Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I find it immoral that cities charge people to use water each month. I believe cities shouldn't charge for things that they did not create.
Yes I'm aware that they maintain plants to recycle, clean the water and pipes to deliver it to peoples homes. I think it should be a tax taken out of people's paychecks instead of paying a water bill month to month for life. It shouldn't be tied directly to the homeowner.
Oh, you mean clean filtered and treated water? Well, that takes time, equipment, labor and money...either do it yourself or pay whoever is doing it for you! It's pretty simple.
Oh, you mean clean filtered and treated water? Well, that takes time, equipment, labor and money...either do it yourself or pay whoever is doing it for you! It's pretty simple.
They don't make it possible to do it yourself. In my city you have no other options.
They don't make it possible to do it yourself. In my city you have no other options.
BS...you're just being lazy!
Oh, but you want all that water coming in through your pipes and be disposed of through more pipes? LOL
That's the price you pay for modern conveniences! Go live in the woods in a commune if you want everything free...but wait! They may expect you to chip in with the chores...oh my!
What a lazy, entitled attitude you have...expecting the labor of others to be provided to you free of charge!
I don't expect the treatment plant workers to come to work without being paid or all the other resources it takes to conveniently bring water to my tap to be uncompensated.
I can go to a nearby river or water and collect water and bring it back. That's free. But it is unfiltered and a pain in the neck. And it's hard to shower that way.
I also don't think water should be paid for through payroll deductions. I want to pay for the amount of water I use, not subsidize families that are wasteful or have swimming pools, etc. I can actually tell from my water bills (which give the last 12 months billing at the address) that we pay half of what the previous family did. Paying for actual usage encourages people to think about the water they are using.
I think it should be a tax taken out of people's paychecks instead of paying a water bill month to month for life. It shouldn't be tied directly to the homeowner.
what do you guys think about this?
Why shouldn't it be tied directly to the person who uses it? Those who use MORE should pay more. Those who conserve and use less of that expensive water (and end up costing the city less) should pay LESS! Why is water so different from the other "life necessities" a city provides? You use and should be paying for other services right? A city utility doesn't create the raw materials necessary to build streets, power plants either does it? They do however transform those materials into forms you want/use and transport them to you. The collective cost to create these services gets spread to the entire population to some degree, but again, those who use more of what the city generates should pay more for it.
There is more than enough water worldwide for everyone. The oceans are filled with it.
The problem is it needs to be distributed, desalinated, and treated to be potable. All those things cost money and that is what you are paying for.
I just think it should be tied to the user and not the homeowner. I would like to see the city (or county) tax everyone instead out of their paycheck instead of paying by month for life.
Why shouldn't it be tied directly to the person who uses it? Those who use MORE should pay more. Those who conserve and use less of that expensive water (and end up costing the city less) should pay LESS! Why is water so different from the other "life necessities" a city provides? You use and should be paying for other services right? A city utility doesn't create the raw materials necessary to build streets, power plants either does it? They do however transform those materials into forms you want/use and transport them to you. The collective cost to create these services gets spread to the entire population to some degree, but again, those who use more of what the city generates should pay more for it.
So the city should charge the user or the homeowner?
I find it immoral that cities charge people to use water each month. I believe cities shouldn't charge for things that they did not create.
Yes I'm aware that they maintain plants to recycle, clean the water and pipes to deliver it to peoples homes. I think it should be a tax taken out of people's paychecks instead of paying a water bill month to month for life. It shouldn't be tied directly to the homeowner.
what do you guys think about this?
You pay for the delivery (and water pressure), you pay costs associated with it that I'm sure even the water company wishes wasn't there.
If you don't like it, get a well, or set up some rain barrels.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
