View Single Post
Old 06-06-2024, 10:36 AM   #89
Iowa_Flames_Fan
Referee
 
Iowa_Flames_Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Over the hill
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by topfiverecords View Post
You want businesses to take a financial hit, and employees to lose wages so you can shower?
Not what I said at all…. More just saying that if it’s really an emergency that requires city-wide curtailment, asking some but not all users to reduce their usage seems a bit like trying to bail out your boat with a colander.

I’m not necessarily criticizing the policy either—I’m not informed enough to do that, and am glad I don’t have to make those decisions. Just wondering what a non-mandatory request to only some water users to curtail their usage actually achieves in the grand scheme of things, and am happy to be corrected if I’m wrong.

With that said, if the actual rationale for treating businesses differently is “they will lose money” then it seems to me we either don’t have a real water crisis or we have no idea how to prioritize things in an emergency.
Iowa_Flames_Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Iowa_Flames_Fan For This Useful Post: