4 ms·

That's fascinating. I've been boycotting Nestlé for many years based on documentaries and articles in German-language media. I've just tried to dig up some Engl

That's fascinating. I've been boycotting Nestlé for many years based on documentaries and articles in German-language media. I've just tried to dig up some English articles for the first time, but they are much harder to find. Compare the German-language version of Nestlé criticism on water: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestlé#Trinkwasser https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestlé#Trinkwasser ...to the English one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestlé#Bottled_water https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestlé#Bottled_water There was even a documentary on German public TV recently, pretty cheesy stuff, but starting at 32:49 the journalists are interviewing local politicians in Mexico about a Nestlé selling water from local reserves: http://www.daserste.de/information/ratgeber-service/montagscheck/videos/der-nestl-check-1-100.html http://www.daserste.de/information/ratgeber-service/montagsc... So while I can't translate all this content right now, the tl;dr is that in practise, Nestlé does not seem to believe in water as a human right. Otherwise, why sell water from areas where it is already scarce?

cynicalkane 10y ago
> Nestlé does not seem to believe in water as a human right. Otherwise, why sell water from areas where it is already scarce? Selling is often the best way to manage scarce resources, particularly in the presence of a government that cannot be trusted to effectively ration them. Most reasonable people don't object to companies selling food or clothing.
- cousin_it 10y ago
  If by "manage" you mean "make sure the scarce resource goes to the highest bidder". That's not the same as maximizing overall happiness, because purchasing power ≠ capacity for happiness. In fact it's often the reverse. The person who can get the most happiness from a glass of water might be the least able to afford it.
- gurkendoktor 10y ago
  Of course people object to companies selling food when it is scarce. Many reasonable people (governments included) are trying to stop the overfishing of the oceans or poaching of endangered animals. Is there an example of a scarce resource that was better off being managed by company than a government?
ptaipale 10y ago
One thing is that selling water from some place enables the source to be developed. E.g. enable better water treatment technology and eliminate losses. It may very well actually improve availability of water. Sale of drinking water is not really much of a problem, anywhere; the amounts consumed by drinking are small compared to everything else, and the development of treatment capability may well offset them. Selling water in bottles is a problem because of the bottles (trash, materials, energy), but that is another thing. Supplying water to other uses (industry, agriculture) is a problem because the amounts are vastly bigger than with drinking water. To be honest, I trust the English Wikipedia here more than the German...

cynicalkane 10y ago

> Nestlé does not seem to believe in water as a human right. Otherwise, why sell water from areas where it is already scarce? Selling is often the best way to manage scarce resources, particularly in the presence of a government that cannot be trusted to effectively ration them. Most reasonable people don't object to companies selling food or clothing.

cousin_it 10y ago
If by "manage" you mean "make sure the scarce resource goes to the highest bidder". That's not the same as maximizing overall happiness, because purchasing power ≠ capacity for happiness. In fact it's often the reverse. The person who can get the most happiness from a glass of water might be the least able to afford it.
gurkendoktor 10y ago
Of course people object to companies selling food when it is scarce. Many reasonable people (governments included) are trying to stop the overfishing of the oceans or poaching of endangered animals. Is there an example of a scarce resource that was better off being managed by company than a government?

ptaipale 10y ago

One thing is that selling water from some place enables the source to be developed. E.g. enable better water treatment technology and eliminate losses. It may very well actually improve availability of water. Sale of drinking water is not really much of a problem, anywhere; the amounts consumed by drinking are small compared to everything else, and the development of treatment capability may well offset them. Selling water in bottles is a problem because of the bottles (trash, materials, energy), but that is another thing. Supplying water to other uses (industry, agriculture) is a problem because the amounts are vastly bigger than with drinking water. To be honest, I trust the English Wikipedia here more than the German...