Toilet of the future.
Householders to be charged for each flush of toilet | PerthNow — We will eventually be taxed for breathing.
HOUSEHOLDERS would be charged for each flush under a radical new toilet tax designed to help beat the drought [in Perth]
The scheme would replace the current system, which sees sewage charges based on a home’s value – not its waste water output.
CSIRO Policy and Economic Research Unit member Jim McColl and Adelaide University Water Management Professor Mike Young plan to promote the move to state and federal politicians and experts across the country.
#4 #8 EXACTLY people should be charged (and they ARE) for water usage, not what the water is used FOR. I cannot understand people finding this acceptable.
A toilet flush is a burden on the public utility.
A watering of the front lawn is not.
There is a logical and practical additional burden regarding toilets not present in other water use activities.
You can still disagree about a discrete charge, as reasonable people will.
#34: “A toilet flush is a burden on the public utility.
A watering of the front lawn is not.”
Guess again. My town is looking into fees for runoff from properties, such as soap from washing you car, pet waste, insecticide use, and lawn fertilizer. All go into the storm drain system and allegedly cause environmental harm because they don’t get treated by the sanitary sewer system.
#35–oven==watering the front lawn is again different from OVERWATERING the front lawn causing runoff, a type of toilet usage if you will.
Again==there is definitely and factually a difference between the simply receipt of water and what you do with it thereafter==all justifying additional charges as the authority may decide.
Simple economics really.
Amusing how many people can’t think rationally if two sentences contain the same word, there must be a equivalency thereafter no matter what else is being discussed?
Water, water everywhere. Not a drop to drink.