Author Topic: Water Wars in Arizona  (Read 443 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #45 on: July 30, 2018, 10:20:34 am »
"Pay to consume" and "pay to pollute" are two very different policies that should not be conflated. "pay to consume" makes sense when a resource is finite and demand exceeds supply. The price becomes a mechanism for rationing and this is the rational behind water pricing. Such a rational would never apply to air.

"pay to pollute" only comes up when simply banning the pollution is not economically viable and politicians think that putting a "price" is a magic wand that can make eliminating the pollution viable. The real world is rarely that simple and politicians end up setting a "price" that too low to change anything because setting it higher would have too large a negative effect on economic activity.

"pay to pollute" schemes are simply government manipulation of the market and are really the opposite of "pay to consume" schemes which leverage the free market.

Not sure why you keep referring to air and water as finite resources. Shortages of water for instance are created by us when we plunk populations down in the middle of deserts and then **** away tons of what water is there greening up a golf course, or ten. And you should maybe have a look at how the carbon tax in BC works. Less emissions, revenue neutral.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #46 on: July 30, 2018, 12:59:56 pm »
Not sure why you keep referring to air and water as finite resources. Shortages of water for instance are created by us when we plunk populations down in the middle of deserts and then **** away tons of what water is there greening up a golf course, or ten. And you should maybe have a look at how the carbon tax in BC works. Less emissions, revenue neutral.
1) I never said that air was finite;
2) The amount of potable water flowing into a region per year is finite. That is why rainy Vancouver has water shortages in the summer;
3) BC emissions are rising again. The initial drop was more likely due to 2008 crisis than any tax policy;
4) The BC carbon tax is no longer revenue neutral;

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #47 on: July 30, 2018, 01:10:12 pm »
1) I never said that air was finite;
2) The amount of potable water flowing into a region per year is finite. That is why rainy Vancouver has water shortages in the summer;
3) BC emissions are rising again. The initial drop was more likely due to 2008 crisis than any tax policy;
4) The BC carbon tax is no longer revenue neutral;

!. Air is no more finite than is water. It's the misuse of the latter and the pollution of both by us that causes the problems.
2. see #1
3. The tax was implemented in 2008 and was successful in cutting emissions and was revenue neutral for at least 8 years. And it could be again as long as governments don't tamper.
4. see #3

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #48 on: July 30, 2018, 01:19:17 pm »
!. Air is no more finite than is water. It's the misuse of the latter and the pollution of both by us that causes the problems.
2. see #1
3. The tax was implemented in 2008 and was successful in cutting emissions and was revenue neutral for at least 8 years. And it could be again as long as governments don't tamper.
4. see #3
"Fake News"™

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/03/08/BC-Carbon-Tax-Failure/

Quote
“The reality is that since 2010, B.C.’s GHG emissions have increased every year; as of 2013 they are up 4.3 per cent above 2010 levels,” Lee writes on the CCPA website.

Even on a per capita basis, emissions have risen.

“We see the recession-induced drop in 2009 and 2010, then increases from 13.5 tonnes per person in 2010 to 13.7 tonnes per person in 2013,” Lee says.

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #49 on: July 30, 2018, 01:28:18 pm »
"Fake News"™

https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2016/03/08/BC-Carbon-Tax-Failure/

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/the-insidious-truth-about-bcs-carbon-tax-it-works/article19512237/

B.C.'s tax, implemented in 2008, covers most types of fuel use and carbon emissions. It started out low ($10 per tonne of carbon dioxide), then rose gradually to the current $30 per tonne, which works out to about 7 cents per litre of gas. "Revenue-neutral" by law, the policy requires equivalent cuts to other taxes. In practice, the province has cut $760-million more in income and other taxes than needed to offset carbon tax revenue.

But how Donald Trumpian of you to call anything that refutes your ideas as "fake news".

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #50 on: July 30, 2018, 01:38:33 pm »
<thread drift>

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #51 on: July 30, 2018, 05:44:55 pm »
I pay for water, you pay for water, and even if you operate your own well you still pay the cost of purifying your water.  I'm not sure how the idea that having to  pay for water is some sort of dystopian nightmare got started. Industrial scale users should definitely pay for water.   People should also pay for air that they render unbreatheable. Taxing airborne emissions (whether industrial or tailpipe) should be a no-brainer policy.

 -k
Do vs ought discussion. When nature is commodified, our humanity comes under the control of a select few who control those commodities.

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12461
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #52 on: July 30, 2018, 06:20:31 pm »
Do vs ought discussion. When nature is commodified, our humanity comes under the control of a select few who control those commodities.

The issue is how to control it.  It will be commodified but how to *try* to make the best decisions you can is the question.  Single-sourced decision making is error prone.  There will always be mistakes to make.

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #53 on: July 30, 2018, 06:53:26 pm »
"Pay to consume" and "pay to pollute" are two very different policies that should not be conflated. "pay to consume" makes sense when a resource is finite and demand exceeds supply.

You are polluting a limited resource as well, they are 100% identical.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #54 on: July 30, 2018, 06:54:04 pm »
It will be commodified
They're commodified because as a society we've allowed these things to be commodified.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #55 on: July 30, 2018, 06:58:09 pm »
The issue is how to control it.
It is a classic resource allocation problem. How do you decide who could get access to how much of a limited resource? The options are:

1) Communist style central planning;
2) First come first serve;
3) Personal allowance + a price for consumption in excess of allowance;

1) and 2) lead to shortages and unfairness as the politically connected get unfair allocations.
3) forces users to decide if they really need the water on a case by case basis.

3) is by far the fairest system because each person can make the choice for themselves at a time when they need without some government official deciding for them or being forced to hoard water.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2018, 07:07:14 pm by TimG »

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #56 on: July 30, 2018, 07:00:03 pm »
You are polluting a limited resource as well, they are 100% identical.
Nope. There is never a situation where allocating rights to pollute is desirable outcome. It only happens when there is no other choice. OTOH consuming water is not inherently undesirable. It is only problematic when demand outstrips supply.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2018, 07:45:47 pm by TimG »

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #57 on: July 30, 2018, 07:09:35 pm »
They're commodified because as a society we've allowed these things to be commodified.
And what is the alternative?  Some government bureaucrat handing out access to water based on the quantity of bribes paid? If a resource is limited there *will* be a price set whether you like it or not. The only question is if this price in on an unregulated black market or on a regulated public market. Seems to me the latter is better for everyone.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2018, 07:32:13 pm by TimG »

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #58 on: July 30, 2018, 08:40:58 pm »
Do vs ought discussion. When nature is commodified, our humanity comes under the control of a select few who control those commodities.

For the vast majority of Canadians, the "select few" who control the commodity of water is a public utilities corporation that provides water at a very modest nominal fee.

Water from the lake or the river doesn't arrive become safe to drink for free, and it doesn't arrive in your tap for free.  Our public utilities corporations are the best way I can think of to share the costs of purifying and distributing water.  If you have a better idea, please share it.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline Michael Hardner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12461
Re: Water Wars in Arizona
« Reply #59 on: July 30, 2018, 08:49:25 pm »
They're commodified because as a society we've allowed these things to be commodified.

Commodified as in exploited as in used en masse.  You can do it without depleting it, like using Niagara Falls for power ?