5 ms·

Where is "access to clean water" (or frankly, anything on the list) not appropriate?

pmiller2 7y ago
I think the charitable interpretation of the comment you're replying to is that we may need ~50 different implementations of "access to clean water," etc.
chrisco255 7y ago
In rural communities, you're most often getting your water from a well. I grew up in an area like this, with a pumped well and septic system. There was no need for public water infrastructure because the density did not necessitate it, and the natural aquifer more than provided for those needs.
- kelnos 7y ago
  That's fine. Those people have "access to clean water". Any guarantee of such needs to take into account the various ways people obtain clean water, and make sure one exists. It might just be someone noting, "nice, they have a functioning well with plenty of capacity, good to go". If they don't then the government should fix that, either by running a public water system to that location, or drilling a well. If that's "socialism", then I'm all for it. The idea that we shouldn't ensure that everyone has access to clean water in this age is ludicrous, and, frankly, reprehensible.
  - chrisco255 7y ago
    Wells and septic systems are often regulated by state and local zoning laws. So, houses are not sellable without these things, as it stands. The initial builder of a house pays for the installation. And then it passes to the next owner as part of the property. Property owners are ultimately responsible. Landlords are responsible for providing clean water in accordance with tenant-landlord law. In U.S. this problem has long been solved. Sometimes you get poor local management like Flint, MI that screws things up. But by and large, solved problem.
ctdonath 7y ago
That presumes providing clean water is somebody else’s problem. It’s not. Classic American culture is rooted in independence. I honestly don’t grasp the notion that “access to clean water” involves compelling others to make water clean & available cheap/free in large quantity; don’t ruin what water is commonly available, property rights apply, collect what flows/falls on your property ... otherwise it’s up to you to buy or acquire/purify for your own needs. If an area does not have a suitable source, move. There is no right to live where you like and compel others to alleviate regional inadequacies. “Access to clean water” is not appropriate where there isn’t any (which includes much of the US), or where water has been ruined beyond reasonable reclamation (Flint, Syracuse, etc).

I think the charitable interpretation of the comment you're replying to is that we may need ~50 different implementations of "access to clean water," etc.

chrisco255 7y ago

In rural communities, you're most often getting your water from a well. I grew up in an area like this, with a pumped well and septic system. There was no need for public water infrastructure because the density did not necessitate it, and the natural aquifer more than provided for those needs.

kelnos 7y ago
That's fine. Those people have "access to clean water". Any guarantee of such needs to take into account the various ways people obtain clean water, and make sure one exists. It might just be someone noting, "nice, they have a functioning well with plenty of capacity, good to go". If they don't then the government should fix that, either by running a public water system to that location, or drilling a well. If that's "socialism", then I'm all for it. The idea that we shouldn't ensure that everyone has access to clean water in this age is ludicrous, and, frankly, reprehensible.
- chrisco255 7y ago
  Wells and septic systems are often regulated by state and local zoning laws. So, houses are not sellable without these things, as it stands. The initial builder of a house pays for the installation. And then it passes to the next owner as part of the property. Property owners are ultimately responsible. Landlords are responsible for providing clean water in accordance with tenant-landlord law. In U.S. this problem has long been solved. Sometimes you get poor local management like Flint, MI that screws things up. But by and large, solved problem.

ctdonath 7y ago

That presumes providing clean water is somebody else’s problem. It’s not. Classic American culture is rooted in independence. I honestly don’t grasp the notion that “access to clean water” involves compelling others to make water clean & available cheap/free in large quantity; don’t ruin what water is commonly available, property rights apply, collect what flows/falls on your property ... otherwise it’s up to you to buy or acquire/purify for your own needs. If an area does not have a suitable source, move. There is no right to live where you like and compel others to alleviate regional inadequacies. “Access to clean water” is not appropriate where there isn’t any (which includes much of the US), or where water has been ruined beyond reasonable reclamation (Flint, Syracuse, etc).