Today marks the day of the EPA's assault on lead paint. If you are a house painter you need to get certification and follow stringent guidelines to abate lead paint.
The extra work that needs to be done seeks to increase the costs of abating lead paint out of homes (most built before 1978).
So Mr./Ms. "progressive" let me ask you these questions.
Do you think it's more likely or less likely that a poor person will have a home built before 1978?
Do you think it's more hazardous to residents to have homes with lead paint in them or to have it abated?
See, in my mind, the goal should be to remove lead paint from older homes. Making it more costly to do abatement work with all the compliance issues makes it more likely that lead paint will remain in these older homes.
But see, you liberals are working hard to make sure little Geddy and Lemmy are going to be chowing down on lead paint chips because the Kilmisters couldn't afford the additional costs of abatement. I hope that feels good Mr./Ms. Do gooder liberal.
For the record. My office was built in 1900. Last summer, I had some walls replastered and painted. I'm sure that in the process, I inhaled some lead paint dust. But I'm guessing that I inhaled less lead from that process than we all did in the 1970's when we used to burn LEAD in our gasoline.
No comments:
Post a Comment