• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should we pay for water?

Should we pay for water?

  • Total voters
    68
TheDemSocialist said:
No. Housing, which includes water, in my opinion is a basic human right and should not have to pay for it. It should be provided.
Click to expand...

That's the city boy in you talking. Those who lease/own houses or even multiple family dwellings don't own water rights.

I have a well. It costs about $6000.00. Now that's a lot of monthly water bills. And I have to pay for electricity to pump the water. I paid about 1000.00 for the filter system. I need to pay that much or more for a water softener. But I hate the feeling of softened water on my skin when I take a shower. Maintenance and supplies for those are expensive.

But city water isn't normally from a well. Some cities transport water long distances. Even if it was from a well water, it would probably still go through some water management system and might even have to be purified. Thus the cost of water management plants and personnel.

In addition to a water plant. It takes a lot of pipe to make water available in a city.

So do manufacturers who make pipe...make it for free? Should the companies who must purchase very expensive heavy equipment and pay skilled labor to lay the pipe do it for free?

The list goes on about everything it takes to get water to homes or dwellings.

So who is to pay for all of the above labor, equipment, services..etc? Water is probably the most profound issue facing humanity today. It's all about da money. One day probably all water will have to be pumped and processed from oceans.
 
DVSentinel said:
Lets see then. The Air Force spends how much on parts and maintenance because it flies antiquated Aircraft that Congress won't let them replace?
What is the current Officer to enlisted ratio?
After the draw down in the 1990's and the current one going on, how many General officers do we have?

BTW, scandals about costs are part of efficiency.

Have you ever actually served in the military?
Click to expand...

Can you please stop playing these games, Sentinel? You made a straight proposition:

DVSentinel said:
Nope. Bet you cannot point out a single part of the government or a single program that is actually efficiently ran.
Click to expand...

And I gave you a straight rebuttal:

Phys251 said:
The Marines
The Army
The Navy
The Air Force
NASA
NOAA

Your move. :)
Click to expand...

I suppose that I am obliged before proceeding to ask you for an exact definition of "efficient," and you are obliged to PROVE that the private sector is inherently more "efficient" than the public sector at anything the two try to respectively do. Notice I said PROVE it, NOT "give examples." Examples are worthless here. (If you can't see why, then there is no sense in my continuing this any further.)

Go.
 
DVSentinel said:
Efficiency relates to costs and effort of completing a task, not whether the task is completed.

You can drive a nail with a 20Lb sledge hammer or you and use a common claw hammer. The claw hammer is more efficient, but even with the sledge, the job still gets done.

As I suggested, go look up the definition of efficiency.
Click to expand...

The FAA is pretty efficient. How are you going to say its not?
 
Henrin said:
It really depends on who is responsible for collecting the taxes and how those taxes are paid. If the people must provide their labor to pay the taxes
Click to expand...
Everyone has to do a certain amount of labor to pay for taxes.

If the government is however collecting the taxes from people using a service voluntarily then it is not slavery.
Click to expand...
So the state of our tax code equates to slavery then :doh
 
TheDemSocialist said:
The FAA is pretty efficient. How are you going to say its not?
Click to expand...

Because he's right and you're wrong. Judging by Sentinel's posts thus far, that is the basis of his arguments.

He can disprove this with his actions.
 
grip said:
Is the supplying of water a basic human right?

If you consider all the things the gov't spends our money on (defense, roads, bridges, justice system etc), should one of them be a simple necessity?





Nearly Half Of Detroit Water Customers Can’t Pay Their Bill « CBS Detroit
Click to expand...

'Should' is irrelevant. It costs money to treat and move water. We're going to pay for that one way or another, either directly, or through taxes. I prefer the direct system, so that those who use more, pay more.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
If he is stranded in the desert he probably should get out of the desert.
Click to expand...

You don't know how he got there or what his circumstances are. You clearly want that man to die.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
A "basic amount"? How much is this? And who decides?
Click to expand...
some sort of independent commission should decide this.

What about people with medical machines in their homes that require cleaning (and a lot of water)?
Click to expand...
Could be written off.

What about businesses that specialize in power washing and carpet cleaning?
Click to expand...
What about them?

Do they bring their own water supply with them, or do you face a greater tax burden for providing neighborhood beautification or simple health code compliance?
Click to expand...
They could buy access to a well.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
You don't know how he got there or what his circumstances are. You clearly want that man to die.
Click to expand...

"left without the means to move from somewhere." When i think of stranded i think of an example like Sirahana. Plane crashes in the desert. They want to get out but cant. Hopefully if that is the case the man is rescued by the authorities.
 
grip said:
Is the supplying of water a basic human right?

If you consider all the things the gov't spends our money on (defense, roads, bridges, justice system etc), should one of them be a simple necessity?





Nearly Half Of Detroit Water Customers Can’t Pay Their Bill « CBS Detroit
Click to expand...

Yes we should pay for it, whether in taxes or as a private fee structure we should pay for it. I'm not necessarily opposed to public utilities for water and having basic usage come as a city service paid for by taxes.
 
grip said:
Municipal systems are paid for by the taxes and fees from capitalist activities, you can't really separate them. And I guarantee you that if the population starts to fail on paying for basic services the markets will fail massively. It's all connected and the corporate/political elite cannot isolate themselves from the effects of how they run things.
Click to expand...

At best, a municipal water system is a monopoly sponsored by the local government. If it were actually a capitalist venture there would be multiple providers vying for a piece of the pie.

Do you remember when Ma Bell had all the phone service? How much was a long distance call? After the breakup it took a few years but how much is long distance now?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Everyone has to do a certain amount of labor to pay for taxes.
Click to expand...

Again, it depends. It wouldn't be slavery for example to pay a toll to use a road, but income taxes on the other hand involve making a slave of both the employer and the employee.

So the state of our tax code equates to slavery then :doh
Click to expand...

More or less.
 
Phys251 said:
Can you please stop playing these games, Sentinel? You made a straight proposition:



And I gave you a straight rebuttal:



I suppose that I am obliged before proceeding to ask you for an exact definition of "efficient," and you are obliged to PROVE that the private sector is inherently more "efficient" than the public sector at anything the two try to respectively do. Notice I said PROVE it, NOT "give examples." Examples are worthless here. (If you can't see why, then there is no sense in my continuing this any further.)

Go.
Click to expand...

Wow, examples are not proof?

Point out where I ever said that "the private sector is inherently more efficient"?

And since you didn't answer, then I am going to have to assume that you don't actually know much at all about the agencies you mentioned.
 
Phys251 said:
Then you should have avoided the childish insults in post #48. Look, rephrase your position and let's go from there.
Click to expand...

Once again you need to reread who you are quoting and what is written. Post #48 is a good example where you replied to something I posted in a way that showed you didn't understand what you were responding to.
 
Lutherf said:
At best, a municipal water system is a monopoly sponsored by the local government. If it were actually a capitalist venture there would be multiple providers vying for a piece of the pie.

Do you remember when Ma Bell had all the phone service? How much was a long distance call? After the breakup it took a few years but how much is long distance now?
Click to expand...

Precisely, they are non-profit municipal utilities governed by community boards.
 
Phys251 said:
Can you please stop playing these games, Sentinel? You made a straight proposition:



And I gave you a straight rebuttal:



I suppose that I am obliged before proceeding to ask you for an exact definition of "efficient," and you are obliged to PROVE that the private sector is inherently more "efficient" than the public sector at anything the two try to respectively do. Notice I said PROVE it, NOT "give examples." Examples are worthless here. (If you can't see why, then there is no sense in my continuing this any further.)

Go.
Click to expand...

And while your demanding others to "prove" their point, where exactly is your "proof", even an example, of what you say being accurate? Demanding that I prove you wrong does not translate to you being right.
 
grip said:
Is the supplying of water a basic human right?

If you consider all the things the gov't spends our money on (defense, roads, bridges, justice system etc), should one of them be a simple necessity?
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as 'free'. And shouldn't the question be, how much should the rest of society pay for the lack of priorities others have?
 
DVSentinel said:
Wow, examples are not proof?
Click to expand...

Not when your sample is biased and when the sample size is much too small. Statistics 101.

DVSentinel said:
And while your demanding others to "prove" their point, where exactly is your "proof", even an example, of what you say being accurate? Demanding that I prove you wrong does not translate to you being right.
Click to expand...

You are in no position to lecture me on logical reasoning. Your failed attempts at doing so will not be listened to, so you are wasting your efforts by trying.

Point out where I ever said that "the private sector is inherently more efficient"?

And since you didn't answer, then I am going to have to assume that you don't actually know much at all about the agencies you mentioned.
Click to expand...

Logic failures, childish insults, defensiveness...yep, you and I are pretty much done here. Good day, sir.

clownboy said:
Once again you need to reread who you are quoting and what is written. Post #48 is a good example where you replied to something I posted in a way that showed you didn't understand what you were responding to.
Click to expand...

Geez, dude, you too please stop the defensiveness. Just state your case already.
 
Detroit should just pay everyones water bill with their extensive budget.
 
grip said:
Is the supplying of water a basic human right?

If you consider all the things the gov't spends our money on (defense, roads, bridges, justice system etc), should one of them be a simple necessity?





Nearly Half Of Detroit Water Customers Can’t Pay Their Bill « CBS Detroit
Click to expand...

water is “a God-given right,”

It is?

I read the article. $75 a month for water? That's what we pay here in my house in NH when we run the sprinklers. Normally it's about $50 a month.

$75 a month equates to about $2.50 a day. Is that unmanageable for half of the residents of Detroit? There isn't a lot in this article to help me understand what's going on or why, or where the 50% who can't come up with $2.50 a day are spending that money.

I disagree that it's a right, God-given or otherwise. If they are looking for charity in Detroit, say it (them, not you). I think the reasons detailed in the article, which vary from God to Wall Street to oil companies, kind of indicated nothing but bitchfesting, unless someone can explain to me how Wall Street or the oil companies impact a Detroit resident's inability to come up with $2.50 a day.
 
Phys251 said:
Geez, dude, you too please stop the defensiveness. Just state your case already.
Click to expand...

I have, your misreading and responses show you clearly have not. I was quite clear, your cost plus idea is already the case with municipal water districts right now. They are non-profit entities designed to serve the people of their communities.
 
The question is in my view more properly, is water use part of the commons, like public education/roads/police, that should be provided to all citizens through taxes, therefore meaning the poor who pay no taxes effectively get the service for 'free.'

I answered no because there is a good reason to attach a cost to the use of water - the per unit cost encourages conservation and discourages waste. Furthermore, there are many options that solve the problem of access to water by the truly indigent - transfer payments (welfare and the like), direct subsidies for water bills, solving water problems for the poor is well within the reach of much private charity etc. One option might be to provide a 'subsistence' level of water use for no or very low cost, and then market rates above that but it's easy to identify practical problems with this as well.

So, yes, charge for water, and take care of the indigent through other means.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom