bottled water

[doodle]

So when someone says that bottled water tastes better than tap water, are their taste buds lying to them (having been duped by advertising, presumably )?

In areas where the municipal water quality is actually really bad, are people buying bottled water still braindead idiots?

Very possibly yes depending on quality of tap water. This is testable....people say they can tell the difference between American and Mexican (real sugar) Coca-Cola....yet the tests suggest otherwise....same with expensive wine and stuff that comes out of a walmart box.  I also recently read that America is a dumping ground for rancid olive oil as well because we cant distinguish between fresh and rotten olive oil.

I can't help but be a little put off by your blithe dismissal of so many people's opinions as the results of low intelligence or susceptibility to greedy outsiders eager to make a buck. How do you go through life harboring such disrespect for your fellow man? It must be awfully isolating to look at a group of people and (even subconsciously) imagine, "most of those people are ignorant fools."

I have come to view most of mankind like this:


Again, if it is "much more efficient and cost effective for a society to supply the basic commodity product of clean water", why have they not done so in a manner that makes people avoid alternatives? I personally am not satisfied by the quality of the water my local monopoly government sells to me. I don't buy bottled water but I run all my tap water through a filter before I drink it because otherwise it tastes strongly of minerals. Am I just a brainwashed idiot? Are all the people in government who should improve this situation braindead idiots? Are you just a trailblazer for having come to the completely obvious conclusion that government should sell to everyone at extremely low cost the highest-quality, best-tasting, most mineral-free water that can possibly be supplied?

No...Im considering buying a filter because my water kind of sucks. I don't want to have to add another contraption to my life. I would be happy to pay an additional .00005 of a penny per gallon on my water rate for my municipal water company to provide me water that didn't contain arsenic or other heavy metals that I have to filter out when they are capable of doing that. Run that shit through another filter before you send it my way. I think most consumers would support that.....why hasn't it happened. The hell if I know....maybe because it makes too much sense?

[MachineGhost]

MG is right. You aren't going to stop people from buying bottled water by providing better tap water. The tap water in the Chicago area is pretty good straight out of the tap. Nonetheless, I installed a filtered water system at my office similar to the one I have at home. But the staff buys bottled water by the case and clogs up the refrigerator with it anyway. They won't even brew coffee with the filtered tap stuff. Ugh.

And this is why legislation to change behavior is sometimes effective.  Damn, did I just say that out loud?  lol.

[doodle]

MG is right. You aren't going to stop people from buying bottled water by providing better tap water. The tap water in the Chicago area is pretty good straight out of the tap. Nonetheless, I installed a filtered water system at my office similar to the one I have at home. But the staff buys bottled water by the case and clogs up the refrigerator with it anyway. They won't even brew coffee with the filtered tap stuff. Ugh.

And this is why legislation to change behavior is sometimes effective.  Damn, did I just say that out loud?  lol.

Hahahaha 

Look Im not saying people CANT buy bottled water. Buy it all you want....Im just saying that in a first world country everyones water should be as good as Chicagos is. I shouldn't have to filter or buy bottled water in the richest country on the planet in the 21st century.

[MachineGhost]

There are many different bottled water companies. They compete with price and quality. The same would happen with pipes and bringing water to your home or business.

I think the vast majority of bottled water companies (which are all actually owned by a few mega-corporations) are not competing on quality.  They're competing on taste and marketing fiction because the quality is all essentially the same...  tap or spring water, filtered through a RO system -- unless its a straight-through artesian or specialty water at a premium price.

[Pointedstick]

Doodle for president!!! "you're all a bunch of ignorant monkeys and I know what's best for you!"

[doodle]

Doodle for president!!! "you're all a bunch of ignorant monkeys and I know what's best for you!"

Well, I prefer to be king...

Anyways, here is the problem.

Im sitting at work thirsty and I want a glass of water. I have an immediate need. There are two options....pay 1.50 for a stupid bottle of water out of the vending machine or go to the drinking fountain and drink some foul tasting arsenic water. So I make the quick choice and just spend the 1.50 to get a bottle of water. I would prefer however to take that 1.50 and pay a very minor fraction of that and have the water company just filter the water again before they send it out...but that purchase option is not available to me. My needs as a consumer are not being met. I want to vote with my money but the damn drinking fountain doesn't have a payment mechanism on it for cheap fresh water so I have to go with the company that is trucking the stupid stuff in and charging a markup of like 20 billion percent on one of the worlds most simple basic commodities.

[Pointedstick]

Hahahaha 

Look Im not saying people CANT buy bottled water. Buy it all you want....Im just saying that in a first world country everyones water should be as good as Chicagos is. I shouldn't have to filter or buy bottled water in the richest country on the planet in the 21st century.

Heh, I actually do understand what you're saying. But consider how you're expressing it. You've basically said, "I want something to be better, but I'm not willing to pay more for it, and I also am ignorant of the technical details of what it would take to improve it." You're an engineer's worst nightmare! 

But I guess you are also ignorant of the human factors relating to why it's not already better or how you would go about persuading people to start improving it so I guess you're a manager's worst nightmare as well!

[doodle]

Is there a market for drinking water that is foul tasting and full of pesticides and chemicals? Would anyone choose to save .00005 of a penny to have a glass of foul tasting chemical water instead of fresh tasting water? What about children without money? Should they just die of dehydration or drink puddle water?

[Pointedstick]

Anyways, here is the problem.

Im sitting at work thirsty and I want a glass of water. I have an immediate need. There are two options....pay 1.50 for a stupid bottle of water out of the vending machine or go to the drinking fountain and drink some foul tasting arsenic water. So I make the quick choice and just spend the 1.50 to get a bottle of water. I would prefer however to take that 1.50 and pay a very minor fraction of that and have the water company just filter the water again before they send it out...but that purchase option is not available to me. My needs as a consumer are not being met. I want to vote with my money but the damn drinking fountain doesn't have a payment mechanism on it for cheap fresh water so I have to go with the company that is trucking the stupid stuff in and charging a markup of like 20 billion percent on one of the worlds most simple basic commodities.

If I were a crueler man, I would point out how you appear to be yearning for a free market in plumbed water, and how your actual problem is the unequivocal result of a government monopoly, with the private sector offering you an alternative that your choices demonstrate you are actually satisfied with, given that you have not availed yourself of the obvious alternative of simply bringing your own filtered water from home.

[doodle]

Hahahaha 

Look Im not saying people CANT buy bottled water. Buy it all you want....Im just saying that in a first world country everyones water should be as good as Chicagos is. I shouldn't have to filter or buy bottled water in the richest country on the planet in the 21st century.

Heh, I actually do understand what you're saying. But consider how you're expressing it. You've basically said, "I want something to be better, but I'm not willing to pay more for it, and I also am ignorant of the technical details of what it would take to improve it." You're an engineer's worst nightmare! 

But I guess you are also ignorant of the human factors relating to why it's not already better or how you would go about persuading people to start improving it so I guess you're a manager's worst nightmare as well!

I AM willing to pay more for it!!! I would happily pay .0005 of a penny per gallon more not to have to buy bottled water or filter my water or all that other crap. Im saying that I cant easily vote that way with my money at this moment. I want to cram 1.50 into the water fountain to buy 1000 gallons of filtered water please......that option is not available to me. My ability to vote with my dollars is being constrained and Im forced to perpetuate a stupid system of buying my water out of a damn vending machine which is retarded.

[doodle]

Anyways, here is the problem.

Im sitting at work thirsty and I want a glass of water. I have an immediate need. There are two options....pay 1.50 for a stupid bottle of water out of the vending machine or go to the drinking fountain and drink some foul tasting arsenic water. So I make the quick choice and just spend the 1.50 to get a bottle of water. I would prefer however to take that 1.50 and pay a very minor fraction of that and have the water company just filter the water again before they send it out...but that purchase option is not available to me. My needs as a consumer are not being met. I want to vote with my money but the damn drinking fountain doesn't have a payment mechanism on it for cheap fresh water so I have to go with the company that is trucking the stupid stuff in and charging a markup of like 20 billion percent on one of the worlds most simple basic commodities.

If I were a crueler man, I would point out how you appear to be yearning for a free market in plumbed water, and how your actual problem is the unequivocal result of a government monopoly, with the private sector offering you an alternative that your choices demonstrate you are actually satisfied with.

I don't care if the market is private or public I want clean water....Im just saying it doesn't make any damn sense to run dozens of water grids under the streets in order to have competition for a basic commodity resource. We all know what clean water is....its not a proprietary product. Just provide it to me and I will pay you money.

Doodle for president!!! "you're all a bunch of ignorant monkeys and I know what's best for you!"

Well, I prefer to be king...

Anyways, here is the problem.

Im sitting at work thirsty and I want a glass of water. I have an immediate need. There are two options....pay 1.50 for a stupid bottle of water out of the vending machine or go to the drinking fountain and drink some foul tasting arsenic water. So I make the quick choice and just spend the 1.50 to get a bottle of water. I would prefer however to take that 1.50 and pay a very minor fraction of that and have the water company just filter the water again before they send it out...but that purchase option is not available to me. My needs as a consumer are not being met. I want to vote with my money but the damn drinking fountain doesn't have a payment mechanism on it for cheap fresh water so I have to go with the company that is trucking the stupid stuff in and charging a markup of like 20 billion percent on one of the worlds most simple basic commodities.

So if you know this is a problem, why don't you bring free filtered water from home in a thermos?

I do bring a thermos from home very often....but then I have to filter it as well...not to mention its a pain to have to carry around a gallon water jug to meet my daily needs.

[Pointedstick]

I AM willing to pay more for it!!! I would happily pay .0005 of a penny per gallon more not to have to buy bottled water or filter my water or all that other crap. Im saying that I cant easily vote that way with my money at this moment. I want to cram 1.50 into the water fountain to buy 1000 gallons of filtered water please......that option is not available to me. My ability to vote with my dollars is being constrained and Im forced to perpetuate a stupid system of buying my water out of a damn vending machine which is retarded.

Thank you for your ringing endorsement of my idea of multiple plumbed water pipes fed by multiple water companies that you can choose from among, with the option you are craving: to pay slightly more to the company that delivers you filtered water rather than arsenic-tasting water. I never thought I'd see the day!

[doodle]

I AM willing to pay more for it!!! I would happily pay .0005 of a penny per gallon more not to have to buy bottled water or filter my water or all that other crap. Im saying that I cant easily vote that way with my money at this moment. I want to cram 1.50 into the water fountain to buy 1000 gallons of filtered water please......that option is not available to me. My ability to vote with my dollars is being constrained and Im forced to perpetuate a stupid system of buying my water out of a damn vending machine which is retarded.

Thank you for your ringing endorsement of my idea of multiple plumbed water pipes fed by multiple water companies that you can choose from among, with the option you are craving: to pay slightly more to the company that delivers you filtered water rather than arsenic-tasting water. I never thought I'd see the day!

That is the height of Inefficiency. Just have the municipal water company run the water through another filter. Its not rocket science. The EPA should just raise water quality standards and test for them. There, problem solved....and the roads don't have to get torn up again.

Besides what makes you think that such a massive infrastructure project with incredibly high startup costs is something any business would want to attempt anyways? We have the pipes in the ground....just deliver clean liquid please.

[MachineGhost]

Thank you for your ringing endorsement of my idea of multiple plumbed water pipes fed by multiple water companies that you can choose from among, with the option you are craving: to pay slightly more to the company that delivers you filtered water rather than arsenic-tasting water. I never thought I'd see the day!

But the problem is, of course, the capital investment required.  No profit-seeking organization is going to cover it.  There's not enough profit to be had anymore since most everyone is busy buying bottled water.  Easier to just go with the path of least resistance.  That's the "flaw" of unregulated capitalism.

[Pointedstick]

That is the height of Inefficiency. Just have the municipal water company run the water through another filter. Its not rocket science. The EPA should just raise water quality standards and test for them. There, problem solved....and the roads don't have to get torn up again.

So again, why haven't they done it?

Of course it's inefficient. Market competition by its very nature is inefficient compared to a single monopoly provider that gives everyone what they want. But as you've indicated, your local monopoly provider isn't actually giving you what you want. IMHO, that's the point at which maybe some inefficient market competition might start to deliver better results than trying to push the monopolist into doing what you want it to do. Howe well does that usually work out? How well is it working for you right now, as a person who's stuck with bad-tasting government-provided water and doesn't have any power to fix it?

[MachineGhost]

Of course it's inefficient. Market competition by its very nature is inefficient compared to a single monopoly provider that gives everyone what they want. But as you've indicated, your local monopoly provider isn't actually giving you what you want. IMHO, that's the point at which maybe some inefficient market competition might start to deliver better results than trying to push the monopolist into doing what you want it to do.

If there was profit in it, don't you think the corporations would be engaging in their usual crony capitalism to take advantage of the opportunity?

[doodle]

That is the height of Inefficiency. Just have the municipal water company run the water through another filter. Its not rocket science. The EPA should just raise water quality standards and test for them. There, problem solved....and the roads don't have to get torn up again.

So again, why haven't they done it?

Of course it's inefficient. Market competition by its very nature is inefficient compared to a single monopoly provider that gives everyone what they want. But as you've indicated, your local monopoly provider isn't actually giving you what you want. IMHO, that's the point at which maybe some inefficient market competition might start to deliver better results than trying to push the monopolist into doing what you want it to do.

Good point...why? Why cant they deliver me water that doesn't contain heavy metals and pesticide residue? My guess is that the EPA should just raise standards (They are delivering me water within EPA guidelines...unfortunately those aren't too stringent it appears)...it would raise cost of water and people would bitch and moan probably....and still continue to buy contaminated bottled water even if the water that flowed out of the tap tasted better than Andean glaciar water......

[Pointedstick]

Good point...why? Why cant they deliver me water that doesn't contain heavy metals and pesticide residue? My guess is that the EPA should just raise standards (They are delivering me water within EPA guidelines...unfortunately those aren't too stringent it appears)...it would raise cost of water and people would bitch and moan probably....and still continue to buy contaminated bottled water even if the water that flowed out of the tap tasted better than Andean glaciar water......

LOL.

What I am suggesting is that the problem is that of monopoly. The only thing that a gets a monopoly to listen to people is a stronger power coercing it. Liberals seem to understand this and abhor private monopolies, trying to break them up, prevent companies from merging, and otherwise appearing to understand the danger posed by large organizations without any competition. But they seem to break down when it comes time to apply this obvious truth to government as well, which after all is nothing more than a series of hierarchical monopolies topped by an ultimate set of monopolists with no domestic competition at all. You said the real problem is the EPA's drinking water standards… well guess what!? The EPA is a federal monopoly agency with no agency higher than it! If the EPA's drinking water standards are too lax for your tastes, who's gonna whip it into shape? Congress? Hah! The president? Fat chance. All you can do is bitch and moan.

Monopolies are bad. They're bad when they're selling you cars or delivering you water. Appealing to someone else to beat them up and make them do what you want them to do is a bad solution that doesn't work. If it did, private monopolies wouldn't need to be broken or pr prevented from forming, only regulated heavily, right?

[Mountaineer]

Good point...why? Why cant they deliver me water that doesn't contain heavy metals and pesticide residue?

I smell a marketing opportunity here. 

Heavy metals = mineral enhanced unique life sustaining water.

Pesticide residue = complex organic naturally derived and hand made flavor enhancers that may possibly improve libido.

Any one want to finance my "kickstarter" project?

... Mountaineer

[Pointedstick]

Of course it's inefficient. Market competition by its very nature is inefficient compared to a single monopoly provider that gives everyone what they want. But as you've indicated, your local monopoly provider isn't actually giving you what you want. IMHO, that's the point at which maybe some inefficient market competition might start to deliver better results than trying to push the monopolist into doing what you want it to do.

If there was profit in it, don't you think the corporations would be engaging in their usual crony capitalism to take advantage of the opportunity?

The ones to profit would not be the water companies but rather the owner of the infrastructure who would rent it out. Since the current owners of the roads are governmental, it doesn't happen because people who are attracted to government simply don't think this way, even though it would probably benefit local governments as they would see a source of revenue as a result of it. So there is no lobby for it.

[Stewardship]

But the problem is, of course, the capital investment required.  No profit-seeking organization is going to cover it.  There's not enough profit to be had anymore since most everyone is busy buying bottled water.  Easier to just go with the path of least resistance.  That's the "flaw" of unregulated capitalism.

A profit-seeking organization covers trucking in water, so why wouldn't they cover piping it (which we've established is more efficient)?  What if everyone could get Crystal Geyser water on tap?  Everyone wins... consumers get the product they want for less money, business makes a profit, and far fewer plastic bottles end up in the ocean.

[Mountaineer]

There may be another consideration re. doodle’s proposal to create a more costly but higher quality piped potable water supply.

Currently, piped in potable water is by law required to meet government (EPA) minimum standards.

doodle would prefer his water taste better so he does not have to carry a supply with him when he desires a drink.

Improving potable water quality will likely cost more both in chemicals required for ongoing treatment and investment in new water purification generation and transmission facilities.

doodle’s proposal will not only increase the cost of potable drinking water (likely only a few cents per day per person) but also increase the cost correspondingly for all other uses of potable water (e.g. laundry, toilet flushing, car washing, showering, bathing, lawn and garden watering, industrial use of potable water).  Human consumption (drinking) is a minor percentage of potable water use.

Thus, doodles desire for personal better tasting water will cause all those who are currently satisfied with the current EPA standard water quality to pay more.  If the total new cost of providing doodle a gallon of better tasting water per day were charged to doodle, it would likely be thousands of dollars per day.  Thus, doodle wants those who are currently satisfied with their water quality to subsidize his desire for increased personal convenience and taste standards. 

... Mountaineer

[MachineGhost]

But the problem is, of course, the capital investment required.  No profit-seeking organization is going to cover it.  There's not enough profit to be had anymore since most everyone is busy buying bottled water.  Easier to just go with the path of least resistance.  That's the "flaw" of unregulated capitalism.

A profit-seeking organization covers trucking in water, so why wouldn't they cover piping it (which we've established is more efficient)?  What if everyone could get Crystal Geyser water on tap?  Everyone wins... consumers get the product they want for less money, business makes a profit, and far fewer plastic bottles end up in the ocean.

Are you going to foot the gigantic bill?  Are you going to negotiate with thousands of governments that own the public easements?  How will you get an assurance that all your efforts will return a profit?

Fortunately, the solution is already at hand.  Its called Public-Private Partnerships (3P).  The private side raises the capital from investors in the capital markets, the public side guarantees a long-term contract to the private side.  The private side also gets to use the traditional ROI analysis and can chosoe to only fund those projects that are profitable.  No "bridges to nowhere" or "make work" here!  Several private highways and some bridges are already operating under this model and 3P will continue to grow as cash-strapped localities wake up to the potential and outsource the whole enchilada to the free market.  Win-win!

[doodle]

There may be another consideration re. doodle’s proposal to create a more costly but higher quality piped potable water supply.

Currently, piped in potable water is by law required to meet government (EPA) minimum standards.

doodle would prefer his water taste better so he does not have to carry a supply with him when he desires a drink.

Improving potable water quality will likely cost more both in chemicals required for ongoing treatment and investment in new water purification generation and transmission facilities.

doodle’s proposal will not only increase the cost of potable drinking water (likely only a few cents per day per person) but also increase the cost correspondingly for all other uses of potable water (e.g. laundry, toilet flushing, car washing, showering, bathing, lawn and garden watering, industrial use of potable water).  Human consumption (drinking) is a minor percentage of potable water use.

Thus, doodles desire for personal better tasting water will cause all those who are currently satisfied with the current EPA standard water quality to pay more.  If the total new cost of providing doodle a gallon of better tasting water per day were charged to doodle, it would likely be thousands of dollars per day.  Thus, doodle wants those who are currently satisfied with their water quality to subsidize his desire for increased personal convenience and taste standards. 

... Mountaineer

This is a solid argument....but why is the water quality in some places so much higher than in others? What makes chicagos water so great while mine is full of heavy metals and tastes like a swimming pool?

[MachineGhost]

This is a solid argument....but why is the water quality in some places so much higher than in others? What makes chicagos water so great while mine is full of heavy metals and tastes like a swimming pool?

If I had to guess, its probably related to unions or lack thereof.  And poorer, rinky dink counties in FL just don't command the stature, tax revenues and talent that a metropolis would attract.  Less customers to service = less groundswell of complaints and potential riots.  Governments only respond to force or threat of force, not lack of profit.