4 ms·
>it's simply useful for people to know that this level of private consumption exists. Why? How can we assume that this water is being wasted? What if the own
by RIMR 11y ago
>it's simply useful for people to know that this level of private consumption exists.
Why? How can we assume that this water is being wasted? What if the owner has a private hydroponics system, and they sell produce to farmers markets? It's legal, productive, and requires a lot of water.
Starting a witchhunt because a wealthy person uses a lot of water in a water-scarce area misses the point entirely, because we have no idea what the water is being used for. If there's a legitimate use for it, and they're able to pay, I don't see what the problem is.
If you're worried about water being legitimately wasted, work towards getting water usage regulated so we can determine which activities are wasteful, and which are not. Then, customers would be forced to explain water-usage like this, and could be penalized if it were deemed unnecessary.
- JabavuAdams 11y agoWe can't ask whether it's justified if we don`t know it's happening. Investigating a potential problem requires recognition that there may be a problem. That's what's happening here -- investigation. I'm surprised you find that controversial. Sometimes investigations start with the regulators, and sometimes they start with members of the public. We shouldn't have to wait for the regulators to change the regulations before we're allowed to ask "what's going on here?" In fact, what reason is there to change any regulation if there's no perception of a problem, nor desire by anybody to see it changed? You seem to be arguing that anything that is not explicitly prohibited by regulations should be acceptable to the public. If people can't regulate themselves to at least some degree, this means we'd have to explicitly codify all "good behaviour". This is unworkable, and frankly undesirable.