Story Comments

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

We as a people have imbued the government with the responsibility of protecting resources from pollution and assuring the quality of the water delivered to us. While we may define that as a 'right' to clean water, we must also recognize that such oversight comes at a cost. A 'right' doesn't necessarily equate to the resource being free. Someone living 'off the grid' may collect rain water, but they still likely pay taxes that pay for efforts to assure that rain doesn't contain excess acid.

The EPA protects the air we breathe (theoretically, at least), and we pay for their services through our taxes, so yes, we do pay to breathe.

Does the 'civilized' world have an obligation to step in and help when drought or famine threaten to wipe out whole populations? Yes, especially in regions where colonialism has wiped out indigenous self-sufficiency for the sake of corporate profit.

I think the question is better framed thus: Do the resource concerns of the people living within a region take automatic precedence over the resource concerns of business or govenrment entities. I would have to answer 'yes'.

1 Reply