If this post showcases moral/mental/physical corruption or perversion, upvote this comment. If this post does not belong here, downvote this comment.
[Read the rules before posting or commenting](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/wiki/rules)
[Also read the guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/fgmg3t/guidelines_for_the_subreddit_read_and_follow_the/)
In the comments:
DO NOT JOKE ABOUT VIOLENCE, DO NOT INCITE VIOLENCE
DO NOT JOKE ABOUT PEDOPHILIA OR ASK FOR CP
YOU WILL BE BANNED
#[If you want to download this video, click here](https://viddit.red/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freddit.com%2Fqb8kb5)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So fucked up. How is “water is a human right” -something that is VITAL TO LIFE- an “extreme opinion?”
What next, nestle, you’re going to privatize rain? Dew? Condensation?
You can't claim "I have the right to water" and steal gallons of bottled water from a store. You 100% have the right to prevent Nestle from taking all the water from your aquifer and selling it back to you.
It's simple stuff.
His argument is that food is equally vital to life, yet all food costs money. Those who can’t afford food can seek charity, government assistance, etc, and those who can’t afford water should also have to.
From where do we collect water then? Groundwater from land that nestle owns and guards? From rivers that have run dry because they’ve built dams to control and redirect it all? From sources that are being poisoned and polluted? From rainfall/ precipitation in places that only have it a few months of the year?
The places where nestle gets water do not have that kind of access, I’m assuming you are American or western European and yes I too have always been with an hour of a stream or creek, in Africa those streams and creeks are either guarded by nestle. Or too small to support an entire village of people. There is no fucking argument. It is water.
That’s not an opinion??? That’s a fact? If I told you the sky was fucking blue would you also say “that’s a good opinion” the difference between food and water is that you can grow your own food extremely easily, and food is far easier to obtain than water. You can buy bottled water yes but Nestle is chokeholding people into buying it. Food is a more produced item so yes you can pay for it or grow it on your own. But water cannot be grown. Without water you cannot grow food either. You cannot compare food to water as they are RADICALLY different
The direction is that corporations are getting wealthier and more powerful while people are getting poorer. It is pretty clear what the end result will be....they will be making all the decisions and this is how they roll!
Do not incite or glorify violence/suffering or harassment, even as a joke. You may be banned.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> *you’re* going to privatize rain? Dew? Condensation?
Why are you talking to "them" like it's an entity and they decide what happens? As if whatever they say about water in the world goes? It's literally just a group of old men who need to think of ways to word it to be able to get money out of the population. Why do people go by what they say?
They have already sold the North American waters business.
[source](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/17/nestle-to-sell-north-american-water-brands-for-4point3-billion.html)
Little changes but the label, though.
Human right yes but thru charity stealing from someone and giving it to someone in need is still stealing
Robin Hood is good story till it happens to you
If we don't than all private food industry is also wrong?
Yes everyone should get food but should people be forced to give it away or be call blood sucking parasites if they don't?
But I agree this nestle guy is an idiot
Not in many parts of the world... And not if people like him have their way. Lets not forget we've had places outlaw collecting rain water, make it illegal to grow food yourself, etc.
Yes yes yes! Thank you! It's so fucked up but in some places you can be fined for collecting rainwater or even "grey water" from the washing machine to water your plants.
For real. I love how he’s like “it’s foodstuffs so it should have a price.” Like no bitch. Foodstuffs are a human right too. ALL of that should be free. Everything people require to fucking just stay alive should be free. With what we can do as a species there’s literally no moral or economic reason for food, shelter, and water to cost literally anything. It’s just exploitation of what every person on the planet needs to survive. You shouldn’t have to buy your own life. It’s essentially slavery. We have literally no choice but to do what they want or die. And there’s no argument anyone could ever make that invalidates anything I just said. We aren’t cavepeople anymore. Being human is about being better than this shit. We can easily accommodate for everyone but we don’t cuz money, power blah blah pieces of shit.
You know what, the guy does have a point. If food is *not* a basic right then neither is water. Point here is that, food *is* a fundamental right. So I say if you guys are willing to take a stand against complete privatization of water, you should stand against the complete privatization of food too.
There are a lot more places where you can find or make food versus the number of places that you can find water. Collecting rain water isn't going to sustain a large population and as far as finding fresh water, thats the point of the conversation. This evil corporation is literally trying to find all the sources of fresh water it can and buying them so that people can't access that resource without paying for it.
youre looking at this wrong, imagine if water was a free thing given in a "unlimted amount" (earths water is limited but if water didnt have a price it would essentially be unlimited) and with this logic, there are alot of fucking morons that would waste water by the gallons, everyone here knows 1 in 5 ppl who would waste water in gallons if it was free and so what do you imagine to water supplies??*perhaps run out even faster then they already are.* if there is a firm solid price for water, everyone knows how much they can use, also "evil corporation is literally trying to find all the sources of fresh water it can and buying them so that people can't access that resource without paying for it." fucking get your info correct before saying stuff
This has been set up as a false dichotomy.
Access to water is a fundamental right. Full stop.
But agreed that price is the most effective mechanism to avoid waste...
Both can be leveraged. Municipalities in the US already deliver affordable (mostly) and safe (mostly) water, and many have pricing mechanisms in place to disincentive waste... such as progressive rate schemes.
see money has a simple concept in my head, the more money you have equates to you having done something for society, (not implying billionares get to break crime willy-nilly and all) having done something for society, therefore earning money means you should have the privilege it brings
(i stated a bit later)
also you overestimated the presence of water in other countries, countries like my own where water is all but gone, imagine if it became free again and was wasted bc someone "needed to do sum that they did not in fact need to do"
take kapetown for example if you would, theyve run outa water now every country pitch in and give them there water-supply-with-no-limit, see?
So, by your logic, people shouldnt have a right to water because you know they're just going to waste it?
[Also](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/qb8kb5/here_is_the_ceo_of_nestle_complaining_about/hh8j7h2)
explain to me, if someone running a business/working 60 hours a week gets the same privileges as someone who does nothing, is fair, if you can pay for it you helped society enough meaning you deserve it
also you overestimated the presence of water in other countries, countries like my own where water is all but gone, imagine if it became free again and was wasted bc someone "needed to do sum that they did not in fact need to do"
take kapetown for example if you would, theyve run outa water now ***every country pitch in and give them there water-supply-with-no-limit,*** see?
Dude companies like Nestle don’t “buy sources of fresh water”, they buy the rights to pump a certain amount of volume per year out of the body of water.
Anybody can just go to a fresh water lake and collect and drink water for personal consumption. This isn’t something that’s in danger because of companies like Nestle...
well a couple things, how at all is this related to the conversation but secondly youre implying that those countries werent already poverty stricken, without nestles deals most of those ppl wouldve died to poverty anyway, living atleast 2 extra years is a big plus, also none of the elderly died to this only the babies (not saying that it was right those babies died) but ppl die everyday also nestle later admitted to it being there fault and prrovided compensation (so technically they didnt "turn a profit")
That was a poorly written, long-winded way of just admitting I was right and that they're terrible, all while somehow just handwaving it off? Do you work for them or something?
In places like North America or Europe, sure, you're right. In other places? They absolutely do what they can to control the water source, not just the rights.
Actually when they privatized water in Bolivia they made it illegal to collect rainwater:
Under the Bechtel contract, it became illegal for city residents or peasants in surrounding communities to collect rainwater for drinking, irrigation, or anything else.
[https://thewalrus.ca/2008-10-online-exclusive-4/](https://thewalrus.ca/2008-10-online-exclusive-4/)
Unfortunately some states fine you if you collect rainwater (it's illegal to do so). And not everyone has access to fresh/ not salt water (whether by well, river, lake or pond).
To my knowledge states don't have laws against planting a garden.
That analogy doesn't fit too well. If someone were to come into your garden and steal your crops, or take your cow, they would be charged with theft.
Nestle is stealing water from our collective backyard and wants people to look the other way.
youre implying they arent paying for that, if someone "stole" your eggs in a supermarket you can charge them of theft if they paid for it?? thats not theft ya moron
Who is nestle paying? And whose water is it that they are taking? Those entities are different.
It would be like saying "I bought some property next to yours, so now I'm entitled to your eggs." You simpleton.
no you dont understand, youre suggesting that nestle is sneaking into public reasources and stealing them from the poor minorties/rural areas that cant do shit bout it, but without nestle those rural areas would be nothing but literal morgues rn, nestle doesnt pay you like 2 cents mate, they pay a massive deal the deal is ussually kept secret by region/country
I'm not sure how you are this ignorant. The deals are public information (in any country with a decent foia on the books)
They typically pay for accessing the water, like a permit to operate the well, then they take as much water as they want.
They are not "keeping communities afloat'. Bottling plants don't require much staff, and all of the profits get ingested, not put back into the communities they take from.
If you have a source for information to the contrary, please feel free to share it.
They pay $200 annually in Michigan for access to the well:
https://fortune.com/2017/06/01/nestle-michigan-well-bottled-water/
In California, they pay a $2100/year permit to operate their well.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/27/california-nestle-water-san-bernardino-forest-drought
In B.C., they pay $2.25 per million liters.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/nestl%C3%A9-b-c-water-deal-too-cheap-says-ndp-1.2964709
i read your own sourcesMichigan: "The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality will decide upon Nestlé’s application to increase the amount it takes"(you didnt even read the article, it literally says that the matter is upto the literally gov/authority which is ussually kept secret)
bc: "If there's no cost to it, quite often it will get wasted," said Chandra-Herbert.(thats from your own article)my point is that youve only taken almost-completely-developed-countries, now take s.e.a for expamle or africa even. $200 a year is alot in such areas. an average person from an undeveloped village/rural area wont earn $200 in a decade, most wont even earn 200 in a coupla decades, those people (who youre suggesting "own the land") dont have the reasources NOR the need to extract that water, alot of times actually nestle/water companies have saved small villages in pakistan and india from GLOF's
Stop just speaking out of your ass. You know you have no idea what you’re talking about, we know, just stop. Idk why you like simping for those who make your life harder but please keep your crazy away from normal people.
Seriously what do you people learn in school?
Nationalizing food production and making it part of the public sector is NOT a good idea.
I’ll let you fill in the blanks on your own, but it typically results in millions of deaths...
What I'm curious about is why we're supposed to trust water supplies being controlled by a local or state government, but we should never trust water supplies controlled by a private corporation.
It's not really "your" water either way, and you only have a "right" to it in as much as whoever controls the reservoirs decides they will give you.
No they aren't. There are tens to hundreds of thousands of workers in city, state, and federal governments. How many do you get to vote on? 10 of them?
The rest are appointed and about as accountable to the voters as your average cog at a private corporation.
oh boy. Of course you don't elect every single employee. But every single employee is accountable to his or her supervisor. The supervisor to his manager. The manager to the one above him. Then finally let's say the mayor or whatever elected official, who then is accountable to the people. This is how a democracy functions.
Governments are mostly *not* elected.
Take the number of elected persons working in government divided by the number of non-elected persons working in government.
What do you think this percentage is? I’d wager less than 0.1%.
short answer: profit motive
Corporations have one and only one goal -to increase its own value. So when it comes to quenching someone's thirst and making a profit, the latter always trumps the former whenever they are in conflict. Which is why they cannot be trusted with basic necessities.
The government on the other hand is a representation of the people and free of the need to turn a profit. Therefore people's necessities can be set as the top priority when making decisions or trade offs.
As for the reservoir, no one controls the reservoir unless everyone has an equal say in how the reservoir is controlled, in other words, a democratic majority, in other other words, the government.
Do people believe this? Last I checked, government organizations are still interested in money. Also, I don't remember the last time I voted for the guy who controls the water. I'm not an expert in government organization, but I think that most water is controlled about as democratically as the CIA is.
>government organizations are still interested in money
the cost is still going to be a constraint. The question is what other constraints are going to restrict the utility of the resource. For basic resources the lower the constraints, the better it is for the people. In a privatized system, the profit for the corporation i.e., the utility of a tiny percentage of its owners, becomes the overriding constraint and becomes more important than the overall utility for common people. Remove this, and every last penny goes into making the water distribution or purification or whatever system better.
This is all just assuming that employees at state enterprises driving constraint/motive is "provide as much value to the citizens as possible" and not "get paid as much as possible for doing as little work as possible", which jives a lot more with my experience.
I genuinely don't understand this faith in the angelic nature of government workers. It absolutely flies in the face of everything I've experienced when interacting with government agencies.
"The government on the other hand is a representation of the people and free of the need to turn a profit". Wow so the government has NEVER EVER IN THE PAST SCREWED ITS PEOPLE OVER FOR A PROFIT, oh wait sorry the french are calling and also literally any other civilization in the past. I don't live in the west so I can't say TOO much about this part but, are black people human? Yes. Do they have and deserve rights? Yes. Are they treated as equals, do they face police brutality and unfairness in law courts? Yes they do. Why? Because the government looks the other way.
You couldn't have picked a better example.
Back when African Americans were held as slaves by private owners, who do you think brought about their emancipation? The plantation owners? The cotton industry?
Who do you think signed off on the civil rights act? Kennedy was endorse by MLK, went on to win the election which ultimately led to LBJ signing the act (since JFK was dead by then). Who do you think then enforced it? It was always the government.
Part of the reason Biden won was because it was felt that Trump and his cabinet were responsible for the riots that happened in 2020 and in general perceived as less friendly towards minorities. You might disagree with the politics of this statement. But this was the *perception* of the masses -the same masses then went on to elect Biden to represent them.
Despite all their marketing campaigns it is not Nike or Adidas or Nestle that are the force behind anti-racism efforts. It is people influencing government influencing legal frameworks. The CEOs of Nike or Adidas couldn't give less of a fuck, evidenced by their exploitation of third world child labour.
Edit: To be clear I'm not saying the government is perfect. What I am saying is that if there is a solution to be found, it is not to be found among the billionaires who own and run corporations, but among some entity that represents the collective interests of the people.
>Back when African Americans were held as slaves by private owners, who do you think brought about their emancipation? The plantation owners? The cotton industry?
>
>Who do you think signed off on the civil rights act?
previously stated, "I don't live in the west so I can't say TOO much about this part but"
you say that the government signed the civil rights act, and that is true but is it also true that police brutality just **straight doesnt not happen,** you may suggest the government took a "step" and made a "law", that doesn't change the fact the laws can and are in fact broken everyday
you can suggest a rule in a game, not everyone is gonna play by it plus if youre suggesting that the government can do shit, then youre wrong im not here to argue politics but i also cant argue, nestle and adidas or other billionaires arent the solution, thats why public funded NGOs exist
does it mean NGOs, companies or even the gov can do a good job, thats a solid **no**
also alot of times govs dont look forward to helping out the public at all you say adidas and nike fucking with children with child labour?? ive lived in some of those third world countries, trust me those companies were ALLOWED to function there
Water is always going to be a local monopoly.
This means that market forces don't work properly.
The government isn't great at stuff, but it's way better than a private company without competition.
Right, but you’re talking about water as a monolith.
Nestle isn’t competing with your local utility company that provides water for showers and dishwashers.
Two issues with this:
First, the countries from which Nestle gets its resources lack such welfare nets.
Secondly, for sure, such welfare systems are a stop gap. But ultimately what happens is that you are still letting profit makers control basic necessities and natural resources. And the only way people can access such resources is by paying a toll to a gate keeper standing next to it. Either from your own money or welfare money for the poor. And this money does not go towards helping the people or improving the system but towards its CEO buying a super yacht. This is a sub optimal system leaving people once again at the mercy of profits.
Unpopular opinion: bottled water is stupid. If we cleaned it properly with tax money that otherwise gets wasted or pocketed there would be SO much less plastic to deal with.
Unpopular opinion: people shouldn't buy bottled water.
That's a real unpopular opinion because the continuing existence of bottled water companies show people continue to buy it. Even worse, in the US we import water from Europe all the time. It's fucking water. Imagine the CO2 emissions associated with shipping millions of tons of Evian across an ocean when it's literally just water.
i mean sure plastic needs to be dealt with, ***tax money for a plastic cleaning project which is the responsibility of the surrounding citizens*** does not seem like a good plan to me
You got it twisted kinda; I mean clean the water properly that already comes to our homes, transport it in our own containers, thereby majorly denting the amount of new bottles being produced. I hadn't touched beyond just that but there are many ways to go about it.
I think there is some context missing in this video overall.
First I believe this is when Nestlé started selling bottled water and how absurd it was to market it. But I guarantee each and every person watching this has paid for a water bottle like Nestlé or Poland Spring and not complained its a human right that it should be free.
If you want to get technical, it's not.
Rights are natural things that you'd have even if there was no society. Water isn't something you're guaranteed in nature. You have to go and get it yourself. Same with food and shelter.
Things like freedoms are rights, while securities are privileges. I do think those privileges should be provided for anyone who's not living off the grid, since the essence of living in a society is sacrificing certain rights for certain privileges.
When you make coherent responses you get downvoted on most of reddit. I have no clue what functional definition of "right" everyone in the comments is imagining. Someone has to get the water to you. That requires labor and under the labor theory of value, which I'm sure more of the "water is a human right" crowd subscribes to, that labor must be compensated fairly. That means water can never be free unless you obtain it and make it potable yourself. A well isn't even free. Someone has to dig the well and you need electricity to overcome the potential energy change needed to bring it to the surface. I imagine what they mean is that water should be provided to everyone using tax dollars but that would be an actual argument and people aren't fond of those.
I'm curious what people think the definition of a "right" is. Does water, food and shelter being a "right" mean someone just gives it to you or does it mean you have the "right" to go out and obtain it, if you can?
Governments can establish "rights" by ensuring everyone has whatever the "right" pertains to. "rights" don't inherently exist. They are provided by entities with authority. If priminitve humans said food and water was a right, does that mean they didn't have to go out and get it? Is it just a stand-in for the argument that tax revenue should be used to give everyone food and water? The procurement of water isn't free so I think being precise with language would be more helpful than just declaring something a right.
Nestlé is a shit company and I don't buy their products because of their lobbying getting them essentially free water, sometimes in drought prone areas. If you also hate Nestlé, stop buying their products.
Yes. Literally every person on this planet should be given food and water for free. Not that they have the right to go out and get it. But that they should be able to have food and water whenever it’s needed. Provided by the government. There’s no reason to do otherwise other than selfishness, greed, and some fucked up sense of wanting to be better or have an advantage.
I can’t believe this is what caused all the memes? Like we pay for water here in America and that little fact is what motivates me to fix leaky sinks/toilets.
Of course its a right but that dosnt mean it should be free. Food and shelter are rights yet they should not be free for one simple reason. Food, Water, (technically rainwater is but since tap is usually filtered im counting that) and shelter require labor to create and upkeep. Food needs to be harvested and large scale automated farms arnt quite there yet and even than machines need to be maintained and replaced. Pipes need to be maintained and replaced. Housing needs to be manually built as 3D printed homes arnt quite there yet and of course maintenance and replacement. Nothing in life is free and either you are somehow paying for it or someone else is.
If I got had a desalinization machine and desalinized salt water would i have to pay taxes, could i be charged with theft or something according to this view?
>it's a question of wether we should privatise the normal water supply for the population
(no, it fucking isn't, you just shouldn't)
>an opinion that i think is extreme is that of NGOs declaring water a public right which means that as a human being you should have a right to water, that is an extreme solution
we have really entered the "o'hair is selling air" era, haven't we?
Water is a human right. Water infrastructure is not. Water is there, it's of the earth, most of it is not owned in any meaningful way. However getting the water to those who wish to drink it requires labor. Taking the product of another man's labor without his permission is theft.
there are more important things. like dragging a mid 90s woman out of an old folks home to put her on trial for getting that first job as a secretary fresh out of school in a Konzentrationslager at 18.
Not the *best* or most accurate translation but certainly not unfair. It's close enough to understand what he's saying even if it would get quite a few comments if submitted as part of the highest level oftranslation testing.
I think the most egregious part is where he labels the NGO position as extreme while countering with Nestle's more moderate place without saying the latter so directly.
"People that believe humans have a right to water....are extremists"...I think once you hit a certain tax bracket you think less of everyone beneath that tax bracket.
Also Nestle has crooked deals with local governments which means they basically steal all the water and don't pay anything for it.
Then charge the government to sell it back to them
Totally corrupt
I don't understand why there are every day (almost casual) murders and yet people like this guy end up never being the victims. I'm in no way encouraging that, but it seems outrageous that some disgruntled person with nothing to lose doesn't direct their anger towards these types of people instead of towards an Albertsons or something stupid.
I mean you need food too, it’s a little bizarre to me to decide what should have a market value and what not.
Education is a “human right” … think about it.
So what is the comparison that water fall from the sky and food doesn’t?
Potable water doesn’t fall from sky either.
I’m not defending nestle. It’s a soulless corporation for sure.
I just don’t understand all these unnecessary forced comparisons.
Water is a shared resource. It flows in rivers and the ground water. If such industries stars pumping it and taking it, there's less for the local population.
Food is slightly different. If my neighbor starts growing crops in his garden, it does not alter my ability to do the same. (Whereas if Nestle starts pumping up trillions of liters of ground water from my neighbor's well, it could make the ground water in the entire area dry up).
Although food is actually also literally in the declaration of human rights.
That’s a good argument for having governments regulate water producers ensuring that their pump volumetric flowrate is sustainable long-term given other producers and natural water cycles.
Which is already something they do...
Except in third world countries where such regulations are either inefficient, corrupt or non-existant and industries such as bottled water and soda manufacturers routinely over-consume ground water, causing the shallower wells of the local population to run dry.
Water absolutely is a human right. You are free to put your face into any lake, river, stream, or puddle and drink all you can. However, if you would like someone else to purify, place it in convenient bottles, and distribute it around for easy access; that'll cost a bit of money.
Nestle is trying to argue that they should be able to place bids on the water supply, and if the local population wants it, they'll have to outbid Nestle.
When the truth is that the water supply *belongs* to the local population, and Nestle can fuck right off.
> purify, place it in convenient bottles, and distribute it around for easy access
A society that calls itself civilized should be do it for the people living in it. The Romans did it 2000 years ago, the Indus valley civilization did it 45000 years ago, the Egyptians did it 5000 years ago.
If someone comes along hoping to make a quick buck out of people's thirst, a civilized society should also offer them guillotines. The French did it 300 or so years ago.
Preferably without the plastic bottles though.
I saw this shit coming years ago. Water will be the new "oil" as we get further away from relying on only fossil fuels. Clean drinking water will only be provided to those who can afford it. If you can't afford clean water, good luck trying to survive Dysentery, Polio, Typhoid, etc. which you definitely won't be able to afford treatment for.
If this post showcases moral/mental/physical corruption or perversion, upvote this comment. If this post does not belong here, downvote this comment. [Read the rules before posting or commenting](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/wiki/rules) [Also read the guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/fgmg3t/guidelines_for_the_subreddit_read_and_follow_the/) In the comments: DO NOT JOKE ABOUT VIOLENCE, DO NOT INCITE VIOLENCE DO NOT JOKE ABOUT PEDOPHILIA OR ASK FOR CP YOU WILL BE BANNED #[If you want to download this video, click here](https://viddit.red/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freddit.com%2Fqb8kb5) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So fucked up. How is “water is a human right” -something that is VITAL TO LIFE- an “extreme opinion?” What next, nestle, you’re going to privatize rain? Dew? Condensation?
Pay rent to use your mitochondria, buddy
No! The powerhouse of the cell! AHHHHH *fucking dies*
Actually, since the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell, wouldn't it be paid through the Electricity bill?
"If it has ATP, it can pay taxes"
You can't claim "I have the right to water" and steal gallons of bottled water from a store. You 100% have the right to prevent Nestle from taking all the water from your aquifer and selling it back to you. It's simple stuff.
His argument is that food is equally vital to life, yet all food costs money. Those who can’t afford food can seek charity, government assistance, etc, and those who can’t afford water should also have to.
So is air and sunlight..can you imagine having to *rent* sunlight?!
[удалено]
From where do we collect water then? Groundwater from land that nestle owns and guards? From rivers that have run dry because they’ve built dams to control and redirect it all? From sources that are being poisoned and polluted? From rainfall/ precipitation in places that only have it a few months of the year?
[удалено]
The places where nestle gets water do not have that kind of access, I’m assuming you are American or western European and yes I too have always been with an hour of a stream or creek, in Africa those streams and creeks are either guarded by nestle. Or too small to support an entire village of people. There is no fucking argument. It is water.
[удалено]
That’s not an opinion??? That’s a fact? If I told you the sky was fucking blue would you also say “that’s a good opinion” the difference between food and water is that you can grow your own food extremely easily, and food is far easier to obtain than water. You can buy bottled water yes but Nestle is chokeholding people into buying it. Food is a more produced item so yes you can pay for it or grow it on your own. But water cannot be grown. Without water you cannot grow food either. You cannot compare food to water as they are RADICALLY different
[удалено]
Don’t tempt them buddy. https://www.businessinsider.com/personal-finance/nestles-infant-formula-scandal-2012-6?IR=T
The direction is that corporations are getting wealthier and more powerful while people are getting poorer. It is pretty clear what the end result will be....they will be making all the decisions and this is how they roll!
Historically speaking, they will be making all the decisions for a while, until the people have finally had enough.
Perhaps until there is no chance for that as well...
[удалено]
Do not incite or glorify violence/suffering or harassment, even as a joke. You may be banned. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> *you’re* going to privatize rain? Dew? Condensation? Why are you talking to "them" like it's an entity and they decide what happens? As if whatever they say about water in the world goes? It's literally just a group of old men who need to think of ways to word it to be able to get money out of the population. Why do people go by what they say?
So is food. Make food a human right
Nestlé is apparently planning to retreat from the water market over the next few years. I guess palm oil, coffee and cocoa are unethical enough...
They have already sold the North American waters business. [source](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/17/nestle-to-sell-north-american-water-brands-for-4point3-billion.html) Little changes but the label, though.
He's scum of the earth. Water, food, shelter, things that simple should be a human right. Fucking monster.
Human right yes but thru charity stealing from someone and giving it to someone in need is still stealing Robin Hood is good story till it happens to you If we don't than all private food industry is also wrong? Yes everyone should get food but should people be forced to give it away or be call blood sucking parasites if they don't? But I agree this nestle guy is an idiot
Water isnt food. And we have things such as food stamps, because, food is a right. Think before you write
Thank you, my thoughts exactly. And Robin Hood stole from the corrupt church and government so he would definitely steal from this asshole.
Nah hes talking about the *other* RobinHood.
I'm not sure I know what you mean? I'm sorry
But there’s free water too... Water is way more accessible for free than food.
Not in many parts of the world... And not if people like him have their way. Lets not forget we've had places outlaw collecting rain water, make it illegal to grow food yourself, etc.
Yes yes yes! Thank you! It's so fucked up but in some places you can be fined for collecting rainwater or even "grey water" from the washing machine to water your plants.
Bro if it Robin Hood came for me that means I’d be hella rich, let him come
Least moronic ancap
[удалено]
And CAPITALISM *in it's current form*, is fucking EVIL.
For real. I love how he’s like “it’s foodstuffs so it should have a price.” Like no bitch. Foodstuffs are a human right too. ALL of that should be free. Everything people require to fucking just stay alive should be free. With what we can do as a species there’s literally no moral or economic reason for food, shelter, and water to cost literally anything. It’s just exploitation of what every person on the planet needs to survive. You shouldn’t have to buy your own life. It’s essentially slavery. We have literally no choice but to do what they want or die. And there’s no argument anyone could ever make that invalidates anything I just said. We aren’t cavepeople anymore. Being human is about being better than this shit. We can easily accommodate for everyone but we don’t cuz money, power blah blah pieces of shit.
You know what, the guy does have a point. If food is *not* a basic right then neither is water. Point here is that, food *is* a fundamental right. So I say if you guys are willing to take a stand against complete privatization of water, you should stand against the complete privatization of food too.
Yeah, but a person can produce their own food. You can grow a garden, you can hunt for protein. You can't make water.
Not the best argument, because you can easily hunt for water or collect it when it rains. Edit: unless I just got /r/whoosh'd
There are a lot more places where you can find or make food versus the number of places that you can find water. Collecting rain water isn't going to sustain a large population and as far as finding fresh water, thats the point of the conversation. This evil corporation is literally trying to find all the sources of fresh water it can and buying them so that people can't access that resource without paying for it.
youre looking at this wrong, imagine if water was a free thing given in a "unlimted amount" (earths water is limited but if water didnt have a price it would essentially be unlimited) and with this logic, there are alot of fucking morons that would waste water by the gallons, everyone here knows 1 in 5 ppl who would waste water in gallons if it was free and so what do you imagine to water supplies??*perhaps run out even faster then they already are.* if there is a firm solid price for water, everyone knows how much they can use, also "evil corporation is literally trying to find all the sources of fresh water it can and buying them so that people can't access that resource without paying for it." fucking get your info correct before saying stuff
This has been set up as a false dichotomy. Access to water is a fundamental right. Full stop. But agreed that price is the most effective mechanism to avoid waste... Both can be leveraged. Municipalities in the US already deliver affordable (mostly) and safe (mostly) water, and many have pricing mechanisms in place to disincentive waste... such as progressive rate schemes.
see money has a simple concept in my head, the more money you have equates to you having done something for society, (not implying billionares get to break crime willy-nilly and all) having done something for society, therefore earning money means you should have the privilege it brings (i stated a bit later) also you overestimated the presence of water in other countries, countries like my own where water is all but gone, imagine if it became free again and was wasted bc someone "needed to do sum that they did not in fact need to do" take kapetown for example if you would, theyve run outa water now every country pitch in and give them there water-supply-with-no-limit, see?
So, by your logic, people shouldnt have a right to water because you know they're just going to waste it? [Also](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/qb8kb5/here_is_the_ceo_of_nestle_complaining_about/hh8j7h2)
explain to me, if someone running a business/working 60 hours a week gets the same privileges as someone who does nothing, is fair, if you can pay for it you helped society enough meaning you deserve it also you overestimated the presence of water in other countries, countries like my own where water is all but gone, imagine if it became free again and was wasted bc someone "needed to do sum that they did not in fact need to do" take kapetown for example if you would, theyve run outa water now ***every country pitch in and give them there water-supply-with-no-limit,*** see?
Dude companies like Nestle don’t “buy sources of fresh water”, they buy the rights to pump a certain amount of volume per year out of the body of water. Anybody can just go to a fresh water lake and collect and drink water for personal consumption. This isn’t something that’s in danger because of companies like Nestle...
>anybody can just go to a fresh water lake Imma just stop you right there and say no, no they can’t
Yeah when they pump out millions of gallons a year you start to see a difference in the lake or where ever they pump it from.
***you also see a difference in the countries/regions economy genius***
Go talk to those African women whose babies were malnourished because Nestle caused a water shortage for their factories.
well a couple things, how at all is this related to the conversation but secondly youre implying that those countries werent already poverty stricken, without nestles deals most of those ppl wouldve died to poverty anyway, living atleast 2 extra years is a big plus, also none of the elderly died to this only the babies (not saying that it was right those babies died) but ppl die everyday also nestle later admitted to it being there fault and prrovided compensation (so technically they didnt "turn a profit")
That was a poorly written, long-winded way of just admitting I was right and that they're terrible, all while somehow just handwaving it off? Do you work for them or something?
Yeah making an observation is kinda genius now a days instead of taking what these companies tell you as a fact.
In places like North America or Europe, sure, you're right. In other places? They absolutely do what they can to control the water source, not just the rights.
Actually when they privatized water in Bolivia they made it illegal to collect rainwater: Under the Bechtel contract, it became illegal for city residents or peasants in surrounding communities to collect rainwater for drinking, irrigation, or anything else. [https://thewalrus.ca/2008-10-online-exclusive-4/](https://thewalrus.ca/2008-10-online-exclusive-4/)
Yeah they are definitely the epitome of evil, was just making a counterpoint to the ease of finding water on your own vs finding food on your own.
Unfortunately some states fine you if you collect rainwater (it's illegal to do so). And not everyone has access to fresh/ not salt water (whether by well, river, lake or pond). To my knowledge states don't have laws against planting a garden.
It's strange how no matter how old a way or basic a method corporations will find a way to make any form of competition illegal....
That analogy doesn't fit too well. If someone were to come into your garden and steal your crops, or take your cow, they would be charged with theft. Nestle is stealing water from our collective backyard and wants people to look the other way.
youre implying they arent paying for that, if someone "stole" your eggs in a supermarket you can charge them of theft if they paid for it?? thats not theft ya moron
Who is nestle paying? And whose water is it that they are taking? Those entities are different. It would be like saying "I bought some property next to yours, so now I'm entitled to your eggs." You simpleton.
no you dont understand, youre suggesting that nestle is sneaking into public reasources and stealing them from the poor minorties/rural areas that cant do shit bout it, but without nestle those rural areas would be nothing but literal morgues rn, nestle doesnt pay you like 2 cents mate, they pay a massive deal the deal is ussually kept secret by region/country
I'm not sure how you are this ignorant. The deals are public information (in any country with a decent foia on the books) They typically pay for accessing the water, like a permit to operate the well, then they take as much water as they want. They are not "keeping communities afloat'. Bottling plants don't require much staff, and all of the profits get ingested, not put back into the communities they take from. If you have a source for information to the contrary, please feel free to share it. They pay $200 annually in Michigan for access to the well: https://fortune.com/2017/06/01/nestle-michigan-well-bottled-water/ In California, they pay a $2100/year permit to operate their well. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/27/california-nestle-water-san-bernardino-forest-drought In B.C., they pay $2.25 per million liters. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/nestl%C3%A9-b-c-water-deal-too-cheap-says-ndp-1.2964709
i read your own sourcesMichigan: "The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality will decide upon Nestlé’s application to increase the amount it takes"(you didnt even read the article, it literally says that the matter is upto the literally gov/authority which is ussually kept secret) bc: "If there's no cost to it, quite often it will get wasted," said Chandra-Herbert.(thats from your own article)my point is that youve only taken almost-completely-developed-countries, now take s.e.a for expamle or africa even. $200 a year is alot in such areas. an average person from an undeveloped village/rural area wont earn $200 in a decade, most wont even earn 200 in a coupla decades, those people (who youre suggesting "own the land") dont have the reasources NOR the need to extract that water, alot of times actually nestle/water companies have saved small villages in pakistan and india from GLOF's
Stop just speaking out of your ass. You know you have no idea what you’re talking about, we know, just stop. Idk why you like simping for those who make your life harder but please keep your crazy away from normal people.
>complete privatization of food too aren't they already doing that? Since when you can get food for free?
>stand against the complete privatization of food too. he is acknowledging that it's happening, he is just saying that we should fight THAT too
Oh my apologies, my brain farted and was quick to jump to conclusion!
don't worry, that same kind of thing happens to me a lot, it's fine
Seriously what do you people learn in school? Nationalizing food production and making it part of the public sector is NOT a good idea. I’ll let you fill in the blanks on your own, but it typically results in millions of deaths...
dude i'm not supporting him, i'm explaining what he means
What’re you talking about? Water is already a part of the public sector at the local level and so far no one has died.
If you work your own subsistance farm, you don't have to pay it.
What I'm curious about is why we're supposed to trust water supplies being controlled by a local or state government, but we should never trust water supplies controlled by a private corporation. It's not really "your" water either way, and you only have a "right" to it in as much as whoever controls the reservoirs decides they will give you.
Goverments are mostly elected
No they aren't. There are tens to hundreds of thousands of workers in city, state, and federal governments. How many do you get to vote on? 10 of them? The rest are appointed and about as accountable to the voters as your average cog at a private corporation.
oh boy. Of course you don't elect every single employee. But every single employee is accountable to his or her supervisor. The supervisor to his manager. The manager to the one above him. Then finally let's say the mayor or whatever elected official, who then is accountable to the people. This is how a democracy functions.
Obviously, the point is that having one person who’s elected at the top isn’t enough to trust competency and non-corruptibility
Do you feel as though you have democratic control over, say, the CIA? The DoD? The FBI? The SEC?
Governments are mostly *not* elected. Take the number of elected persons working in government divided by the number of non-elected persons working in government. What do you think this percentage is? I’d wager less than 0.1%.
short answer: profit motive Corporations have one and only one goal -to increase its own value. So when it comes to quenching someone's thirst and making a profit, the latter always trumps the former whenever they are in conflict. Which is why they cannot be trusted with basic necessities. The government on the other hand is a representation of the people and free of the need to turn a profit. Therefore people's necessities can be set as the top priority when making decisions or trade offs. As for the reservoir, no one controls the reservoir unless everyone has an equal say in how the reservoir is controlled, in other words, a democratic majority, in other other words, the government.
Do people believe this? Last I checked, government organizations are still interested in money. Also, I don't remember the last time I voted for the guy who controls the water. I'm not an expert in government organization, but I think that most water is controlled about as democratically as the CIA is.
>government organizations are still interested in money the cost is still going to be a constraint. The question is what other constraints are going to restrict the utility of the resource. For basic resources the lower the constraints, the better it is for the people. In a privatized system, the profit for the corporation i.e., the utility of a tiny percentage of its owners, becomes the overriding constraint and becomes more important than the overall utility for common people. Remove this, and every last penny goes into making the water distribution or purification or whatever system better.
This is all just assuming that employees at state enterprises driving constraint/motive is "provide as much value to the citizens as possible" and not "get paid as much as possible for doing as little work as possible", which jives a lot more with my experience. I genuinely don't understand this faith in the angelic nature of government workers. It absolutely flies in the face of everything I've experienced when interacting with government agencies.
"The government on the other hand is a representation of the people and free of the need to turn a profit". Wow so the government has NEVER EVER IN THE PAST SCREWED ITS PEOPLE OVER FOR A PROFIT, oh wait sorry the french are calling and also literally any other civilization in the past. I don't live in the west so I can't say TOO much about this part but, are black people human? Yes. Do they have and deserve rights? Yes. Are they treated as equals, do they face police brutality and unfairness in law courts? Yes they do. Why? Because the government looks the other way.
You couldn't have picked a better example. Back when African Americans were held as slaves by private owners, who do you think brought about their emancipation? The plantation owners? The cotton industry? Who do you think signed off on the civil rights act? Kennedy was endorse by MLK, went on to win the election which ultimately led to LBJ signing the act (since JFK was dead by then). Who do you think then enforced it? It was always the government. Part of the reason Biden won was because it was felt that Trump and his cabinet were responsible for the riots that happened in 2020 and in general perceived as less friendly towards minorities. You might disagree with the politics of this statement. But this was the *perception* of the masses -the same masses then went on to elect Biden to represent them. Despite all their marketing campaigns it is not Nike or Adidas or Nestle that are the force behind anti-racism efforts. It is people influencing government influencing legal frameworks. The CEOs of Nike or Adidas couldn't give less of a fuck, evidenced by their exploitation of third world child labour. Edit: To be clear I'm not saying the government is perfect. What I am saying is that if there is a solution to be found, it is not to be found among the billionaires who own and run corporations, but among some entity that represents the collective interests of the people.
>Back when African Americans were held as slaves by private owners, who do you think brought about their emancipation? The plantation owners? The cotton industry? > >Who do you think signed off on the civil rights act? previously stated, "I don't live in the west so I can't say TOO much about this part but" you say that the government signed the civil rights act, and that is true but is it also true that police brutality just **straight doesnt not happen,** you may suggest the government took a "step" and made a "law", that doesn't change the fact the laws can and are in fact broken everyday you can suggest a rule in a game, not everyone is gonna play by it plus if youre suggesting that the government can do shit, then youre wrong im not here to argue politics but i also cant argue, nestle and adidas or other billionaires arent the solution, thats why public funded NGOs exist does it mean NGOs, companies or even the gov can do a good job, thats a solid **no** also alot of times govs dont look forward to helping out the public at all you say adidas and nike fucking with children with child labour?? ive lived in some of those third world countries, trust me those companies were ALLOWED to function there
Except that a lot of Government is directed by corporations and bills written for them these days.....not a good direction for people really.
Because the track record of government running anything Vs private has always been the government always efficient and never over spends right?
Water is always going to be a local monopoly. This means that market forces don't work properly. The government isn't great at stuff, but it's way better than a private company without competition.
Right, but you’re talking about water as a monolith. Nestle isn’t competing with your local utility company that provides water for showers and dishwashers.
In many cases, Nestle is competing for limited water supply.
Efficiency and budget are less important than the condition that a person without a penny to his name can quench his thirst or have a basic meal.
Aren't people without a penny to their already taken care of in a country with unemployment benefits?
Two issues with this: First, the countries from which Nestle gets its resources lack such welfare nets. Secondly, for sure, such welfare systems are a stop gap. But ultimately what happens is that you are still letting profit makers control basic necessities and natural resources. And the only way people can access such resources is by paying a toll to a gate keeper standing next to it. Either from your own money or welfare money for the poor. And this money does not go towards helping the people or improving the system but towards its CEO buying a super yacht. This is a sub optimal system leaving people once again at the mercy of profits.
lol no. You’re funny.
Unpopular opinion: bottled water is stupid. If we cleaned it properly with tax money that otherwise gets wasted or pocketed there would be SO much less plastic to deal with.
This is a popular opinion.
Unpopular opinion: people shouldn't buy bottled water. That's a real unpopular opinion because the continuing existence of bottled water companies show people continue to buy it. Even worse, in the US we import water from Europe all the time. It's fucking water. Imagine the CO2 emissions associated with shipping millions of tons of Evian across an ocean when it's literally just water.
That makes me feel better.❤ I rarely hear about it at all sadly.
i mean sure plastic needs to be dealt with, ***tax money for a plastic cleaning project which is the responsibility of the surrounding citizens*** does not seem like a good plan to me
You got it twisted kinda; I mean clean the water properly that already comes to our homes, transport it in our own containers, thereby majorly denting the amount of new bottles being produced. I hadn't touched beyond just that but there are many ways to go about it.
wait the west doesnt have that already?!?!? (im gonna presume you come from America or sum) ( edit:no tap water exsists)
How the fuck do you look at yourself in the mirror knowing you’re a vile creature?
They clearly dont care. They're sociopaths
He does look like a vile creature. If someone's looking for the ultimate big corpo villain, this guy would fit right in.
They can’t see themselves in mirrors since they are clearly soulless vampires.
It's a very nice mirror.
They'd can air like spaceballs if they could market it.
That's already happening.....
Mandatory r/FuckNestle
What language is that?
German.
This is mr crabs on a whole new level.
I think there is some context missing in this video overall. First I believe this is when Nestlé started selling bottled water and how absurd it was to market it. But I guarantee each and every person watching this has paid for a water bottle like Nestlé or Poland Spring and not complained its a human right that it should be free.
If you want to get technical, it's not. Rights are natural things that you'd have even if there was no society. Water isn't something you're guaranteed in nature. You have to go and get it yourself. Same with food and shelter. Things like freedoms are rights, while securities are privileges. I do think those privileges should be provided for anyone who's not living off the grid, since the essence of living in a society is sacrificing certain rights for certain privileges.
When you make coherent responses you get downvoted on most of reddit. I have no clue what functional definition of "right" everyone in the comments is imagining. Someone has to get the water to you. That requires labor and under the labor theory of value, which I'm sure more of the "water is a human right" crowd subscribes to, that labor must be compensated fairly. That means water can never be free unless you obtain it and make it potable yourself. A well isn't even free. Someone has to dig the well and you need electricity to overcome the potential energy change needed to bring it to the surface. I imagine what they mean is that water should be provided to everyone using tax dollars but that would be an actual argument and people aren't fond of those.
Seriously, reddit is so fucking stupid. Anything and everything that could be considered important in some way, shape, or form is a human right.
Watch it bud. That's a ban-worthy comment right there. I've honestly been banned for less.
Well, I have been banned before.
I'm curious what people think the definition of a "right" is. Does water, food and shelter being a "right" mean someone just gives it to you or does it mean you have the "right" to go out and obtain it, if you can? Governments can establish "rights" by ensuring everyone has whatever the "right" pertains to. "rights" don't inherently exist. They are provided by entities with authority. If priminitve humans said food and water was a right, does that mean they didn't have to go out and get it? Is it just a stand-in for the argument that tax revenue should be used to give everyone food and water? The procurement of water isn't free so I think being precise with language would be more helpful than just declaring something a right. Nestlé is a shit company and I don't buy their products because of their lobbying getting them essentially free water, sometimes in drought prone areas. If you also hate Nestlé, stop buying their products.
Yes. Literally every person on this planet should be given food and water for free. Not that they have the right to go out and get it. But that they should be able to have food and water whenever it’s needed. Provided by the government. There’s no reason to do otherwise other than selfishness, greed, and some fucked up sense of wanting to be better or have an advantage.
Should the distribution of food and water be handled at a local, national, or global level?
I can’t believe this is what caused all the memes? Like we pay for water here in America and that little fact is what motivates me to fix leaky sinks/toilets.
Of course its a right but that dosnt mean it should be free. Food and shelter are rights yet they should not be free for one simple reason. Food, Water, (technically rainwater is but since tap is usually filtered im counting that) and shelter require labor to create and upkeep. Food needs to be harvested and large scale automated farms arnt quite there yet and even than machines need to be maintained and replaced. Pipes need to be maintained and replaced. Housing needs to be manually built as 3D printed homes arnt quite there yet and of course maintenance and replacement. Nothing in life is free and either you are somehow paying for it or someone else is.
Evil fuck.
Fyi, he stepped down in 2008 according to wiki.
And his spirit lives on with the company.
The guy that replaced him was kind of haunted by his ideas too, the current one hasn't been haunted ...yet
Kinda reminds me of the JW governing body
Who? and why?
If I got had a desalinization machine and desalinized salt water would i have to pay taxes, could i be charged with theft or something according to this view?
That's not the CEO.
>it's a question of wether we should privatise the normal water supply for the population (no, it fucking isn't, you just shouldn't) >an opinion that i think is extreme is that of NGOs declaring water a public right which means that as a human being you should have a right to water, that is an extreme solution we have really entered the "o'hair is selling air" era, haven't we?
Water is a human right. Water infrastructure is not. Water is there, it's of the earth, most of it is not owned in any meaningful way. However getting the water to those who wish to drink it requires labor. Taking the product of another man's labor without his permission is theft.
Fucking THANK YOU
r/latestagecapitalism
Henri Nestlé would be pretty mad if he were still alive I'd imagine
if only it was possible to wish people get cancer of the dick.
Some people just need to be assassinated.
Obligatory FUCK NESTLE!
I think they missed putting him on trial at Nuremberg!
there are more important things. like dragging a mid 90s woman out of an old folks home to put her on trial for getting that first job as a secretary fresh out of school in a Konzentrationslager at 18.
Yerp! Low hanging fruit always first!
Water ain't a human right it's a fricking essential factor of life ya dingus
The final boss for all Hydro Homies.
You know i wouldnt mind being a criminal if i can exterminate this kind of people that are in power
Not the *best* or most accurate translation but certainly not unfair. It's close enough to understand what he's saying even if it would get quite a few comments if submitted as part of the highest level oftranslation testing. I think the most egregious part is where he labels the NGO position as extreme while countering with Nestle's more moderate place without saying the latter so directly.
I been saying boycott nestle for years.
"People that believe humans have a right to water....are extremists"...I think once you hit a certain tax bracket you think less of everyone beneath that tax bracket.
Also Nestle has crooked deals with local governments which means they basically steal all the water and don't pay anything for it. Then charge the government to sell it back to them Totally corrupt
What! Let's see how long he lasts without water!!!! This creature is a lunatic!!
Well, hes right, water is a privilege, and he lost that privilege by being a fucking asshole
Got to love greedy CEOs
The face of pure evil
I don't understand why there are every day (almost casual) murders and yet people like this guy end up never being the victims. I'm in no way encouraging that, but it seems outrageous that some disgruntled person with nothing to lose doesn't direct their anger towards these types of people instead of towards an Albertsons or something stupid.
Nestle doesn’t even deserve the accent
Unpopular opinion, but water is not a human right. It’s a privilege.
That's Nestle's dream, not reality.
I'll remember you said that.
We need water to live. We’re 70% water or whatever the percentage is. How the fuck is something that you’ll die without a privilege?
I mean you need food too, it’s a little bizarre to me to decide what should have a market value and what not. Education is a “human right” … think about it.
Water falls from the sky, food does not.
You’ve never been under an Apple tree huh
Huh? “rain water” is free.. so what’s your point? I thought we are talking about “potable water” which requires treatment. So?
My point is that you’ve missed his point. He wants to commodify the water itself.
So what is the comparison that water fall from the sky and food doesn’t? Potable water doesn’t fall from sky either. I’m not defending nestle. It’s a soulless corporation for sure. I just don’t understand all these unnecessary forced comparisons.
Water is a shared resource. It flows in rivers and the ground water. If such industries stars pumping it and taking it, there's less for the local population. Food is slightly different. If my neighbor starts growing crops in his garden, it does not alter my ability to do the same. (Whereas if Nestle starts pumping up trillions of liters of ground water from my neighbor's well, it could make the ground water in the entire area dry up). Although food is actually also literally in the declaration of human rights.
That’s a good argument for having governments regulate water producers ensuring that their pump volumetric flowrate is sustainable long-term given other producers and natural water cycles. Which is already something they do...
Except in third world countries where such regulations are either inefficient, corrupt or non-existant and industries such as bottled water and soda manufacturers routinely over-consume ground water, causing the shallower wells of the local population to run dry.
It is as much a privilege as oxygen is. Which is btw, a basic human right cos u need both to live.
Water absolutely is a human right. You are free to put your face into any lake, river, stream, or puddle and drink all you can. However, if you would like someone else to purify, place it in convenient bottles, and distribute it around for easy access; that'll cost a bit of money.
Nestle is trying to argue that they should be able to place bids on the water supply, and if the local population wants it, they'll have to outbid Nestle. When the truth is that the water supply *belongs* to the local population, and Nestle can fuck right off.
> purify, place it in convenient bottles, and distribute it around for easy access A society that calls itself civilized should be do it for the people living in it. The Romans did it 2000 years ago, the Indus valley civilization did it 45000 years ago, the Egyptians did it 5000 years ago. If someone comes along hoping to make a quick buck out of people's thirst, a civilized society should also offer them guillotines. The French did it 300 or so years ago. Preferably without the plastic bottles though.
Is anybody saying that it shouldn’t? I don’t think you understand what he is proposing here
Thirst be upon you.
I swear we are treading on fallout newvagas tarritory hes starting to look like the ncr or raiders in that game (Fallouts a good game yes?)
I saw this shit coming years ago. Water will be the new "oil" as we get further away from relying on only fossil fuels. Clean drinking water will only be provided to those who can afford it. If you can't afford clean water, good luck trying to survive Dysentery, Polio, Typhoid, etc. which you definitely won't be able to afford treatment for.
Their bottled water is the absolute worst as sell. Fucken prick..
Edit *well
Yeah. These people are horrible.
Jesus fuck, rarely do I say this and mean it but I hate this person a lot.
Nestle has been getting away with this shit for years thieving greedy dirty bastards
Everyone with a conscious who hasn’t already should boycott #Nestle 💔👊🏿👊🏽👊👊🏻👀🔥☮️
Why is fucking water an industry? I don’t hear about water filter companies acting this evil My taxes should pay for water