3 ms·

The best method is when the rich get water and the poor don't? What happens when a Native American village that's been around for 800 years can't afford its wa

The best method is when the rich get water and the poor don't? What happens when a Native American village that's been around for 800 years can't afford its water supply because a nearby factory prices them out? (Even better, the US might have promised to uphold that water right under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.) When rain falls on my land, who do I pay, and how much? What about water from an aquifer? If I decide to dam all the water from leaving my land, is that okay? Can Colorado decide to dam divert the entire Colorado River from reaching downstream?

sn0wf1re 4y ago
> The best method is when the rich get water and the poor don't? Give each citizen / resident a basic water allowance that they don't need to pay for (or do it by tax rebate) and charge high prices for usage above that. If rich people can afford to pay prices that would be comparable to desalinating water and trucking it to their house, let them have a lawn. This is how Carbon taxing in Canada works, everyone pays X% and it is offset for poorer people by giving them money several times per year (some provinces give an equal money to each person rather than based on income). > When rain falls on my land, who do I pay, and how much? What about water from an aquifer? Some places already don't let you keep rainwater without a licence and the government has the right to see how much and what you are doing with said water. Similarly for aquifers, put a meter on it, big fines if you get caught bypassing the meter. > If I decide to dam all the water from leaving my land, is that okay? Nope. Not only is this hoarding of resources you might not have legal right to possess (see above about rainwater), but depending on the size of your reservoir it can pose a safety risk to those downstream. > Can Colorado decide to dam divert the entire Colorado River from reaching downstream? There is the Colorado river treaty that legally prevents this. From a practical standpoint it ridiculous.
- eesmith 4y ago
  silexia's proposal was "simply use pricing to ration use". All the things you mentioned are not part of that simple proposal.
iudqnolq 4y ago
> What happens when a Native American village that's been around for 800 years can't afford its water supply because a nearby factory prices them out? > (Even better, the US might have promised to uphold that water right under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.) That's what's happening right now. CA growers get more than their agreed share, essentially for free. Native Americans get essentially none of their agreed share. Mexico gets literally none of their agreed share (that is, the river runs bone dry before it gets to them). That's the whole problem. The agreed shares add up to far more than 100%, and right now some states - especially CA - are benefiting disproportionately from the allotment.
- eesmith 4y ago
  Yes, the current system is fubar. That doesn't mean silexia's proposal should be immune from criticism. Especially where it would seem to exacerbate known issues in the existing system.

sn0wf1re 4y ago

> The best method is when the rich get water and the poor don't? Give each citizen / resident a basic water allowance that they don't need to pay for (or do it by tax rebate) and charge high prices for usage above that. If rich people can afford to pay prices that would be comparable to desalinating water and trucking it to their house, let them have a lawn. This is how Carbon taxing in Canada works, everyone pays X% and it is offset for poorer people by giving them money several times per year (some provinces give an equal money to each person rather than based on income). > When rain falls on my land, who do I pay, and how much? What about water from an aquifer? Some places already don't let you keep rainwater without a licence and the government has the right to see how much and what you are doing with said water. Similarly for aquifers, put a meter on it, big fines if you get caught bypassing the meter. > If I decide to dam all the water from leaving my land, is that okay? Nope. Not only is this hoarding of resources you might not have legal right to possess (see above about rainwater), but depending on the size of your reservoir it can pose a safety risk to those downstream. > Can Colorado decide to dam divert the entire Colorado River from reaching downstream? There is the Colorado river treaty that legally prevents this. From a practical standpoint it ridiculous.

eesmith 4y ago
silexia's proposal was "simply use pricing to ration use". All the things you mentioned are not part of that simple proposal.

iudqnolq 4y ago

> What happens when a Native American village that's been around for 800 years can't afford its water supply because a nearby factory prices them out? > (Even better, the US might have promised to uphold that water right under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.) That's what's happening right now. CA growers get more than their agreed share, essentially for free. Native Americans get essentially none of their agreed share. Mexico gets literally none of their agreed share (that is, the river runs bone dry before it gets to them). That's the whole problem. The agreed shares add up to far more than 100%, and right now some states - especially CA - are benefiting disproportionately from the allotment.

eesmith 4y ago
Yes, the current system is fubar. That doesn't mean silexia's proposal should be immune from criticism. Especially where it would seem to exacerbate known issues in the existing system.