I have posted before on
the stupidity of water restrictions. But I received yesterday via snailmail a magnet poster for the fridge and a glossy pamphlet from the Victorian Govenrment on Permanent Water Saving Rules Now in PlaceIt tells us how precious water is, how water restrictions have conserved it, and gives us five rules to follow: use manual
(
Read more... )
Comments 37
Reply
And petrol is so much more expensive! Consider the poor people ...
Reply
Mind you, so does petrol-sniffing. And car accidents.
Bureaucracies, eh? Each department has no clue, and different policies on what other departments handle.
Reply
Try houses. Or jobs.
Some departments aren't so bad. And a politician always ultimately signs off on it.
Reply
Reply
A 'solution' which ameliorates but does not solve a problem provides bureaucratic careers forever.
A 'solution' which really is, doesn't. What do you think governments will generally end up doing?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Water should absolutely not be free, because it is not infinite and how much we use matters.
Corporations supply food, drink, housing, clothing. That seems to work quite well (indeed, a great deal better than getting govt to do the same). And I actually want corporations, like everyone else, to pay the real scarcity value of water.
Reply
Reply
And I have lived on a low income with little money, indeed, fairly recently. But the notion that prices only affect people on low income is demonstrably false. And, as I said, I am happy for rebates for low income people.
One of the (many) problem of water restrictions is that they are inherently unfair -- the diligent obey them and the feckless don't. Prices are inherently fairer.
Reply
Check out :http://www.savewater.com.au/default.asp?SectionId=630&ContentId=674
I think there is quite good balance between regulation and encouragement - even for business.
Reply
"This thing is underpiced item, so we will make it even more underpriced if you install water saving devices".
Just more unnecessary complication which still underates water scarcity and provides an insufficient incentive structure. And the rebates are govt set prices for actions: I'm sorry, they have a really bad record for very good reasons.
Price water properly. Give rebates to low income households. Simple, effective: much more effective, indeed.
Reply
Only if given that water must be expensive. If access to water is a human right, then your argument becomes less tenable. Instead of everyone having access to water, your method would introduce more beaurocracy to keep track of who is elegible for rebates or not, and those who fall foul of that beaurocracy and don't have the resources to fight miss out. Don't even try to pretend it wouldn't happen. Privatising water would even more egregious, as people who cannot afford their inflated water bills would simply be cut off, and alternative supplies would be made illegal. This is not a hypothetical argument, it has happened, and is worse than I could have invented.
Education, instead, has inculcated a sense of the worth of water far deeper than mere money can do. Even wealthy people are loath to obviously waste water, where if the disincentive was purely economic, then large swimming pools and hosing down the driveway become status symbols of conspicuous consumption. You may not believe the ( ... )
Reply
And of course farmers should pay proper prices. I do mean everyone.
Your point about cultural factors just means that Australians will respond more strongly at lower prices. Australia's drought history no doubt is a factor.
Water is no more a 'human right' than food, shelter etc are. Water is a resource, and should be priced accordingly.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Leave a comment