Use less water, get charged more

[Rikurzhen]

This same dynamic is seen playing out with electric cars. As more electrics are on the road, they don't consume gasoline, which means that these cars aren't paying gas taxes to pay for upkeep of roads. Government subsidizes alternative modes of transit plus pubic transit and then complains about gas tax shortfalls.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

explain to me how competition in water supply would work logistically. how many sewer systems will a city support and have room for?

where did all this city water utility profit go?

The fact that I don't have an answer to every question does not prove anything other than my inability to answer every question. Why don't you explain to me why we should trust a system that obviously doesn't work. I know you think government is the answer to everything, so this should be pretty good.

the system does work. we have clean, potable water throughout the united states. there are temporary exceptions and hiccups - toledo being an example. of course, i'm not sure how a private company would have dealt with toxins from an algae bloom either, but i can guess that it would have tried to cover it up and inform as few as possible to protect the bottom line.

and you have to realize that it's unrealistic to expect multiple sewer lines or water supplies for homes - hell, most places around the united states can only get one cable provider and that's incredibly simple when compared to the infrastructure needed for water and sewer.

LA wasted 50 million gallons of water because the system works.

Toledo had to call in the National Guard to supply water because the system works.

I think we have different definitions of work, which might be the entire problem you have relating to the real world.

By the way, the reason most places can only get one cable provider is that the government enforces a monopoly. You really need to come up with better arguments to defend government monopolies than they exist.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There are just a whole bunch of cities that do not have a limitless supply of water. In fact, many of them are at the end of their supplies. Simple economic equation, limited supply, higher prices.

You don't like public utilities, go ahead and pay for private utilities. That is going to cost you a lot more.

I guess you missed the part where everyone is using less water, and the utilities are raising the rate because they are using less water. In other words, your post is ignoring the facts laid out in the OP, this has nothing to do with the amount of water the utility has available, it is all about stealing money from people that are forced to deal with a government mandated monopoly, which is the only type of monopoly that can exist.

I guess you missed the part where there are a lot more everyones. Less water use, but the more infrastructure for the amount of water used. So, how is that going to be put into place? Sorry, no magic wand. It will be put into place by paying people to build it. And that raises the cost of water.

Supply is irrelevant to cost? Demand is irrelevant to cost? Tell you what, read 'Wealth of Nations', Adam Smith, and get back to me.

And you missed the part where, thanks to conservation, water use has remained constant despite the increase in population. You also missed the part where they should have been replacing pipes as they reached their recommended lifetime instead of keeping them in the ground and then forcing their captive customers to pay for routine maintenance by government decree.

Want to try again?

 

[Old Rocks]

I guess you missed the part where everyone is using less water, and the utilities are raising the rate because they are using less water. In other words, your post is ignoring the facts laid out in the OP, this has nothing to do with the amount of water the utility has available, it is all about stealing money from people that are forced to deal with a government mandated monopoly, which is the only type of monopoly that can exist.

I guess you missed the part where there are a lot more everyones. Less water use, but the more infrastructure for the amount of water used. So, how is that going to be put into place? Sorry, no magic wand. It will be put into place by paying people to build it. And that raises the cost of water.

Supply is irrelevant to cost? Demand is irrelevant to cost? Tell you what, read 'Wealth of Nations', Adam Smith, and get back to me.

And you missed the part where, thanks to conservation, water use has remained constant despite the increase in population. You also missed the part where they should have been replacing pipes as they reached their recommended lifetime instead of keeping them in the ground and then forcing their captive customers to pay for routine maintenance by government decree.

Want to try again?

Not going to help a bit. You simply refuse to see the reality. Water use remained constant despite increase in population. So that are more pipes used for the same amount of water, someone has to pay for the new pipes. Yes, they should be replacing the pipes as they reach there use date. So you should either be paying more taxes, or a higher amount for the water that runs through those pipes. As far as captive customers go, go ahead and drill your well in an urban setting and see how drinkable that water is.

You are simply bitching and moaning for no reason at all. You choose to live in town or an urban environment, you pay for your water. If you don't want to do that, live in a rural environment and have your own well. Where you live and what you pay for is your choice in this nation.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I guess you missed the part where there are a lot more everyones. Less water use, but the more infrastructure for the amount of water used. So, how is that going to be put into place? Sorry, no magic wand. It will be put into place by paying people to build it. And that raises the cost of water.

Supply is irrelevant to cost? Demand is irrelevant to cost? Tell you what, read 'Wealth of Nations', Adam Smith, and get back to me.

And you missed the part where, thanks to conservation, water use has remained constant despite the increase in population. You also missed the part where they should have been replacing pipes as they reached their recommended lifetime instead of keeping them in the ground and then forcing their captive customers to pay for routine maintenance by government decree.

Want to try again?

Not going to help a bit. You simply refuse to see the reality. Water use remained constant despite increase in population. So that are more pipes used for the same amount of water, someone has to pay for the new pipes. Yes, they should be replacing the pipes as they reach there use date. So you should either be paying more taxes, or a higher amount for the water that runs through those pipes. As far as captive customers go, go ahead and drill your well in an urban setting and see how drinkable that water is.

You are simply bitching and moaning for no reason at all. You choose to live in town or an urban environment, you pay for your water. If you don't want to do that, live in a rural environment and have your own well. Where you live and what you pay for is your choice in this nation.

I know somebody has to pay for the new piles, oh he who can't understand English. My point is that it would cost less to replace the pipes as they reach the end of their service life than waiting until every single pipe you use is disintegrating and then demanding a rate increase that will hurt poor people to pay for them.

But what can anyone do, that is the way the government works. And, for some reason that makes sense only to people who hate the poor, you support it.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Gotta love government monopolies, who else could get away with this crap?

Federally mandated low-flow toilets, shower heads and faucets are taking a financial toll on the nation’s water utilities, leaving customers to make up the shortfall with higher water rates and new fees that have left many paying more for less.
Utility officials say they understand that charging more for water because demand has dropped might seem to violate a basic premise of Economics 101. But utilities that generally charge by the number of gallons used are beginning to feel the financial pinch of 20 years of environmentally friendly fixtures and appliances, as older bathrooms and kitchens have been remodeled, utility experts say.
Federal laws aimed at conserving water limit toilets that once needed up to seven gallons per flush to 1.6 gallons. Shower heads that spewed up to eight gallons per minute are being replaced with sprays of about 2.5 gallons.
Adding to the problem, Washington-area utilities say, is the fact that consumption is falling as costs are mounting to upgrade sewer systems and repair and replace aging water pipes, some more than a century old, that are bursting after decades of decay and neglect. Meanwhile, utilities’ costs — electricity, chemicals and labor — have continued to rise.

Water utilities charge more to offset low-flow toilets, faucets and shower heads - The Washington Post

Any bets on how long it takes for some idiot to come in and defend public utilities because they keep people safe?

its always been this way.
If you are old enough to remember the so called "Arab oil embargo".....After all the BS gas rationing was over with( Thanks Nixon) there were federal officials that came up with the brilliant idea of allocating gasoline to each state based on consumption rates.
Meanwhile we were told to conserve fuel. We were running out to buy fuel efficient cars.
So what does government do in its infinite wisdom?...."dear citizens, you've been so kind ot conserve fuel that we will LOWER your state's gasoline allocation for next month"...
REALLY?...So we could get out from under gas rationing, we saved fuel...And they punished us for saving fuel.
The same wisdom was bestowed upon us in Northern NJ after a sever drought during which we were asked to conserve water. Lo and behold, the utility claimed their revenue was down( read, the stockholders were pissed) so they went to the State and requested a rate increase. Intelligent people prevailed and Hackensack Water Co( Now United Water) was told to go piss up a tree. A rare win for consumers.

 

[Skull Pilot]

There are just a whole bunch of cities that do not have a limitless supply of water. In fact, many of them are at the end of their supplies. Simple economic equation, limited supply, higher prices.

You don't like public utilities, go ahead and pay for private utilities. That is going to cost you a lot more.

Sorry but no.

My well costs me nothing. Sure I might have to replace a pump once in a lifetime but that's cheaper than public water.

My septic tank costs me less than 200 a year and I pump it out annually. I could really pump it out every other year.

Again way less than public sewage.

 

[Old Rocks]

And you missed the part where, thanks to conservation, water use has remained constant despite the increase in population. You also missed the part where they should have been replacing pipes as they reached their recommended lifetime instead of keeping them in the ground and then forcing their captive customers to pay for routine maintenance by government decree.

Want to try again?

Not going to help a bit. You simply refuse to see the reality. Water use remained constant despite increase in population. So that are more pipes used for the same amount of water, someone has to pay for the new pipes. Yes, they should be replacing the pipes as they reach there use date. So you should either be paying more taxes, or a higher amount for the water that runs through those pipes. As far as captive customers go, go ahead and drill your well in an urban setting and see how drinkable that water is.

You are simply bitching and moaning for no reason at all. You choose to live in town or an urban environment, you pay for your water. If you don't want to do that, live in a rural environment and have your own well. Where you live and what you pay for is your choice in this nation.

I know somebody has to pay for the new piles, oh he who can't understand English. My point is that it would cost less to replace the pipes as they reach the end of their service life than waiting until every single pipe you use is disintegrating and then demanding a rate increase that will hurt poor people to pay for them.

But what can anyone do, that is the way the government works. And, for some reason that makes sense only to people who hate the poor, you support it.

So, what you are stating is that we should subsidize the poor? I have no problem with that, as long as that subsidization comes with some degree of rationing.

As far as replacing the pipes, I am all for that. But it has to be paid for. Now, I am assuming that you are not one of the poor that will be subsidized. So you and I are going to pay for the new pipes, either through taxes or higher water bills. Even as we are using less water. Pretty damned simple and logical and has little to do with politics, only with reality.

 

[thereisnospoon]

There are just a whole bunch of cities that do not have a limitless supply of water. In fact, many of them are at the end of their supplies. Simple economic equation, limited supply, higher prices.

You don't like public utilities, go ahead and pay for private utilities. That is going to cost you a lot more.

Yeah.. Nice tell that to the politicians in certain states that through lobbying efforts by public utilities it is illegal to NOT connect to the public utility.
Also, many municipal utilities have ordinances which require all property owners to connect to and use the public utilities provided.
In other words, unless one resides in a rural or unincorporated area, they MUST use the public utilities.

I have to hand it to you. You are at least consistent. You are pro government.
The fact is these very same providers of utilities lacked the vision to keep up with the growth THEY approved.
So don't hand us this shit about limited supply....
These geniuses in the planning depts rubber stamped every housing development and every apartment complex because all they saw was the potential for more tax revenue which translates to more for them to spend on bullshit.
BTW contrary to your beliefs, many utilities ARE indeed private entities that issue stock. They are considered "public" utilities due to state regulations.
For example....Duke Energy is one of the largest providers of electrical power in the US. It is a publicly traded company but not a government entity. In other words part of the PRIVATE sector.

 

[thereisnospoon]

so privately held utility companies would not pass on costs of maintaining their equipment to consumers? is that the argument?

Of course they do...Son't play stupid. The point is a privately owned utility has much more at stake. With that said, one of these would have a high degree of motivation to maintain existing infrastructure and continue to build new.
Municipal utilities will simply look locally to increase taxes or increase rates with impunity.

 

[thereisnospoon]

so privately held utility companies would not pass on costs of maintaining their equipment to consumers? is that the argument?

They aren't privately held, if they were they would have upgraded their facilities over a period of time instead of turning to a captured customer base to pay for it when it is way too old.

they also would have been charging more the entire time and making profit off the water. and you don't believe that the public utilities have upgraded some of their infrastructure over time?

Most utilities whether privately or publicly held are regulated by state law.
Municipal utilities have much more latitude. If they cannot increase rates, they go to the local government and ask for tax increases.
Anyway.....This is not about supply or infrastructure. It is about the civic duty performed by the customers in that they conserved resources. Because of the reduced revenue, the utility company wants to punish the customers for conserving resources.

 

[thereisnospoon]

explain to me how competition in water supply would work logistically. how many sewer systems will a city support and have room for?

where did all this city water utility profit go?

The fact that I don't have an answer to every question does not prove anything other than my inability to answer every question. Why don't you explain to me why we should trust a system that obviously doesn't work. I know you think government is the answer to everything, so this should be pretty good.

the system does work. we have clean, potable water throughout the united states. there are temporary exceptions and hiccups - toledo being an example. of course, i'm not sure how a private company would have dealt with toxins from an algae bloom either, but i can guess that it would have tried to cover it up and inform as few as possible to protect the bottom line.

and you have to realize that it's unrealistic to expect multiple sewer lines or water supplies for homes - hell, most places around the united states can only get one cable provider and that's incredibly simple when compared to the infrastructure needed for water and sewer.

You are so God Damned stupid..
Tell me genius, how long would a water company last if it were discovered the water quality was less than the state standard?...I have seen idiotic arguments, but your absolutely frosts the cake.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The libs on here are showing their collective ass.
You people are advocating for higher rates...just because...
Because with you it is ideology or be damned.
Unbelievable....
Suppose it was YOUR rates that skyrocket..What say you then?

 

[thereisnospoon]

I guess you missed the part where there are a lot more everyones. Less water use, but the more infrastructure for the amount of water used. So, how is that going to be put into place? Sorry, no magic wand. It will be put into place by paying people to build it. And that raises the cost of water.

Supply is irrelevant to cost? Demand is irrelevant to cost? Tell you what, read 'Wealth of Nations', Adam Smith, and get back to me.

And you missed the part where, thanks to conservation, water use has remained constant despite the increase in population. You also missed the part where they should have been replacing pipes as they reached their recommended lifetime instead of keeping them in the ground and then forcing their captive customers to pay for routine maintenance by government decree.

Want to try again?

Not going to help a bit. You simply refuse to see the reality. Water use remained constant despite increase in population. So that are more pipes used for the same amount of water, someone has to pay for the new pipes. Yes, they should be replacing the pipes as they reach there use date. So you should either be paying more taxes, or a higher amount for the water that runs through those pipes. As far as captive customers go, go ahead and drill your well in an urban setting and see how drinkable that water is.

You are simply bitching and moaning for no reason at all. You choose to live in town or an urban environment, you pay for your water. If you don't want to do that, live in a rural environment and have your own well. Where you live and what you pay for is your choice in this nation.

And the utility should have been using revenue to invest in their OWN infrastructure.
I cannot believe you are so blinded by ideology that you would advocate AGAINST consumers.
Does it work that way with other corporations and businesses?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not going to help a bit. You simply refuse to see the reality. Water use remained constant despite increase in population. So that are more pipes used for the same amount of water, someone has to pay for the new pipes. Yes, they should be replacing the pipes as they reach there use date. So you should either be paying more taxes, or a higher amount for the water that runs through those pipes. As far as captive customers go, go ahead and drill your well in an urban setting and see how drinkable that water is.

You are simply bitching and moaning for no reason at all. You choose to live in town or an urban environment, you pay for your water. If you don't want to do that, live in a rural environment and have your own well. Where you live and what you pay for is your choice in this nation.

I know somebody has to pay for the new piles, oh he who can't understand English. My point is that it would cost less to replace the pipes as they reach the end of their service life than waiting until every single pipe you use is disintegrating and then demanding a rate increase that will hurt poor people to pay for them.

But what can anyone do, that is the way the government works. And, for some reason that makes sense only to people who hate the poor, you support it.

So, what you are stating is that we should subsidize the poor? I have no problem with that, as long as that subsidization comes with some degree of rationing.

As far as replacing the pipes, I am all for that. But it has to be paid for. Now, I am assuming that you are not one of the poor that will be subsidized. So you and I are going to pay for the new pipes, either through taxes or higher water bills. Even as we are using less water. Pretty damned simple and logical and has little to do with politics, only with reality.

No, what I am saying is we should get rid of all government mandated monopolies. Considering your expressed hatred of monopolies, I see no reason why you would have a problem with this position, other than you support the government unconditionally. Can you explain it without ending up looking like a fool?

 

[Harry Dresden]

so privately held utility companies would not pass on costs of maintaining their equipment to consumers? is that the argument?

They aren't privately held, if they were they would have upgraded their facilities over a period of time instead of turning to a captured customer base to pay for it when it is way too old.

Los Angeles has a broken water main every month it seems....

 

[Quantum Windbag]

so privately held utility companies would not pass on costs of maintaining their equipment to consumers? is that the argument?

They aren't privately held, if they were they would have upgraded their facilities over a period of time instead of turning to a captured customer base to pay for it when it is way too old.

Los Angeles has a broken water main every month it seems....

I loved the pictures from the one on Sunset last week.

 

[auditor0007]

Gotta love government monopolies, who else could get away with this crap?

Federally mandated low-flow toilets, shower heads and faucets are taking a financial toll on the nation’s water utilities, leaving customers to make up the shortfall with higher water rates and new fees that have left many paying more for less.
Utility officials say they understand that charging more for water because demand has dropped might seem to violate a basic premise of Economics 101. But utilities that generally charge by the number of gallons used are beginning to feel the financial pinch of 20 years of environmentally friendly fixtures and appliances, as older bathrooms and kitchens have been remodeled, utility experts say.
Federal laws aimed at conserving water limit toilets that once needed up to seven gallons per flush to 1.6 gallons. Shower heads that spewed up to eight gallons per minute are being replaced with sprays of about 2.5 gallons.
Adding to the problem, Washington-area utilities say, is the fact that consumption is falling as costs are mounting to upgrade sewer systems and repair and replace aging water pipes, some more than a century old, that are bursting after decades of decay and neglect. Meanwhile, utilities’ costs — electricity, chemicals and labor — have continued to rise.

Water utilities charge more to offset low-flow toilets, faucets and shower heads - The Washington Post

Any bets on how long it takes for some idiot to come in and defend public utilities because they keep people safe?

It has nothing to do with keeping people safe. It costs a certain amount of money to get the water to the customer, regardless of the actual amount used. Water treatment plants and holding tanks have to be paid for along with many other costs involved in getting water to the end users. Old rates were based on rates of consumption consistent with those times. Saving water now is not a bad thing, in fact it is a necessary thing in many communities. That does not change the fact that the fixed costs continue to go up. This happened in Colorado while I was living there. In fact, it happened during some of the drought years when they had water restrictions in place.

 

[auditor0007]

but ...but .... I thought water was a human right= free....Detroit and libs told me so

 

[auditor0007]

they also would have been charging more the entire time and making profit off the water. and you don't believe that the public utilities have upgraded some of their infrastructure over time?

You would have a point if the public utilities weren't making money off of it themselves, with the added advantage that no one can switch to another company because they have a government enforced monopoly.

By the way, I assume you don't live in Toledo. Or perhaps you just like shitty water.

Fairfax Water - one of the utilities listed in your article.

Chartered in 1957 by the Virginia State Corporation Commission as a public, non-profit water utility,

https://www.fcwa.org/about_us/index.htm

According to them they aren't making money.

Most water commissions have oversight and are not permitted to be profitable.