2 ms·
That's probably a misunderstanding. There are plenty of places that don't have public water, but that do have abundant potable water. It's just coming from a ne
by db48x 6y ago
That's probably a misunderstanding. There are plenty of places that don't have public water, but that do have abundant potable water. It's just coming from a nearby well rather than a water treatment plant. Same with the sewer; they've got private septic systems rather than a public sewer system. This type of distributed infrastructure is less costly and more resilient than public water and sewer systems, though it's not suitable for cities or even suburbs.
- monocasa 6y agoI understand that, I have a house on a well. That bit is covered by my first response: > Almost entirely rural. These people aren't digging up roads, but it's purely a right of way issue on the poles (if they're getting real high speed internet either way). The part you seem to take issue with is the part where I think I had reduced the subset to people who have an issue getting current infrastructure, probably because it hasn't been maintained properly (thinking of flint like situations). I'm admitting that there are cases where they have bigger utility issues and systemic problems managing those utilities, and probably don't have the bandwidth to deal with a new one.