollars. I can't wrap my head around this. Seems like a significant amount for an equally significant problem that most people have never heard about.

And this is likely not nearly enough. This is shaping up to be a 100 billion dollar public health crisis / 3M offset.

Surely, I am missing several more broad funding allotments, this is just just getting started.

When I can't understand the scale of something, I tend to look at the size of the response. It's not perfect, but it's a start

1 comments

33.5 billion dollars. I can't wrap my head around this

Given the US population of just over 333 million, its a but over $100 per person.

> Given the US population of just over 333 million, its a but over $100 per person.

That's true but not everyone lives in their own complex.

A family of 3 will benefit from 1 installation.

An apartment complex with 500 people could benefit from 1 installation assuming the benefit comes from something installed at the base of the unit and then applies to all inner-building plumbing.