Leaded gas was banned in 1996, but exposure to the poison cost people born before then several IQ points on average, researchers estimated.
  • Kokesh@lemmy.worldEnglish
    182·
    8 months ago

    It would seem like the lead is still being used, from seeing so many tRump supporters.

  • Pronell@lemmy.worldEnglish
    14·
    8 months ago

    I truly believe leaded gasoline was the final nail in the coffin of the human race.

    Just as our technologies became able to affect the globe on a massive scale, our ability to govern ourselves appropriately diminished.

    • LethalSmack@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      8 months ago

      The problem with that is who gets to decide what is on that test.

      If it’s done in good faith then all is well. When it’s weaponized to prevent those with opposing opinions from voting then it’s a major problem

    • 3volver@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      8 months ago

      No there shouldn’t, it would be an absolute shit show as to who decides what’s on the test and what the correct answers are.

      The best is mandatory voting, making voting day a national holiday, and universal mail-in voting. The problem is people thinking their voice doesn’t matter because of gerrymandering, the electoral college, and 2 senators per state.

    • EtherWhack@lemmy.worldEnglish
      41·
      8 months ago

      Then we may as well restrict impoverished groups of people who can’t get a good enough education from voting. Since they don’t vote, we should just pull even move funding from them. We should also make them work for their basic sustenances since they can’t contribute anything else. Let’s even quarantine them to certain areas to make sure they don’t put too much strain on our society. Without them having a voice, only working for basic necessities, and being confined, we should just call them slaves.

        • EtherWhack@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          8 months ago

          It’s illustrating the point of why restricting certain groups of people from voting is very ill-advised. It may seem like an extreme example, but it can get the point across.

          It pretty much says that when you start to remove voting rights from some people based on something that may be out of their hands, it can open that system up to be abused. Just like what the US experienced with women and blacks. (We remember the Suffrage and Civil Rights Movements, right?)