• 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

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
33,000
Reaction score
13,973
Location
FL - Daytona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
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?



It’s a basic human right: water. But could the United Nations soon help the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department provide the service to struggling customers?

And while Garner says water is “a God-given right,” she says there is a cost to move water from the water resource to the customer and that the infrastructure costs money.

Nearly Half Of Detroit Water Customers Can’t Pay Their Bill « CBS Detroit
 
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
You will pay for water ether way, to the Government in taxes, or to the water authority.
The difference is with the Government, non payment can send you to jail, and the price per unit
would likely be higher, to cover the Government overhead.
 
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.
 
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.

Yeah, except it's not and never has been, anywhere on the globe.
 
Of course we should pay for water, delivering safe clean water is not cheap.
 
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.

Positive rights are fun. Tell me, how would water and housing be provided to you without someones labor being required?

Edit: I meant to vote yes. :doh
 
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

Without water, we cannot live. Therefore since we have a right to life we have a right to water.

The prohibition on collecting rainwater should be prohibited.


If you're not in a position to drop your own well, a "cost plus" method of delivery should be established in the locality in which you reside. The "plus" a minimal amount which covers the expenses of withdrawing, cleaning, distributing, and maintenance of infrastructure.
 
Ofc you have to pay for water. What sort of stupid question is that.

And to my understanding, there is a management program for those who can't afford to pay water that makes it so they pay only a % of the cost and still get water.

That being said, water shouldn't be denied if you haven't paid your bills on time and there should be some governmental intervention in situations like the ones in Detroit.
That being said, Detroit is beyond saving so maybe this will incentivize people to leave that ****hole for good.
That being said, not everyone who wants to leave can leave...

Either way, the govt should step in with either a bailout or some sort of enforced governmental program to make sure that this situation doesn't escalate. Whether it should be the federal govt or the state govt, I'll leave it up to you to decide. But it's clear that local authorities are incompetent.
 
You cannot have a right to other people paying for something for you.

Just because something is required for living does not make it a right.

Rights are unalienable, inherent rather than parasitic.

If everything you needed was provided for you, at the expense of another's labor, why work? Your survival is not my problem, I do not live for your sake.
 
Positive rights are fun. Tell me, how would water and housing be provided to you without someones labor being required?

Edit: I meant to vote yes. :doh
Taxation.
 
Without water, we cannot live. Therefore since we have a right to life we have a right to water.

The prohibition on collecting rainwater should be prohibited.


If you're not in a position to drop your own well, a "cost plus" method of delivery should be established in the locality in which you reside. The "plus" a minimal amount which covers the expenses of withdrawing, cleaning, distributing, and maintenance of infrastructure.


Your right to life means someone cannot take your life except in certain circumstances. It does not mean someone has to take affirmative steps to preserve your life.

Inidividuals should be billed for water usage. It costs money to purify and deliver and if you're on the hook for your personal usage you might act in ways that conserves water.

And frankly it's not like it's a huge expense. I think I pay about $10/month to the local water company.
 
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.
Food is also a basic right however its not free. Somebody has to pay for water whether its the tenet or the landlord. You can always stick your tongue out when it rains, that way its free. :lamo
 
You cannot have a right to other people paying for something for you.

Just because something is required for living does not make it a right.

Rights are unalienable, inherent rather than parasitic.

If everything you needed was provided for you, at the expense of another's labor, why work? Your survival is not my problem, I do not live for your sake.

Yet much money is expected by owners of water rights for access alone.

As taco said, it is illegal to.collect the water that falls on your house in many areas.

And requiring people to pay someone else to sleep legally is govt enforced parasitism. Otherwise I could sleep in my RV for free.
 
Without water, we cannot live. Therefore since we have a right to life we have a right to water.

Already answered in subsequent posts.

The prohibition on collecting rainwater should be prohibited.

You're begging for the return of mass water and mosquito bourne disease throughout densely populated areas.

If you're not in a position to drop your own well, a "cost plus" method of delivery should be established in the locality in which you reside. The "plus" a minimal amount which covers the expenses of withdrawing, cleaning, distributing, and maintenance of infrastructure.

Already the case.
 
Taxation.

Taxation is a draw on the labor of others, that goes to pay for the labor of others (in this case, the person or people who maintain the water treatment plant and build the infrastructure).

In your system, what does the basis for taxation come from? Labor!

In your system, where does that taxation get used? On more labor!

Your system requires the labor of others.
 
Of course we should pay for water, delivering safe clean water is not cheap.

The reason I brought this up, because if a major US city has half its population unable to afford basic water supply, it speaks to how broken our capitalist system is becoming.

Walmart advertises, they'll provide $250 billion worth of new US production. That's one company trying to rebuild public image, with a $.25 trillion dollars. Yet half of the citizens of Detroit can't afford freaking water, something is wrong.

A socialist gov't isn't the answer but it's going to become a necessity if corporations don't put something back in, instead of leveraging their ability to hoard money. Starbucks is going to start offering a free college education to its employees.

Paying workers more, with better benefits would be a big step in the right direction, and stimulate the economy dramatically putting funds in the hands of spenders.
 
Last edited:
Yet much money is expected by owners of water rights for access alone.

As taco said, it is illegal to.collect the water that falls on your house in many areas.

And requiring people to pay someone else to sleep legally is govt enforced parasitism. Otherwise I could sleep in my RV for free.

I am in complete agreement with anyone opposed to rain taxes or bans on collecting rainwater.
 
Taxation.

Taxation requires labor to be paid. Taxation also only deals with the payment of the service, but has nothing to do with the delivery of it.
 
Last edited:
I am in complete agreement with anyone opposed to rain taxes or bans on collecting rainwater.

In certain locations that just makes no sense whatsoever. In very cold climates and with excellent filtering and a population that knows how to live without a governmental support system it works. However, in many places, again, you're asking for mass disease.
 
Taxation is a draw on the labor of others, that goes to pay for the labor of others (in this case, the person or people who maintain the water treatment plant and build the infrastructure).

In your system, what does the basis for taxation come from? Labor!

In your system, where does that taxation get used? On more labor!

Your system requires the labor of others.

So what? Any system needs labor.
 
I am in complete agreement with anyone opposed to rain taxes or bans on collecting rainwater.

Banning or taxing rainwater collection is done for the exact same reason that in many states, it is becoming increasingly legally difficult to live off the grid.
 
Back
Top Bottom