Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Paladin2

A story about this yesterday has me scratching my head.

The citizens of Flint are refusing to pay their water bills, since the water is too nasty to use.

But they are also demanding that their water not be shut off for non-payment.

Why do they still want nasty water, even if it’s free?


4 posted on 01/21/2016 6:54:56 AM PST by kevslisababy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: kevslisababy

Toilet flushing. The water quality depends on exactly which pipes provide the water to a given abode.


5 posted on 01/21/2016 6:57:39 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: kevslisababy
But they are also demanding that their water not be shut off for non-payment.

Well, I think I understand what they mean, but maybe not. My water company charges a fee for re-instating service after shut-off. Also, my water company charges fees other than just that of the water. So, even if I use no water for the month, I still have a bill due because of these fees. Now, if I don't use any water because it's unsafe for me to do so, why should I pay for anything at all for that period of non-use? Then, why should I pay again to have my service turned back on when I refuse to pay for something unsafe and that I didn't use.

Now, if I used the water (hey, I can still flush with it), then I owe them for that, and the service fees related to it. And if that's what people are doing, then they should pay.

7 posted on 01/21/2016 7:02:32 AM PST by IYAS9YAS (I got nothin'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson