That would be wrong. It wouldn't allow a proper value to be placed on a shrinking national resource. You see, the water-diamond paradox is wrong. Mainly because diamonds are actually very common. Most sources of dirt have them. Where as water isn't actually that abundant. It's by far less abundant then most people realize and getting less so everyday. Water needs to be priced fairly, and people need to pay for it's use. Actually, utilities have a funny place. they are often seen as public, even though they are governed by market forces. It's kinda a gray area. It's an interesting case, water.
He could have meant that the management/maintenance could/should be nationalised, not that water should be free at the point of access...
usually going to a meter results in reduced bills. it cut ours practically in half. it really only hits people who use water retardedly, leaving their sprinklers running throughout the day, leaving hose on while washing car, etc. either that or they have gigantor gardens, in which case paying a bit more for water really is probably a drop in the ocean
I'm with you now, thanks BBC It seems that an increasing world population and the agriculture required to support them are some of the biggest problems, though I can see how metering could help reduce a percentage of the waste.
I've just had another thought.... If the water companies install meters at every house, they know how much water is leaving their system, and where. They presumably know how much they're putting in and where as well, which would mean that once the meters are installed, it'll be easier to find and fix leaks in the main. Or am I being silly?
Makes sense, but I'd assume they already have a good idea (old pipes, and they probably have some form of metering / detecting drops in flow) and if they can't even fix things as is can they be bothered to install meters for every house in England? I tried to find some decent info on this but so far nothing definitive
Not at all. In fact, here in SA -at least in Jozie- we can call the water company and do just that. They monitor the last point in their system that they can and your house connection, and figure out how much is lost in the local system mains. Do this enough times and you can pretty much pin point where the leak is and dig it up.
This is what I meant. I don't get how anyone can argue for private ownership over government in matters of basic needs. Alright, governments are incompetant, stupid, crony-istic(?) and generally beurocratic but Private companies are the exact same, AND they are working for profit, therefore they have even less requirement to give a quality service. There are some things that shouldn't be in the free market and water (in addition to many other things) is one of them.
exactly like healthcare. Remove the profit requirement or the entire system gets ****ed, only tangently related by Coca cola's bottled water attempt, dasani, tried to sell water even after the government, not itself, identified that it was infected with carcenogenic bromate.
All property built since 1990 was metered in construction but if you own one of the 70% of older properties with no meter the choice is yours, plus you can have a year's trial. I'm all for having a meter, especially now I've spent money on tubs to store rainwater for the garden.
nobody's restricting your access to water, if you want some you can go to the river and get some. but it costs money to pump it to your house, and if you don't pay for it to be pumped, then it would seem perfectly reasonable to stop pumping it. i shudder to think what would happen here if we had unmetered water, people already seem to feel a need to water their lawns for hours and wash their cars every day.
To be honest I think having a meter would probably work best for most people. I've just moved house and the first water bill was £150 for the quarter based on ratable value. After a meter was fitted it dropped to £100 over 6 months and it's not like I never really use the water.
