A greater percentage of bottled water is drunk. Drinking being the most critical use of drinkable water. If there's a shortage that's the activity you want to m

A greater percentage of bottled water is drunk. Drinking being the most critical use of drinkable water. If there's a shortage that's the activity you want to most prioritise over others. I didn't say household water use is minimal, I said a tiny portion of it is used for drinking. People use on average like 200L a day and drink like 3. It's mostly used on showering, gardens, washing machines, toilets, pools, dishwashers. Activities that could generally be cut a fair bit. You crank up the price and my showers are definitely getting shorter, my non-existent garden pool and dishwasher would get removed if they existed, id pay attention to the water level setting on the washing machine instead of just leaving it on high, and only flush for shits. I absolutely do not believe people would eat a huge budget hit to keep these activities nor that they're already running at a much higher rate of water efficiency. Demand would plummet and more water would be available for drinking. Everything hurts poor people more. That's how having a financial buffer works. It's basically the definition. Poor people are people who have few or no resources. You want resources to make life less painful. Cutting water use hurts poor people. Allowing things to get so bad that neighbours have water flow issues would hurt them more. It's not going to be the wealthy that go without in any scenario so "trying to fix it will hurt the poor" is a nothing statement.