Is high speed internet a right?

[The T]

God gives water freely. Man may have a right to charge to deliver it but man also has an obligation to insure those who have pollutes the waters pay for the cleanup of those waterways.

An individual is perfectly free to dig his own well or collect rainwater.

The best way to ensure cleanliness of the water ways and tributaries that are shared is to enforce property rights along the way. If the upstream folks send pollution downstream, the latter have a cause of action.

Yep.

 

[RodISHI]

God gives water freely. Man may have a right to charge to deliver it but man also has an obligation to insure those who have pollutes the waters pay for the cleanup of those waterways.

An individual is perfectly free to dig his own well or collect rainwater.

The best way to ensure cleanliness of the water ways and tributaries that are shared is to enforce property rights along the way. If the upstream folks send pollution downstream, the latter have a cause of action.

Sounds like a plan but unfortunately that does not work out. In Idaho one cannot sue a dairy operation or a farmer that is dumping so much on the land that it pollutes the springs that feed the water supply to the small valleys. The Idaho legislators took that option away from people who had clean water from those springs for generations until the dairies and mega farmers moved in.

When a chemical giant pollutes the water way it may take a generation to catch onto the damage that has been done and ten generations for the pollutants to dissipate, that is if the pollutants do dissipate at all. Soil takes more than twenty years to recover from heavy pollution from just to many farm chemicals being sprayed. Even in Arizona where the majority of the winter lettuce is grown the ground that is watered from the river brings in so many chemicals the lettuce is full of these toxins from fuel spills thirty or more years ago.

Nope regulate the major polluters to begin with and the unaware won't be poisoned by toxins. I should not be forced to hunt for an attorney to press for natural rights to be free of major polluters. It took over twenty years for this country to ban pcb's. That is too long and way too many suffered the consequences of the government's refusal to hold these giants accountable.

 

[ihopehefails]

so clean water to drink isn't a right?

No, it isn't. It takes resource to process and transport drinking water.

If someone else has to work and/or to expend capital to provide a product or service, they deserve fair compensation for it. In the case of water, the supplier does owe the consumer a clean product (i.e., contaminants below a safe level) as the consumer's reasonable expectation is that the water is safe to drink.

God gives water freely. Man may have a right to charge to deliver it but man also has an obligation to insure those who have pollutes the waters pay for the cleanup of those waterways.

The problem with your God demands we be enviro pure is the fact that not everyone believes in God. Don't you know that we are not a christian nation so why do I have to do something God tells me to do if it is not a part of my religion and even if it was when was it the government role to enforce certain aspects of my religion onto me.

 

[boedicca]

Nope regulate the major polluters to begin with and the unaware won't be poisoned by toxins. I should not be forced to hunt for an attorney to press for natural rights to be free of major polluters. It took over twenty years for this country to ban pcb's. That is too long and way too many suffered the consequences of the government's refusal to hold these giants accountable.

There is a different answer which does not required such a heavy hand (and the inevitable moral hazard of government invoolvement): the distributor of water is responsible for deliverying a clean product to customers. Such distributor has a vested interest in monitoring water quality - and understanding the source of significant impurities. If the distributor has property rights, the risk of damages assessed on others if they pollute that water is not worth it.

As it stands now, the fines government levies on polluters are hand slaps (that's the nature of the regulatory beast - the rules are often written by the lobbyists of those to be regulated).

 

[Foxfyre]

God gives water freely. Man may have a right to charge to deliver it but man also has an obligation to insure those who have pollutes the waters pay for the cleanup of those waterways.

An individual is perfectly free to dig his own well or collect rainwater.

The best way to ensure cleanliness of the water ways and tributaries that are shared is to enforce property rights along the way. If the upstream folks send pollution downstream, the latter have a cause of action.

Sounds like a plan but unfortunately that does not work out. In Idaho one cannot sue a dairy operation or a farmer that is dumping so much on the land that it pollutes the springs that feed the water supply to the small valleys. The Idaho legislators took that option away from people who had clean water from those springs for generations until the dairies and mega farmers moved in.

When a chemical giant pollutes the water way it may take a generation to catch onto the damage that has been done and ten generations for the pollutants to dissipate, that is if the pollutants do dissipate at all. Soil takes more than twenty years to recover from heavy pollution from just to many farm chemicals being sprayed. Even in Arizona where the majority of the winter lettuce is grown the ground that is watered from the river brings in so many chemicals the lettuce is full of these toxins from fuel spills thirty or more years ago.

Nope regulate the major polluters to begin with and the unaware won't be poisoned by toxins. I should not be forced to hunt for an attorney to press for natural rights to be free of major polluters. It took over twenty years for this country to ban pcb's. That is too long and way too many suffered the consequences of the government's refusal to hold these giants accountable.

You're both right. While each of us, under the literal edicts of our U.S. Constitution, has the right to look to our own interests and own welfare, and we have the right of redress when others infringe on our interests or welfare. Boedicca's point.

But Rod's point is also well taken that right of redress is insuffiicent or inadequate or even impossible in some cases. One's life, health, loved one, reputation, prosperity, enjoyment, etc. cannot always be restored once it is taken away.

So, there must always be provision in the social contract to whatever laws and regulation are necessary to as much as possible prevent grievances that are not easily remedied. So, if you are drilling a water well into a shared aquifer, you will generally need a permit and be subject to certain standards, principles, and policies intended to protect the water supply for everybody.