Do parts of the USA need charitable assistance from WaterAid?

[CivilDiscourse]

I did request clarification as to the specific country to which you referred.

Why will they be different?

Why? What logistical reasons are you citing?

A somewhat irrelevant comment.

Well, you claimed it was vague. Given that it was in direct response to you, it was not vague at all.


As for the rest, look up the law of very large numbers and extrapolate.

If an incident has a 1% chance of happening per year per plant, then a country with 200 plants will have about twice as many incidents as one with 100 plants. It's not hard at all. I'm sorry you don't seem to grasp that.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Well, you claimed it was vague. Given that it was in direct response to you, it was not vague at all.

You wrote "Are you asking why a country that is 228 time larger than another"?

Now that we have established you were referring to Denmark kindly explain why the USA is unable to provide clean and safe drinking water to large swathes of its population.

[Maranatha]

I have been on these boards for years, I have never, and I mean never, seen such a singled minded attack on the US by a one person. It really is pathological...

It would truly be an awful lonely german to spend so much time here of all places.

[Maranatha]

It is not mine. The USA has its own branch of WaterAid, as the OP indicated - https://www.wateraid.org/us/

We'll you don't offer much then. Sounds like your analysis is, as per usual, overly hysterical. Contaminated water, simply a rare occurrence that...occured. You do seem to bend towards hysteria. Even your name reminds me of the word.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

We'll you don't offer much then. Sounds like your analysis is, as per usual, overly hysterical. Contaminated water, simply a rare occurrence that...occured..

These occurrences do take place quite often in the USA though don't they?

You do seem to bend towards hysteria. Even your name reminds me of the word

Hysteria: an uncontrollable outburst of emotion or fear, often characterized by irrationality, laughter, weeping, etc. Psychoanalysis. a psychoneurotic disorder characterized by violent emotional outbreaks, disturbances of sensory and motor functions, and various abnormal effects due to autosuggestion.

You are welcome to find anything I have written that remotely compares with that definition.

[CivilDiscourse]

You wrote "Are you asking why a country that is 228 time larger than another"?

Reading comprehension and the ability to follow a conversation would have informed that without any problem. You realize that a conversation is not a series of ISOLATED statements, but they each rely upon the context provided by earlier statements by both parties. In otherwords, the statement is only "vague" if taken in isolation. Otherwise there's no ambiguity there, unless you are unable to follow the conversation.

Now that we have established you were referring to Denmark kindly explain why the USA is unable to provide clean and safe drinking water to large swathes of its population.

You use the word unable, which is simply untrue. What you are describing are instances of contamination, not the inability to to provide it at all.

Germany has also had instances of contamination of water. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25687345/


This all gets back wo what I was saying earlier, that you have refused to admit. The US covers an entire continent, with a wide variety of water sources all across the country. This means it's going to have many more water treatment plants compared to a country of the size of say, Denmark. Once you realize that what you are REALLY complaining about are Isolated, Random Incidents, it becomes a matter of math to explain why a country like the US has more INCIDENTS than one like Denmark. It has more chances to have an incident happen, and because of that, more incidents will happen by pure random chance.

(Note this is the same reason why countries compare things like deaths by % of population, because a country with 1 million residents will have less deaths than one of 300 million even in circumstances where one has a higher rate of death.)

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It would truly be an awful lonely german to spend so much time here of all places.

Why is a "german" spending time here any more "lonely" than a Finn, a New Zealander, an Australian, or a Dane who also spend time here? Or do you have a specific animus towards Germans?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Reading comprehension and the ability to follow a conversation would have informed that without any problem. You realize that a conversation is not a series of ISOLATED statements, but they each rely upon the context provided by earlier statements by both parties. In otherwords, the statement is only "vague" if taken in isolation. Otherwise there's no ambiguity there, unless you are unable to follow the conversation.



You use the word unable, which is simply untrue. What you are describing are instances of contamination, not the inability to to provide it at all.

Germany has also had instances of contamination of water. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25687345/


This all gets back wo what I was saying earlier, that you have refused to admit. The US covers an entire continent, with a wide variety of water sources all across the country. This means it's going to have many more water treatment plants compared to a country of the size of say, Denmark. Once you realize that what you are REALLY complaining about are Isolated, Random Incidents, it becomes a matter of math to explain why a country like the US has more INCIDENTS than one like Denmark. It has more chances to have an incident happen, and because of that, more incidents will happen by pure random chance.

(Note this is the same reason why countries compare things like deaths by % of population, because a country with 1 million residents will have less deaths than one of 300 million even in circumstances where one has a higher rate of death.)

Of course countries suffer incidents of pollution in their water supplies. At the present time Germany is suffering from a lack of fresh water and many ecological systems are threatened. Only last year we were warned by a European Court of Justice ruling that we had to protect our water courses from nitrate pollution or risk facing fines.

However, the USA does seem to have a tendency to experience psuch incidents remarkably often. Once again, the incidents in Michigan come to mind. As I understand it the current administration is also removing protections that were formerly introduced to protect America's streams and wetlands. I also understand that this will permit pesticides, fertilisers, and other pollutants to be poured directly into US waterways, with the potential [?inevitable?] impact on drinking water.

[seer]

It would truly be an awful lonely german to spend so much time here of all places.

Probably still upset that we bombed the crap out of her cities.

[Thoughtful Monk]

All these attacks on the United States! It is really becoming pathological - some kind of deep seated envy? Or the WW2 defeat thing still stings?

You're making it over complicated. It is almost always easier to talk about other people's problems than you're own. Maybe she doesn't want to talk about European issues like the increasing popularity of right-wing parties in national elections or why Angela Merkel's successor quit and there's no apparent succession plan now.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Probably still upset that we bombed the crap out of her cities.

And thank you for giving my parents' generation all that financial assistance to rebuild what the allies had bombed, after the war ended.

By the way, why do you keep posting replies suggesting that I was alive during WW2? How old do you imagine me to be?

[CivilDiscourse]

Of course countries suffer incidents of pollution in their water supplies. At the present time Germany is suffering from a lack of fresh water and many ecological systems are threatened. Only last year we were warned by a European Court of Justice ruling that we had to protect our water courses from nitrate pollution or risk facing fines.

However, the USA does seem to have a tendency to experience psuch incidents remarkably often. Once again, the incidents in Michigan come to mind. As I understand it the current administration is also removing protections that were formerly introduced to protect America's streams and wetlands. I also understand that this will permit pesticides, fertilisers, and other pollutants to be poured directly into US waterways, with the potential [?inevitable?] impact on drinking water.

Obviously. A country with as many more variable sources of water, and the much larger number of plants to treat it WILL have a larger incident rate per country. You asked why it happens so often, it's because you keep comparing a tiny area with a much larger one. You'd be better off comparing the EU as a whole to the US. Even then it only covers about half the land area, but it's more populated, so it might balance out.

The thing is we are going to have more plants, which means more chances for these relatively rare events to happen. The problem is you see the US as "just one country" and think that means you can compare incidents to a tiny (by comparison) country, and expect #'s to line up. They simply don't, and you keep acting as if the outcome is surprising.

[Sparko]

Do you perceive any thread that points out out the discrepancies and shortcomings of the USA as constituting some form of existential threat? This Civics board is fixated on the USA and therefore should be receptive to threads that highlight where the USA is deficient.

Your country is the richest in the world.

Therefore why is it unable to provide clean safe drinking water for large swathes of its population?

An isolated health incident here and there does not equate to being "unable to provide drinking water for large swathes of its population"

[CivilDiscourse]

An isolated health incident here and there does not equate to being "unable to provide drinking water for large swathes of its population"

That's been pointed out to her time and again in this thread, she refuses to address it. She's been more concerned with asking why the US has more (raw) incidents than a country 228 times smaller...

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Obviously. A country with as many more variable sources of water, and the much larger number of plants to treat it WILL have a larger incident rate per country. You asked why it happens so often, it's because you keep comparing a tiny area with a much larger one. You'd be better off comparing the EU as a whole to the US. Even then it only covers about half the land area, but it's more populated, so it might balance out.

The thing is we are going to have more plants, which means more chances for these relatively rare events to happen. The problem is you see the US as "just one country" and think that means you can compare incidents to a tiny (by comparison) country, and expect #'s to line up. They simply don't, and you keep acting as if the outcome is surprising.

Point of information. Leonhard made a comment and I asked him how many incidents of water pollution have been recorded in Denmark. That is not a comparison. It is a question.

You actually made the comparison when you referenced Denmark's land mass in contrast to that of the continental USA.