Won't this cause a public health issue if nothing else?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/24/detroit-water-shut-offs-human-rights_n_5526678.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green
QuoteActivists Beg United Nations For Help After Detroit Shuts Off Water For Thousands
The Huffington Post | By Kate Abbey-Lambertz
Posted: 06/24/2014 4:27 pm EDT Updated: 5 hours ago
After Detroit turned off water for thousands of residents, activists are calling on the United Nations for help in what they've called a "massive human rights atrocity."
The Detroit Water and Sewerage Department said in March that they would begin shutting off service to more than 150,000 customers who were behind in their bills, according to the Detroit Free Press. With 323,000 total customers, nearly half are late on their bills, or cannot afford water. A water department report states the utility sent 44,000 warnings in April and 3,000 customers have had their water shut off.
A coalition of groups including the Detroit People's Water Board, Food and Water Watch, Blue Planet Project and Michigan Welfare Rights Organization submitted a report to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to safe drinking water and sanitation last week, saying they are "outraged about the violation of the human right to water and sanitation in the City of Detroit and call on the authorities to take immediate action to restore water services and stop further cut-offs."
They detailed the challenges faced by residents without water, difficulties working with the department to keep or restore water, and spiraling bills -- Detroit rates are higher than national averages, and city lawmakers just approved a rate increase of 9 percent. The coalition also claimed some people had not received shut-off warnings:
Quote
The Detroit People's Water Board is hearing directly from people impacted by the water cut-offs who say they were given no warning and had no time to fill buckets, sinks and tubs before losing access to water. In some cases, the cut-offs occurred before the deadline given in notices sent by the city. Sick people have been left without running water and working toilets. People recovering from surgery cannot wash and change bandages. Children cannot bathe and parents cannot cook...
Families concerned about children being taken away by authorities due to lack of water and sanitation services in the home have been sending their children to live with relatives and friends, which has an impact on school attendance and related activities.
Water department spokeswoman Curtrise Garner told CBS Detroit there are there are programs for people in need, and also said that some customers don't pay out of "habit" rather than inability.
"At the DWAS Department -- it's not our goal to shut off water," Garner told the news station. "We want people's water on, just like they do; but you do have to pay for your water... That's the bottom line."
There are several helpful options for Detroiters -- about 40 percent of whom are below the poverty line -- like WAVE, a non-profit that works with the water department to offer emergency assistance for those who can't pay their water bills.
In their report, activists recommend that the city restore service to households without water, abandon plans for further cut-offs and implement fair water rates for the city.
A United Nations FAQ on the right to safe drinking water and sanitation states that "the price of sanitation and water services must be affordable for all without compromising the ability to pay for other essential necessities guaranteed by human rights such as food, housing and health care."
The shut-off effort was meant to collect $118 million from delinquent residential and commercial customers as the city seeks to settle billions in debts to creditors through municipal bankruptcy, with the water system one of the major sticking points in bankruptcy agreements. The department collected an additional $400,000 in April compared to years past.
The report links the water department's practices to the bankruptcy, calling it a "last-ditch attempt to make up lost revenues" and saying they fear authorities "want to sweeten the pot for a private investor by imposing even more of the costs of the system on those least able to bear them."
They also allege the department has inequitable practices, and is not targeting delinquent commercial customers to the same extent as residents. The water department has denied that claim.
Dehydrating.
I'm awaiting Yi's and CdM's posts in this thread. :cool:
failed State?
Failed city, anyway.
Quote from: mongers on June 25, 2014, 05:48:13 AM
I'm awaiting Yi's and CdM's posts in this thread. :cool:
I don't know why, you know the deal.
Detroit suck city.
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
I'm sure their cable TV service is still on.
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
According to the article 40% of Detroit residents are below the poverty line. Also, according to the article, the move to shut off the water is an attempt to get blood from a stone to satisfy creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 08:39:09 AM
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
According to the article 40% of Detroit residents are below the poverty line. Also, according to the article, the move to shut off the water is an attempt to get blood from a stone to satisfy creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings.
water is what, 40 bucks a month? I've been below the poverty line before, and I could afford that. Granted, not everyone can, but 40%?
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
I would assume because up to now there have been no repercussions of not paying.
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:42:12 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 08:39:09 AM
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
According to the article 40% of Detroit residents are below the poverty line. Also, according to the article, the move to shut off the water is an attempt to get blood from a stone to satisfy creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings.
water is what, 40 bucks a month? I've been below the poverty line before, and I could afford that. Granted, not everyone can, but 40%?
http://www.freep.com/article/20140617/NEWS01/306170107/City-Council-water-rate-hike
QuoteThe average Detroit resident currently pays $64.99 per month for water and sewer charges, according to the department's presentation at a public hearing last week. The rate hike will increase the average monthly bill, effective July 1, to $70.67 — an 8.7% increase.
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Quote from: Siege on June 25, 2014, 08:53:57 AM
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Texas was run by Democrats without opposition for over 100 years and....oh I see what you are saying.
Quote from: Siege on June 25, 2014, 08:53:57 AM
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Republicans would make access to water more affordable?
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 09:14:29 AM
Quote from: Siege on June 25, 2014, 08:53:57 AM
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Republicans would make access to water more affordable?
Republicans would have destroyed the unions in an orgy of blood.
Quote from: Valmy on June 25, 2014, 09:15:18 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 09:14:29 AM
Quote from: Siege on June 25, 2014, 08:53:57 AM
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Republicans would make access to water more affordable?
Republicans would have destroyed the unions in an orgy of blood.
No blood for water :mad:
Quote from: Valmy on June 25, 2014, 09:15:18 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 09:14:29 AM
Quote from: Siege on June 25, 2014, 08:53:57 AM
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Republicans would make access to water more affordable?
Republicans would have destroyed the unions in an orgy of blood.
Especially the damned water union :angry:
Quote from: derspiess on June 25, 2014, 08:37:13 AM
I'm sure their cable TV service is still on.
What, didnt have time to write something about buying Air Jordans and hair extensions, Cracker McCracker?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 25, 2014, 09:51:02 AM
What, didnt have time to write something about buying Air Jordans and hair extensions, Cracker McCracker?
No, sir. I didn't have to-- YOU DID IT FOR ME :face:
Needs more Midnight Basketball.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 08:39:09 AM
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
According to the article 40% of Detroit residents are below the poverty line. Also, according to the article, the move to shut off the water is an attempt to get blood from a stone to satisfy creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings.
If they're below the poverty line then they must be getting state/federal subsidies. I would think that pays all or some water and other utility bills?
Quote from: KRonn on June 25, 2014, 10:26:20 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 08:39:09 AM
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
According to the article 40% of Detroit residents are below the poverty line. Also, according to the article, the move to shut off the water is an attempt to get blood from a stone to satisfy creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings.
If they're below the poverty line then they must be getting state/federal subsidies. I would think that pays all or some water and other utility bills?
Your assumptions seem to be undone by the fact that 150,000 people are losing access to a necessity of life.
I'd say we should let everybody have free water, but then people would be using it all up on their lawns. :rolleyes:
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 11:25:44 AM
Quote from: KRonn on June 25, 2014, 10:26:20 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 08:39:09 AM
Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2014, 08:35:14 AM
How the hell do you have half a city not paying their water bills? Is Detroit really that poor, or are people not paying because they feel they don't have to?
According to the article 40% of Detroit residents are below the poverty line. Also, according to the article, the move to shut off the water is an attempt to get blood from a stone to satisfy creditors in the bankruptcy proceedings.
If they're below the poverty line then they must be getting state/federal subsidies. I would think that pays all or some water and other utility bills?
Your assumptions seem to be undone by the fact that 150,000 people are losing access to a necessity of life.
The weirdest part of this story is that instead of appealing to the government in Lansing or Washington they are going to the UN.
If Detroit and the people who live there can't afford to provide running water to every home, perhaps they should look into some kind of neighbourhood well system. People can walk to the taps to fetch water for the day, public bathing facilities could be built. An opportunity to turn their mismanagement of their funds and lives into something that will bring the community together.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on June 25, 2014, 11:36:37 AM
I'd say we should let everybody have free water, but then people would be using it all up on their lawns. :rolleyes:
Damn straight.
Quote from: Neil on June 25, 2014, 11:39:38 AM
If Detroit and the people who live there can't afford to provide running water to every home, perhaps they should look into some kind of neighbourhood well system. People can walk to the taps to fetch water for the day, public bathing facilities could be built. An opportunity to turn their mismanagement of their funds and lives into something that will bring the community together.
Yeah. My church raises enough cash to dig several wells in Africa each year. Maybe we could do a couple in Detroit :hmm:
Detroit isn't Africa. :(
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on June 25, 2014, 11:36:37 AM
I'd say we should let everybody have free water, but then people would be using it all up on their lawns. :rolleyes:
We have free water with watering restrictions during dry months. The watering restrictions are enforced by fine but mostly compliance is voluntary. I can understand a system which requires payment for water if substantial investment in infrastructure is required to deliver the water but I think the better method is to pay for such things from general revenue because everyone needs water. This isnt service that is subsidized by non users.
I also dont think rationing by way of a fee structure is a good policy either unless it is a progressive system which allows basic water consumption to be free and ramps up in cost from there to charge a large fee for luxury use - pools etc.
I think this will become a major issue as water becomes a more scarce resource.
Quote from: derspiess on June 25, 2014, 11:41:20 AM
Quote from: Neil on June 25, 2014, 11:39:38 AM
If Detroit and the people who live there can't afford to provide running water to every home, perhaps they should look into some kind of neighbourhood well system. People can walk to the taps to fetch water for the day, public bathing facilities could be built. An opportunity to turn their mismanagement of their funds and lives into something that will bring the community together.
Yeah. My church raises enough cash to dig several wells in Africa each year. Maybe we could do a couple in Detroit :hmm:
You couldn't actually use wells, as I'm reasonably sure that a century of unchecked industrial use has rendered it unwise to use untreated. These would be more like public taps. That would reduce consumption and eliminate the ability of people to water their lawns, both good things.
How's the Delta City project coming along?
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.businessinsider.com%2Fimage%2F4fbab15c6bb3f72577000007%2Fimage.jpg&hash=a47747d9133ba8091778213fdc9c46808ad946ed)
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 11:52:32 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on June 25, 2014, 11:36:37 AM
I'd say we should let everybody have free water, but then people would be using it all up on their lawns. :rolleyes:
We have free water with watering restrictions during dry months. The watering restrictions are enforced by fine but mostly compliance is voluntary. I can understand a system which requires payment for water if substantial investment in infrastructure is required to deliver the water but I think the better method is to pay for such things from general revenue because everyone needs water. This isnt service that is subsidized by non users.
I also dont think rationing by way of a fee structure is a good policy either unless it is a progressive system which allows basic water consumption to be free and ramps up in cost from there to charge a large fee for luxury use - pools etc.
I think this will become a major issue as water becomes a more scarce resource.
You don't have free water. You're billed by the city for your usage, with the rate varying for the time of year.
It's not a bad idea to pay for water from general revenue in a place like Vancouver, where high property values gives the city a fair bit of money to play with. I don't know if that approach would be practical in Detroit, where the city is bankrupt and most of the property in the city is essentially worthless.
The inhabitants aren't property. :glare:
Quote from: The Brain on June 25, 2014, 12:09:48 PM
The inhabitants aren't property. :glare:
I'd ask for a refund if they were.
Quote from: Neil on June 25, 2014, 12:08:39 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 11:52:32 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on June 25, 2014, 11:36:37 AM
I'd say we should let everybody have free water, but then people would be using it all up on their lawns. :rolleyes:
We have free water with watering restrictions during dry months. The watering restrictions are enforced by fine but mostly compliance is voluntary. I can understand a system which requires payment for water if substantial investment in infrastructure is required to deliver the water but I think the better method is to pay for such things from general revenue because everyone needs water. This isnt service that is subsidized by non users.
I also dont think rationing by way of a fee structure is a good policy either unless it is a progressive system which allows basic water consumption to be free and ramps up in cost from there to charge a large fee for luxury use - pools etc.
I think this will become a major issue as water becomes a more scarce resource.
You don't have free water. You're billed by the city for your usage, with the rate varying for the time of year.
It's not a bad idea to pay for water from general revenue in a place like Vancouver, where high property values gives the city a fair bit of money to play with. I don't know if that approach would be practical in Detroit, where the city is bankrupt and most of the property in the city is essentially worthless.
Correct. What I meant is we do not have a user pay metered system. The costs is built into the general taxation system of our municiple taxes. For sake of transparancy the water cost is listed as a specific amount which makes up part of the amount payable to the municaplity. We dont make separate payments for water as seems to be the case for Detroit.
I agree that the payment of basic utilities cant be expected to come from a non existant municiple tax base. But that is apparently what happens in the US. Here the Provincial and Federal governments assist with funding of water delivery and waste water treatement infrastructure. A place like Vancouver is largely self funded as you point out. But there are a number of smaller communities that wouldnt be able to afford such infrastructure development on their own.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 25, 2014, 12:25:33 PM
Correct. What I meant is we do not have a user pay metered system. The costs is built into the general taxation system of our municiple taxes. For sake of transparancy the water cost is listed as a specific amount which makes up part of the amount payable to the municaplity. We dont make separate payments for water as seems to be the case for Detroit.
Yeah, that's a pretty sensible way to handle it, by just tacking it to the bill the property owner gets for his taxes. When I lived in Grande Prairie, I used to rent a home (before I got to enjoy the benefits of tower living), and we got a monthly water bill from the city, just like power or gas, so I've seen it done the other way too. I suppose it would be easier for the owners of rental properties, so that they don't have to worry about adjusting their tenants' rent to reflect water usage. But every multi-unit building I've ever lived in has had the water included in the rent anyways. Assuming that there is a technical reason for this (difficulty or expense of metering every unit seperately?), then it's a fairly small portion of the rental market that gets any benefit at all from an end-user pay system, as opposed to your taxation system. The only other benefit is that it allows you to shut people's water off if they don't pay, which would work better for Detroit than the tax-lien option that Vancouver-type systems would no doubt use.
QuoteI agree that the payment of basic utilities cant be expected to come from a non existant municiple tax base. But that is apparently what happens in the US. Here the Provincial and Federal governments assist with funding of water delivery and waste water treatement infrastructure. A place like Vancouver is largely self funded as you point out. But there are a number of smaller communities that wouldnt be able to afford such infrastructure development on their own.
I would suspect that in the US you see counties getting involved in water treatment and the like for smaller centres. Detroit's transition from a prosperous city to poverty means that it can't fulfill the responsibilities expected of it, but because of the times we live in now, it's politically difficult for higher government to bail them out. A lot of people have the idea that if only they used their resources more effectively, they could take care of themselves. That the entire basis of their economy has disappeared is a difficult idea to deal with.
Good point Neil. Is it kinder to evict people than cut off their water?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 25, 2014, 01:11:59 PM
Good point Neil. Is it kinder to evict people than cut off their water?
I would think they're about the same. Barring some as-yet unbuilt infrastructure, a roof and water are equally important to surviving this modern world.
Disgree. With water cut off you still have a roof. With eviction you have neither.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 25, 2014, 01:19:16 PM
Disgree. With water cut off you still have a roof. With eviction you have neither.
But either way you won't really be able to function properly. 'Can you function in a first-world manner?' is a pass/fail question, and a double fault is still just a fail.
Besides, if you don't bathe for a few weeks, you'll lose your job and then you'll get evicted anyways. Although assuming that someone is employed when we're talking about Detroit is probably a bit of an overreach on our part.
Quote from: Neil on June 25, 2014, 11:57:28 AM
You couldn't actually use wells, as I'm reasonably sure that a century of unchecked industrial use has rendered it unwise to use untreated.
:ph34r:
Water is one of the most contentious issues in Metro Detroit region. The water department is owned by the city of Detroit and it serves both the city and surrounding suburbs. Until the early 2000s Michigan had residency requirements; people who worked for the water department had to live in the city of Detroit. Consequently the water department became a notorious example of featherbedding. This has lingered even though the residency requirement is no longer in effect. In 2012 an independent audit concluded that the water department could operate just as efficiently with only 19% of its staff.
The water department was also used for public corruption; Kwame Kilpatrick and friends profited nearly a million dollars in graft due to land deals the water department was involved in.
Each individual city in the Detroit Metro region is responsible for collecting fees for water. Detroit is hilariously incompetent at collecting revenues. Half the property owners in the city don't pay their property taxes; and there has been no consequences for them not having done so. Likewise half the residents of the city don't pay their water bill and, until this year, there have been no consequences for that either. This system doesn't work. There has to be consequences to not paying bills; otherwise the city will be back in bankruptcy in no time at all.
Quote from: Siege on June 25, 2014, 08:53:57 AM
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Chicago works (more or less) fine despite having Democrats run without opposition.
The politicians who run Detroit are more akin to heads of rival families in a Renaissance city state; (or the head of a crime family) rather than party politicians. Kwame Kilpatrick's mother was a congresswoman, father was a county executive and aunt was a state representative. His rival, Shrek Cockrel Jr.'s father and step mother were city council members.
Quote from: Savonarola on June 25, 2014, 05:23:04 PM
Quote from: Siege on June 25, 2014, 08:53:57 AM
This is what happens when Democrats run a place without opposition.
Chicago works (more or less) fine despite having Democrats run without opposition.
The politicians who run Detroit are more akin to heads of rival families in a Renaissance city state; (or the head of a crime family) rather than party politicians. Kwame Kilpatrick's mother was a congresswoman, father was a county executive and aunt was a state representative. His rival, Shrek Cockrel Jr.'s father and step mother were city council members.
Reminds me of the McLin family in Dayton. Acted like they owned the place. Until the black churches turned against the fancy hat wearing boob Rhine McLin over the murder rate.
Quote from: Savonarola on June 25, 2014, 05:23:04 PM
Chicago works (more or less) fine despite having Democrats run without opposition.
Chicago has $18.4 thousand dollars of unfunded pension liability per resident. That's more than twice what NY has, the nearest competitor.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 25, 2014, 06:09:20 PM
Quote from: Savonarola on June 25, 2014, 05:23:04 PM
Chicago works (more or less) fine despite having Democrats run without opposition.
Chicago has $18.4 thousand dollars of unfunded pension liability per resident. That's more than twice what NY has, the nearest competitor.
It's just money.
We can always mint more gazillion dollar coins.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 25, 2014, 06:09:20 PM
Quote from: Savonarola on June 25, 2014, 05:23:04 PM
Chicago works (more or less) fine despite having Democrats run without opposition.
Chicago has $18.4 thousand dollars of unfunded pension liability per resident. That's more than twice what NY has, the nearest competitor.
Time for UN intervention!
IMF would make more sense.
Speaking of "only in Detroit", I saw some thing on the news earlier that a little kid was missing for like two weeks, and today the police finally found him, hiding in his own basement. :lol:
Apparently the kid's father was on the Nancy Grace show and she broke the news to him live on the air. :wacko:
Quote from: Caliga on June 26, 2014, 11:51:58 AM
Speaking of "only in Detroit", I saw some thing on the news earlier that a little kid was missing for like two weeks, and today the police finally found him, hiding in his own basement. :lol:
The police say he wasn't down there when they had searched the house previously: http://www.freep.com/article/20140626/NEWS01/306260136/charlie-bothuell-missing-boy-12-year-old
QuoteApparently the kid's father was on the Nancy Grace show and she broke the news to him live on the air. :wacko:
:lol:
Only in America
Detroit's bankruptcy judge, Steve Rhodes, has already ruled that there is no right to free water (and that he wouldn't deny the bankrupt city a stream of revenue). So until Detroit exits bankruptcy the shutoffs will continue:
QuoteU.N. officials hear good, bad on Detroit water shutoffs
Francis X. Donnelly, The Detroit News 11:50 p.m. EDT October 19, 2014
Detroit – — Water shutoffs have brought out the best and worst in city residents, the United Nations learned Sunday.
The shutoffs, enacted by the city after many residents failed to pay their bills, have led to residents helping neighbors by giving money, jugs of water or running hoses to their homes.
But a woman said her water bill jumped $600 after neighbors helped themselves to her outside faucet, using it so often they broke the handle.
The woman, Barbara Russo, said she didn't blame her neighbors for their actions.
"If you treat people like animals, you can only expect them to behave like animals," she said.
The residents spoke during a public hearing held by two U.N. officials trying to determine if the water shutoffs have led to human rights violations.
About 350 people attended the meeting in the atrium of the downtown campus of Wayne County Community College District.
Monica Lewis-Patrick, a member of the Detroit People's Water Board, one of the citizen groups that organized the hearing, led a chant with the crowd: "Whose water? Our water. Whose water? Our water."
Members of the group held signs and hung others along the walls: "Water is a Human Right," "Water Justice for All," and "Turn on the Water."
As residents recounted their personal tribulations with the loss of water, they were often supported vocally by the boisterous crowd.
"Today I charge genocide against the president of the United States," Lewis-Patrick said to cheers. "Today I charge genocide against Mayor Mike Duggan."
Resident Nicole Hill said her water was turned off after a billing mix-up. Nine months after moving, she was still being billed for water at her old residence, she said.
The mother of three said she couldn't turn to her neighbors for help because most of them had lost their water as well.
"I went to court but they can't have a hearing until 2015," she said.
Another resident said the loss of water has aggravated problems in a neighborhood already ravaged with blight and foreclosures.
Gregory Price said he hoped the UN officials could do more than just hold a hearing. Otherwise, its effort would amount to little more than "people hollering and clapping."
"I'm hurt. The community is hurt," said Price. "I hope you can do something about it."
One of the U.N. officials tried to temper the expectations of the crowd.
Leilani Farha, U.N. special rapporteur on adequate housing, said the organization can make recommendations but can't force the city to make changes.
She and the other representative plan to meet with city officials Monday and then will propose ways for the city to help the residents.
[email protected]
It's nice how white people, like Mike Duggan, and African-Americans like Barack Obama can work together on something really important; like genocide. It gives us all hope for the future. :bowler:
Is genocide an impeachable offense? I'm asking for a friend.
I can't even remember how many times I got up for school to find the water had been shut off as a kid. It sucked, but it's hardly a human rights emergency.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2014, 12:17:20 PM
I can't even remember how many times I got up for school to find the water had been shut off as a kid. It sucked, but it's hardly a human rights emergency.
I seem to recall that if the water wsa shut off we had to go home. No water = no bathroom, which doesn't work out too well...
Quote from: Barrister on October 20, 2014, 12:20:09 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2014, 12:17:20 PM
I can't even remember how many times I got up for school to find the water had been shut off as a kid. It sucked, but it's hardly a human rights emergency.
I seem to recall that if the water wsa shut off we had to go home. No water = no bathroom, which doesn't work out too well...
I had that happen at work one time eons ago. About an hour after I got to work they had to turn the water off in the building for the rest of the day and we were all sent home. Like a free vacation day :)
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2014, 12:17:20 PM
I can't even remember how many times I got up for school to find the water had been shut off as a kid. It sucked, but it's hardly a human rights emergency.
One problem is that the Detroit Water and Sewage Department was a city department until quite recently; and consequently moves at the speed of bureaucracy. A water shut-off will take several days to resolve. A second problem is that water billing is handled by the individual municipality. The city of Detroit is notoriously inept at bill collection; mistakes are inevitable and resolving them can take several months.
On the other hand not shutting off the water due to delinquent bills has led to a situation where only half the the citizen pay their water bill. Judge Rhodes is right, Detroit cannot afford that.
Quote from: derspiess on October 20, 2014, 12:23:14 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 20, 2014, 12:20:09 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2014, 12:17:20 PM
I can't even remember how many times I got up for school to find the water had been shut off as a kid. It sucked, but it's hardly a human rights emergency.
I seem to recall that if the water wsa shut off we had to go home. No water = no bathroom, which doesn't work out too well...
I had that happen at work one time eons ago. About an hour after I got to work they had to turn the water off in the building for the rest of the day and we were all sent home. Like a free vacation day :)
Yeah my work did the same recently. Wasn't like a vacation day though as we were expected to manage from home.
Quote from: garbon on October 20, 2014, 12:54:18 PM
Yeah my work did the same recently. Wasn't like a vacation day though as we were expected to manage from home.
This was back in 1999-ish, when working remotely was such a pain in the ass you were rarely required to do it. I was on-call that week, so I did technically have to be available should any emergency arise. But it didn't, so I stayed home and played Close Combat III all afternoon :)
Quote from: derspiess on October 20, 2014, 12:23:14 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 20, 2014, 12:20:09 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2014, 12:17:20 PM
I can't even remember how many times I got up for school to find the water had been shut off as a kid. It sucked, but it's hardly a human rights emergency.
I seem to recall that if the water wsa shut off we had to go home. No water = no bathroom, which doesn't work out too well...
I had that happen at work one time eons ago. About an hour after I got to work they had to turn the water off in the building for the rest of the day and we were all sent home. Like a free vacation day :)
I think MIM meant the water was off at his residence, not at the school.
As far as genocides go, this one seems remarkably ineffective.
While Detroit is busy shutting off people's water, they're also building a 1,000 foot waterslide for the summer. Isn't multitasking great! :w00t:
http://www.metrotimes.com/Blogs/archives/2015/04/08/1000-foot-water-slide-to-take-over-detroit-streets-this-summer#.VSWW6oZHbxo.facebook
I have heard of other cities that do more than one thing at a time.
That looks fun.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on April 08, 2015, 07:29:18 PM
While Detroit is busy shutting off people's water, they're also building a 1,000 foot waterslide for the summer. Isn't multitasking great! :w00t:
http://www.metrotimes.com/Blogs/archives/2015/04/08/1000-foot-water-slide-to-take-over-detroit-streets-this-summer#.VSWW6oZHbxo.facebook
Well it isn't a FREE waterslide. So it's not like they are cutting off non-payers' water while telling them to slurp it off the ground at the free public waterslide.
Waterslides are more fun than hydrated blacks? :hmm: