Chefelf.com Night Life: Water Metering - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2

Water Metering

Poll: Water Metering

Are you in favour of mandatory water metering?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

Do you have a water meter fitted?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.

Do you think this is the fairest way to pay for water?

You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Vote Guests cannot vote

#16 User is offline   darth_paul Icon

  • Henchman
  • Pip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 85
  • Joined: 11-April 06
  • Location:San Antonio, TX
  • Interests:Comics, Sci-Fi, Games, Religion (Christianity & Catholicism), Politics (Republcan) - although I tend to stay away from discussing those last two since they often get me into trouble that I'd rather not deal with unless I am pushed, which then I'll push back until I get disgusted and give up. Other than that I can pretty much get along with anyone ;)
  • Country:United States

Posted 01 July 2006 - 01:02 AM

QUOTE (barend @ Jun 18 2006, 07:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
people who use more should pay more... until we establish a cashless star trek society where everything is available to everyone...

the whole problem with society is that alot of poor people are paying for luxuries of the rich... why should a motorcyclist be paying the same toll or road taxes as someone in a giant road wearing, poluting, childkilling 4WD tank?

same goes for water



I'm not really sure why this has to be debated and can't be in the general discussion area, but it's here so here's my 2 cents. I actually agree with barend here. If you use more you should pay more. My monthly water bill is fairly low, as my family and I don't use a lot of water even when we use more at certain times for watering the lawn and such. However, if we were talking about power bills here then that's where I've experienced problems. Sometimes the power company in my area gets lazy and just does an average of the neighborhood instead of checking everyone's individual meter for their fair share and I get shafted with having to pay a higher electric bill sometimes because someone in the neighborhood used more power and ruined it for the rest of us. As if I wasn't financially strapped as it is. angry.gif
0

#17 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 01 July 2006 - 07:12 AM

Well it has a poll and many people debate about it in many places I seen. If people had to find their own water and filtered it themselves I can see that as a method of realizing the true value of water considering how much water is left in the sources.


Okay, yes pay per what you use, you use more you pay more.

So how about a family who is struggling to pay other bills and they have to economise the water under health levels as critics were concerned about and my vision about a single rich person living across the road who has a large swimming pool to fill, except he can afford water he does not need for basic hygiene or survival. Is that really fair?


"Who can afford what."
An example in hot areas:
A rich person can afford to water his garden in hot weather to keep the crops and flowers healthy. A poor person can only depend on the rain or a storage collector and eventually choose between the survival of the garden crops and flowers or the other important needs.


All at the same time, the water company can put up rates if their water storage is low as a way of cutting people down from my view like bidding and making money behind people's backs.

I think that using large amounts of water that is not in the interest of the environment or certain amount of people could be charged more depending on the impact of their storage like for companies who use local water to bottle it.

I can see that putting a price as to money on the measurement of water is not fair to who needs it most rather than who wants it.


That is a point of paying the luxuries for the rich, but I thought there are many ways they charged for water also based on the profits and most I see are not by the average.

Well with or without meters did you read my previous post on what they are doing in places like Africa with pre paid meters?

Even the bank intervenes on the advantages of cost recovery whilst the people are paying the price of the rich companies.

http://www.citizen.o...manright/meter/

Also is it fair that they privatised the water services from the public and then who needed the water but couldn't afford as for costing more than their earnings had to drink the dirty water to only to become worse?

All for profit instead of health

So I see:

First the public builds their water system.
People benefit and becomes dependent on it.
The government sees it as a ripe crop,
They sells it to a company who pre pay meter everybody, the same company who normal meters their local customers in their own country.
Last of all the public is left back to what free water they begun with, dirty water.
The government took that away that for profit, left them in the dark and did not even give them the chance of bulk buying.


Many ways how people can pay the price of the rich.




Sorry about the length of this post. I have so much to express and questions to ask.

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 01 July 2006 - 07:41 AM

0

#18 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 06 July 2006 - 02:38 PM

It is starting to irritate me when ministers or people say that "Metering is the fairest way to pay for water." Same statement stated all the time. What is in the meaning of fair? Fair to one set of people and unfair to another set. I can't say that one thing is fair for everybody. They are assuming people here.

"I believe this should be the way to pay for road usage. I want everybody to pay that way." Because you pay per what you use. Soon I could see it being "Pay per what you breathe."



Look what I found. Pay per use before you use the water.


QUOTE
"We had to fight against a lot of misinformation," says Bricks Mokolo, a member of the OWCC. "Our municipal councillor and his clique were telling the people that the water was ’pre-paid,’ so already paid by the government. And when the Johannesburg Water technicians came in Drieziek Extension 2 to install the pre-paid meters, they also lied to the residents, telling them they were installing sanitation!"

http://www.alternati...article590.html


They can't even trusted if it is to do with charging irrationally for basic resources. They seem to have an addiction to overcharging. Okay so they claimed it was already paid by the government but hasn't been yet, because the consumers are apart of that government is what I think they could mean. But not apart of the government when they can't afford it. Well they are guilty until proven innocent. We know they have not got money until we are assured that they can pay in advance. At the same time of setting a huge price over the quantity of water.



QUOTE
Since 1996, more than 10 million South Africans have lost their access to water, a direct consequence of the privatization and cost recovery policies which have incrased tariffs up to 600 percent.

When OWCC activists heard that Ronnie Kasrils, the Minister of Water Affairs, was coming to Orange Farm on October 1 to officially launch the installation of pre-paid water meters all over the township, they didn’t miss the occasion. Strong from their mobilizations during the WSSD, they organised a mass meeting two days before the Minister’s visit. The message sent to the local ANC councillor by over 3 000 attendees was clear: Orange Farm citizens don’t want pre-paid water. The minister’s celebratory launch had to be cancelled though the program is still going forward. Meanwhile, the graffiti still spoke simply, demanding "Free Water for All!" or urging residents to "Break the Meter - Enjoy the Water!"

http://www.alternati...article590.html


I can see that pre paid devices are in the interests of the government there and outside places like companies and the bank, over drinking water. I think the cost recovery could also include the very devices used to restrict the people from their water. I am thinking on what kind of point they are proving here. To me it sounds wasteful.

Yes, this sounds the time when money is spent on getting ready to charge the citizens more so they are trying to arrange some kind of party whilst perhaps giving out their celebratory mis informed speeches of the costs maybe. Some people say that talking about the methods of charging for water sounds pointless but as you see the ministers there are launching a celebratory visit just for that. People don't want pre paid meters but the government seems to only learn if the profit isn't greater for themselves. Is the visit a method to entice people, thinking that the people are stupid by any chance?


QUOTE
Bricks Makolo was heavily involved in South African anti-apartheid movements. In 1985, he was imprisoned, held without trial and tortured for his anti-apartheid activities.


http://www.alternati...article935.html


All whilst they are keeping political prisoners for attempting to break their profits over water services that were originally stolen from the public. If it is for money they can be released as it shows. This is starting to sound more like dictatorship and slavery in disguise except it seems they are trying to be nice about it with those celebratory visits as it sounds. I can see that they are making people more into slaves by going into the depths of every move they make.

Also for China I now know why some international companies base their manufacturing plants there. From a documentary I watched and as well as how people get paid, it is easier and cheaper to dump their waste into the air and rivers without filtering it to cut costs which is why so many people now are suffering from diseases from drinking the contaminated water.

They say it is a good thing that China is following suite set by the foreign companies. Are they hiding the fact that they are not following industrial standards for pollution? To me they are exploiting the land and using it as a dumping ground.

One of the presenters was threatened. The businessman said it did not concern him. But of course it would if he was affected by the contaminated water.



What do you think of prepaid metering?

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 06 July 2006 - 02:57 PM

0

#19 User is offline   Dorothy Icon

  • We supply it, we demand you eat it.
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,604
  • Joined: 17-May 05
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Seattle.
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 06 July 2006 - 05:03 PM




QUOTE
What do you think of prepaid metering?

I just don't want to be the one in the shower who runs out of pre-paid water minutes... crying.gif

This post has been edited by Dorothy: 06 July 2006 - 05:03 PM

"The problem is, you're not a kangaroo... that's a bear... and he's in your pants."
"Maybe artists shouldn't talk about their art."
"Well kids, I guess your father isn't a hermaphrodite."
"Izzy! enough with the rabid smootching!!"
0

#20 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 06 July 2006 - 05:45 PM

Okay, and with a meter will you be the one who has got the pocket to use the water in droughts? I mean in a scenario if the water rates rises to a situation like auctioning.
The richest gets the rich pickings.

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 06 July 2006 - 05:48 PM

0

#21 User is offline   Dorothy Icon

  • We supply it, we demand you eat it.
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,604
  • Joined: 17-May 05
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Seattle.
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 06 July 2006 - 06:04 PM

happy.gif You said "pickings" again...

In the situation where there is enough of a drought that the poor will not have water, I guess I'll die... We have had an draught here in Treasureville for about 7 years, and we still have some water about... so I think that before it gets so bad that only the wealthy have water, the average person will have lots of time to collect water. In buckets and jugs and such.
"The problem is, you're not a kangaroo... that's a bear... and he's in your pants."
"Maybe artists shouldn't talk about their art."
"Well kids, I guess your father isn't a hermaphrodite."
"Izzy! enough with the rabid smootching!!"
0

#22 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 06 July 2006 - 07:30 PM

Precisely what I am against. The rich taking their pickings whilst the poor get to work on it.

Now it wouldn't be fair on the rich if they had a flat bill to pay like everybody else would it?
If they did I think there may be less auctions, therefore less pickings to take and they might have to be getting to work on finding alternative ways of providing the water. Perhaps they are special this way, rich pickers.
0

#23 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 12 July 2006 - 09:35 AM

I have a question for those of you out there who oppose meters.

What would you do if the government or water company sends out firms to install water meters in your homes?

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 12 July 2006 - 09:36 AM

0

#24 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 15 July 2006 - 09:58 PM

I was reading somewhere that in England they are trying to promote Millband in place of pig who is always pressing his cot. Well it shows now that he takes bribes to open up casinos which could defeat his claims as a decoration for the working class system. More casinos, more people, more addictions, more problems to sustain the addictions leading to more desperate ways to find money. Whilst they benefit out of the suffering of the people including the blind ones who can't see their own addictions which goes to the protected pigs at Animal Farm. I think they should do away with the term "working class." Maybe to describe but there are many forms.

Why can't they gamble on objects that are not worth money? That could solve a lot of financial problems with the players and at least they have the addiction of playing but not the addiction of giving their life's work away from the hope the casinos encourage and control.

There maybe another bribe going on and it looks like Millband has a secret band this time, it is called "meters for all plan." Oh they won't metered. But they all will by 2015 by targets. I know they will find some hidden way to cheat the public out. I'll just have to keep on thinking.


I can't remember where abouts in Kashmir but I read last year that the government there denied claims of an agreement with a company to meter some of the towns. Next couple of days later the water company acted on it's own and hired private utilities and guards to forcefully install meters in people's homes.

There were huge riots outside homes but the government intervened, they said it was a good thing and sent in extra enforcements. That is why I said:

QUOTE (Deepsycher @ Mar 10 2006, 07:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Kashmir Denies Compulsory Water Metering Deal with Firm.

But Lets The Squeally Pig Out to Rule Animal Farm.


As for that I wonder how much more money is lumbered onto the cost of water per measurement.
Meters, private guards and utilities, piping and costs. They go to all that bother.

I would like to see some discussion here for a change instead of me doing all the talking.

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 15 July 2006 - 10:28 PM

0

#25 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 30 July 2006 - 09:46 AM

Okay I have some ideas on what could happen.

They could ban people from having their own water tanks in their houses other than the hot water tanks, I am sure they could think of something for that. For example they could build a large storage tanks for water on or under the street and also to have their own boilers outside to charge people for hot water as a product.


Followed by this, they could have separate pipes for certain usages. Water could be recycled and cheaply made available economically, the outputs could be graded for usage and health consumptions .

One set of water pipes for the toilet which would be the less filtered.
One set of pipes for the bath and showers which could be filtered to a higher degree.
One set of pipes for washing and drinking at the current filter rate.
One set of pipes for hot water.


Now there are plenty of opportunities. They can start charging people on these concepts. Four meters, or a meter that monitors four pipes that charge different prices depending on the type and quality of water used.

The external hot water may take longer to introduce, a good excuse may be needed such as environment cutbacks. I can see that bottled water firms could soon start to take advantage by raising their prices cheaper in appearance. I know it sounds paranoid but there are people like that who try to think of every way possible to charge people, even if it means unsensible use of filtering.

I mean unsensible way of filtering because it could cost more money for more filters. Then the poorer people will have to cut down for paying for those filters so less water may be used. The lower filter grades maybe economical to that. The filters may have to be replaced more often if they are not used, so with a good demand of people that might work if they are cooperative or the riots are under control.

Does this sound like something they would do in the future?

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 30 July 2006 - 09:59 AM

0

#26 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 07 August 2006 - 12:19 PM

Okay something I have been hearing a lot.
"The next world war will be over water."

That is something to consider over and very worrying.
It has shown that at this rate there maybe a war to the way they are going. Even the bank has or is starting to intervene or influence poorer countries over metering for cost recovery. Like blaming people for problems that is not theirs through money.

Some countries say that they prefer to charge people more than to develop filtering technologies to filter the sea water or import water where it is most needed.

Cutting back and rationalising helps I agree, but rationing by price is irrational to the people who need it most, they could get left at the bottom of hygiene. Whilst some water bottle and can manufacturers could be stocking up on warehouses of the drinks from the water there.

I know something that could be economical. It is to have have large barrels in shops where they put them in drink holders, so people bring their own bottles along to fill them up and charge accordingly. That will save a lot of environmental waste on metals and glass.
Do you think that is a good solution?

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 07 August 2006 - 12:24 PM

0

#27 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 02 October 2006 - 08:43 PM

Situation not looking good for me in a couple of years. Some fishtank has been suggesting what has mostly been suggested all along. Force everyone to have meters, this time with double saving equipment and tap sprinklers.

Sprinklers: I came across a lot of tap sprinklers before in outings and most of them were awful. They barely clean my hands despite the pressure. So I have to use one hand to collect the water to put on the other and that is barely good enough to cleanse all the food and grease. To me it is like what did to ice cream I think around 20 years ago by pumping air into it to make it look big. Except this is not ice cream and if it can't remove the stains from my hands I don't think it is good enough for hygiene. There was one with large holes which did the job perfectly but most I seen had tiny holes. If the toilet tank blocker is too big that could cause the same problem with flushing.

I mean what happens if someone had diarrhea or hard faeces, that can only be flushed with a certain amount of pressure and quantity. What are they going to use for that? a toilet brush? to make more mess... Hot water? That might be further wasteful in slowly filling a jug up coming from a sprinkler tap... Bleach? Let hope the water don't bounce on that.

Meters - As the environment is getting hotter and dryer of course there will be problems with the balances in the reservoirs. Instead of restoring that balance due to hotter climate lets do pretty things like correct the appearances and not what matters. There are many choices on restoring the balance by filtering sea water and transportation which I read is costly. Also another problem to this is populating the place too much which increases the demand on supply. Then they wonder why so much of water is being used.

I also question the amount of water enterprises use for the drink bottles and can products. Did they calculate how much of water is going to that and the amount in storage. They say they are going to fine people for using too much of water but does this apply to enterprises? Probably they might say something like "That the mass majority drink Pepsi and Coke so that can go towards the bill in cutting down on water usage."

Rationing by quantity or by needs might be one good choice but rationing by how much you got to me is careless in many ways of exploition on collective profit; Rich people can choose to be wasteful if they can afford to be fined whilst a group of people who depend on it struggle to pay the price on usage below hygiene and not wasting it whilst little or nothing is being done to restore the balance but by directing the problems on the price. Unless they mean that water is not wasteful if I can afford it.

Mandatory devices opens another door on allowing inspectors to enter homes as they please. I don't know whether it would be fair to charge foreign people by meters until they become citizens but I don't think it is fair to not improve something and limit it by the very purpose of use if other features give rise to the problems.

I think a balance should exist on reasonable usage.

Any thoughts?

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 02 October 2006 - 09:05 PM

0

#28 User is offline   Deepsycher Icon

  • Giantness of Heart
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 6,220
  • Joined: 22-December 05
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 28 February 2007 - 10:00 PM

QUOTE
Universal water metering coming


City council has approved a formal step to bring universal water metering to the city. Council gave the go-ahead to submit a grant application to the General Strategic Priorities Fund and Innovations Fund, which provides up to 100 per cent of the funding to install water meters for individual households and businesses throughout the city.

Last December council approved in principle to implement water metering into the water utility business plan. The goal of the plan is to conserve water.

Coun. Tom Barr told the Feb. 20 city council meeting that universal metering is an area the city has to proceed in to save water.

“I don’t think we’ll have to much problem selling this idea to property owners,” Barr said.

http://www.wltribune...id=841020&more=


As soon as that happens it will start to spread and Canada may be doomed for water costs. Based on an unpredictable value of saving water unless you overcharge people unfairly for a contradictional cause.

Soon we'll be paying per what we breathe.

It reminds of that John West Salmon advert by the riverside when the bear kicked the man in the crotch except instead of pointing upwards they say "conserve water".

This post has been edited by Deepsycher: 28 February 2007 - 10:03 PM

0

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size