Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Metering water consumed in most cases is pretty good at finding sewage use, and water metering exists in most apartments or at least every one I've lived in. And this is how it already works in “most places”. Where it isn’t currently doing that you propose installing meters that aren’t already there, or determining pipe size to every user to determine the proper amount to charge for their shit. How is this not addi…
>And this is how it already works in “most places”. Where it isn’t currently doing that you propose installing meters that aren’t already there, or determining pipe size to every user to determine the proper amount to charge for their shit. How is this not adding complexity ? Sewage systems are built under permit virtually everywhere and the pipe size or drain units is documented. I live in about the least regulated…
You’re just repeating what I’ve already said. This already happens, but where it doesn’t you must add a bunch of overhead to make it work.
> You tax this in pieces, you can 'tax' at consumption in pieces without each consumer building their own billion dollars in infrastructure.
That is easy to say when you _already have_ tax payer funded infrastructure to start with. If you include the costs of building all the roads, ports, rail, as well as all the tax payer services that make it reasonable for employees to live in cities near the factories this stuff is made. What I’m trying to point out here is that your $5,000 shitter is going to be significantly more expensive once that’s taken into account. You are freeloading on work already paid for by others in order to make your libertarian idea remotely feasible.
> Apartment owners mortgage the cost of their sewage pipe yes, as well as the toilet they sit on.
Not talking about owners, I’m talking about renters. I’m talking about people who really ought not to have to make the decision to go into thousands of dollars of debt in order to shit just so you can say you didn’t have to contribute.
> If you want shitters for the homeless why don't you buy them some?
Because I couldn’t afford to. I’m not rich. However, society can.
> Taxes haven't been very successful at solving the problem
This is, at best, wild speculation. We do pay taxes, taxes are used to assist and shelter the homeless. You’re saying that because it hasn’t completely solved homelessness then it’s worthless and your little libertarian faction should be able to reap all the benefits of the things paid for by cities and pay nothing back into it.
The good news is that will never happen because it is so popular to provide social benefits through tax payer funds. Most people are unwilling to be such ardent boot lickers of the wealthy.