4 ms·

We need to stop giving money to bottled water company, so to stop them giving the means and the reason to lobby against water being a human right, it is the job

We need to stop giving money to bottled water company, so to stop them giving the means and the reason to lobby against water being a human right, it is the job of a government to make sure that the infrastructure for clean water is present, and funded through taxes, to benefit any and all, and as always fuck nestle… and the other water companies

autoexec 3y ago
> it is the job of a government to make sure that the infrastructure for clean water is present, and funded through taxes, to benefit any and all this is a job they are failing at. I was recently shocked to see how many places in the US were under boil-water advisories. At this point I'd really like a national map of where the water is unsafe because they are everywhere and some of them go on for years while others are short term (water main breaks for example). I found one advisory for a nearby town I frequent that had recently ended and I hadn't even been aware of it. Unless you're obsessively following the department of water/natural resources on social media for every city/state you visit you'd never know! There are bound to be many homes, businesses, even restaurants totally unaware that their water is unsafe and many more visitors to areas who don't have any clue.
- happymellon 3y ago
  Even places that aren't, the water out of the faucet is fairly grim. Heavily chlorinated and unpleasant. It's no wonder that they all drink filtered, or bottled water. It's one of those things I forget about each time I visit and drink from the tap only to remember that I can't do that most places here after the first sip.
Georgelemental 3y ago
> Water being a human right Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right.
- dietr1ch 3y ago
  So how's the argument that water is technically limited is enough to start selling it for corporate profit?
  - Georgelemental 3y ago
    In fact, I don't think corporations should be able to exploit a commons (like a stream) for profit without compensating the community.
    - Aerroon 3y ago
      They do compensate the community. First, they make goods available: bottled water. Second, they buy the land and/or water rights to use them.
      - FireBeyond 3y ago
        > water rights to use them There's some rather sweetheart deals at play there. In some places, those water rights cost as little as a single digit number of dollars per million gallons.
- parineum 3y ago
  Water isn't limited.
  - Georgelemental 3y ago
    Freshwater is limited, the energy and infrastructure to desalinate and transport saltwater are limited.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right. Rights aren’t natural, that’s a quasi-religious fiction invoked as a thought-terminating cliché to avoid debate over political ideology, and the bounds you state are simply the dogma of a particular political sect fond of the “natural rights” evasion. Human rights are a matter determined by the conscience of humans, and (while not explicitly called out there), water seems to fall squarely within the broad international consensus on what constitutes “human rights” expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, especially Article 25.
Eumenes 3y ago
> water being a human right housing, jobs, healthcare, education, water ... strange how classically liberal rights, such as speech and fair trial, which if anything are antagonist to the state, have transitioned, in popular discourse, to physical and materialistic needs that require top down control of resources/institutions. not very liberal to me. nestle sucks, and shouldn't exist, but this 'human right' rhetoric is just stupid
- TheAceOfHearts 3y ago
  If enough people agree that something should be available to all, then we can decide that it's a human right. I don't think it's that complicated. Your comment seems like it takes on the problem from a platonic ideal of a reality which doesn't seem to exist.
  - Eumenes 3y ago
    Well, expect people to mock the endless growing list of 'rights' because at this pace, I'm starting to lose track

autoexec 3y ago

> it is the job of a government to make sure that the infrastructure for clean water is present, and funded through taxes, to benefit any and all this is a job they are failing at. I was recently shocked to see how many places in the US were under boil-water advisories. At this point I'd really like a national map of where the water is unsafe because they are everywhere and some of them go on for years while others are short term (water main breaks for example). I found one advisory for a nearby town I frequent that had recently ended and I hadn't even been aware of it. Unless you're obsessively following the department of water/natural resources on social media for every city/state you visit you'd never know! There are bound to be many homes, businesses, even restaurants totally unaware that their water is unsafe and many more visitors to areas who don't have any clue.

happymellon 3y ago
Even places that aren't, the water out of the faucet is fairly grim. Heavily chlorinated and unpleasant. It's no wonder that they all drink filtered, or bottled water. It's one of those things I forget about each time I visit and drink from the tap only to remember that I can't do that most places here after the first sip.

Georgelemental 3y ago

> Water being a human right Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right.

dietr1ch 3y ago
So how's the argument that water is technically limited is enough to start selling it for corporate profit?
- Georgelemental 3y ago
  In fact, I don't think corporations should be able to exploit a commons (like a stream) for profit without compensating the community.
  - Aerroon 3y ago
    They do compensate the community. First, they make goods available: bottled water. Second, they buy the land and/or water rights to use them.
    - FireBeyond 3y ago
      > water rights to use them There's some rather sweetheart deals at play there. In some places, those water rights cost as little as a single digit number of dollars per million gallons.
parineum 3y ago
Water isn't limited.
- Georgelemental 3y ago
  Freshwater is limited, the energy and infrastructure to desalinate and transport saltwater are limited.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right. Rights aren’t natural, that’s a quasi-religious fiction invoked as a thought-terminating cliché to avoid debate over political ideology, and the bounds you state are simply the dogma of a particular political sect fond of the “natural rights” evasion. Human rights are a matter determined by the conscience of humans, and (while not explicitly called out there), water seems to fall squarely within the broad international consensus on what constitutes “human rights” expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, especially Article 25.

Eumenes 3y ago

> water being a human right housing, jobs, healthcare, education, water ... strange how classically liberal rights, such as speech and fair trial, which if anything are antagonist to the state, have transitioned, in popular discourse, to physical and materialistic needs that require top down control of resources/institutions. not very liberal to me. nestle sucks, and shouldn't exist, but this 'human right' rhetoric is just stupid

TheAceOfHearts 3y ago
If enough people agree that something should be available to all, then we can decide that it's a human right. I don't think it's that complicated. Your comment seems like it takes on the problem from a platonic ideal of a reality which doesn't seem to exist.
- Eumenes 3y ago
  Well, expect people to mock the endless growing list of 'rights' because at this pace, I'm starting to lose track