It is my belief that a civilized and developed nation should ensure that it supplies water as a basic human necessity to all under its jurisdiction. That said- details are important in making a decision on this exact case which I do not have, and there is a case to be made. A human can survive long term on as little as 1.5 liters of water per day. A more humane and “safe” amount would probably be around 6-10 liters a day per person. Things that are not technically survival imperatives but could be called necessary for practical survival like grooming and general sanitation would increase that figure. That said- people are not only generally inefficient with water usage, but quite frivolous. That’s an issue in supplying water. Lawns and gardening, recreational usage like water balloons and all manner of hobby and recreation related usage of water, car washing, sidewalk washing, more cleaning than is necessary etc. for sanitation purposes you don’t NEED to flush the toilet every time
and flush toilets aren’t even necessary for proper sanitation, they convenient. Long showers, inefficient appliances, running the tap excessively when washing dishes or hands or brushing teeth etc. so while we need water to survive- some percentage of our daily needs can be handled via water ingested in food we eat (with the right diet is is feasible to survive on 1 cup of liquid water per day or even less in some cases), and the bulk of water usage in most of the “developed world” by private citizens is for non essential reasons, even if we say “practical need” like toilet flushing is essential if not strictly than in practice, most water use is waste.
So this creates a problem. In the extreme- take a person who has a large garden or law and leaves the tap running and such- should we use water resources and comunal money to pay for their waste? I’d argue no, as that is no longer essential and not something that is a bare minimum of a developed civilization- especially if the person
is abusing the free water. So at some point yes, water should be charged for to limit waste. One could argue it be rationed, if a person can’t pay that they should be given a metered ration per day. The infrastructure for that hasn’t classically existed and largely still does not even if we might now have the technology to allow it. The other problem there is that if that person is wasteful with their ration, they’ll still not have enough water to survive, so why do we do, tell them to die then? So then there becomes no practical way to limit or penalize excessive water usage- if you use a 3 gallon ration to wash your car and then are dehydrated so we say: “ok. You can have another gallon…” and you use that to take a shower… when do we say: “ok. Enough…” and how would we know? It’s a complex system that requires close personal administration for every person and is easily gamed.
Firstly- yes. In much of the US it CAN be illegal to supply neighbors with water. It depends on where you live, but it is commonly illegal to help people avoid paying utilities charges and commonly illegal to share utilities in manners that do not prescribe to codes in place for health and safety.
Many or most places the sharing of water is illegal offer flat rate municipal water. I don’t know if they lived in such a place. Flat rate municipal water is tax subsidized and each citizen pays a flat rate for water use regardless of how much they use. So ot makes sense the practice is illegal in such places as one home sees a drastic increase in water meant to provide and planned for use by that single household, and one person avoids paying into the system which impacts the systems ability to provide water for everyone.
Water utilities often offer payment plans, and they often have programs specifically for the elderly and the low income. I do not know if this person qualified for such
programs or perhaps was even in them and still couldn’t pay due to limited finances. It is also possible the person simply managed their budget poorly- another issue with water rationing being that a ration is a budget. We all live on a money ration, our ability to manage our money being a type of self rationing. That said the logic there applies to most cases but any specific person is not most cases, they have unique circumstances that tend to be unknown in their entirety.
I lack the information to judge here beyond to say that there was some clear failing in the ability or function of social welfare if an elderly person was without water.
I think it happens very frequently where you see that people in dire need do not know how to access available resources. Sometimes they don’t have the mental capacity; sometimes they don’t realize there’s help, sometimes they don’t know where to start.
There is a lot missing from this story, but it’s still tragic and entirely too common.
No disagreement here. Without another 10,000 words it was heard to be specific so I tried to convey the same idea in a vague sense in mentioning how folks have different circumstances, but yes. Classically the elderly and certain other groups are in demographics that often make it so that even when assistance is available, they are unaware those programs even exist or taking advantage of them is prohibitive or difficult to navigate. What’s more, it is common that many don’t have the capacity, linguistic or mental processing, access- and it seems strange to many but yes, it can be a physical, mental, or psychological challenge for many to even travel a short distance.
Now, there is truth a sort of right leaning “manifest destiny” outlook where one is ultimately responsible for all things in their life and so forth, and truth in a more progressive outlook that maybe in a civilized society we don’t HAVE to live by brutal and unforgiving rules of nature and we can engineer man made systems to offer comfort and aid where natural ones do not.
I take a middle ground in general but skew towards compassion because at the end of the day. It is my belief that people either “have what it takes” or Can or will do it- or they don’t or won’t. No amount of punitive action or cajoling or self need will change certain things in people. I don’t say that in a condescending way. What I mean is that I’m not a billionaire and I don’t have what it takes to be, and someone like my mother, couldn’t be convinced in all her life to learn to drive or to hold a job or to stick to a schedule other than what she felt like at any moment.
Some of that can be attributed to lack of access- the tools and knowledge and ingrained practices to be prudent and disciplined. Even still- luck is a real bear and you can “do everything right” and end up flat in the gutter. It tends to be less likely when you “do everything right” than doing it all wrong or a lot of it- but it happens. Most people who that happens to bounce back. Most people with talents or marketability and any drive to use it tend to be ok long term, at least until they lose those things from age or changes to what people want etc. but it’s the people who aren’t necessarily the “best of us,” and I count myself in this group. I’ve done ok, but I haven’t cured cancer or owned a global empire or anything so grand that I’m likely to be in the history books.
Most of us are pretty average. We have things we are exceptional at and things we are not. We have positive and negative traits so I don’t mean to devalue anyone as a human being- but I mean… in a hypothetical where the world faced cataclysm and only the brightest and most skilled and most productive 1% of humanity could be saved… well… I live my people but not many of them, including me; are likely to be in that bunker.
So with that clear- some people just aren’t as suited for the way society and economics tend to run, regardless of access or education or anything else. I do not believe those people have less right to exist than any others, things aren’t so dire on this space ship earth that we need to start making sacrifices. All life in my eyes has inherent value, and we don’t actually know who will or won’t do something important or amazing. Some folks get a late start. So…
Indeed. No one should have to go without water and I think we could improve our systems. Ultimately in a democracy the way systems behave in theory acts as a mirror of the peoples will. The truth is that our systems reflect the flaws within us. Revolution is a revolving door of assholes. It occasionally ends with better assholes or ones more suited to the predispositions of most, but history is just a parade of assholes taking power from each other because those who want power tend to be assholes or become assholes, or if they aren’t… some asshole takes their power. Because we respond well to assholes. Self serving assholery suits most people where they rubber meets the road. The system works in that we blame people in power to avoid personal responsibility and then largely consider the cycle.
So this creates a problem. In the extreme- take a person who has a large garden or law and leaves the tap running and such- should we use water resources and comunal money to pay for their waste? I’d argue no, as that is no longer essential and not something that is a bare minimum of a developed civilization- especially if the person
Many or most places the sharing of water is illegal offer flat rate municipal water. I don’t know if they lived in such a place. Flat rate municipal water is tax subsidized and each citizen pays a flat rate for water use regardless of how much they use. So ot makes sense the practice is illegal in such places as one home sees a drastic increase in water meant to provide and planned for use by that single household, and one person avoids paying into the system which impacts the systems ability to provide water for everyone.
Water utilities often offer payment plans, and they often have programs specifically for the elderly and the low income. I do not know if this person qualified for such
There is a lot missing from this story, but it’s still tragic and entirely too common.
I take a middle ground in general but skew towards compassion because at the end of the day. It is my belief that people either “have what it takes” or Can or will do it- or they don’t or won’t. No amount of punitive action or cajoling or self need will change certain things in people. I don’t say that in a condescending way. What I mean is that I’m not a billionaire and I don’t have what it takes to be, and someone like my mother, couldn’t be convinced in all her life to learn to drive or to hold a job or to stick to a schedule other than what she felt like at any moment.
So with that clear- some people just aren’t as suited for the way society and economics tend to run, regardless of access or education or anything else. I do not believe those people have less right to exist than any others, things aren’t so dire on this space ship earth that we need to start making sacrifices. All life in my eyes has inherent value, and we don’t actually know who will or won’t do something important or amazing. Some folks get a late start. So…