Should companies be allowed to stop selling services to people who refuse to pay?

[Nakura]

The City of Detroit has come under fire from the United Nations (lol), who accuse the city of "gross human rights abuses" for shutting off water utilities to those who refuse to pay their bills. What do you think, should companies be allowed to stop selling services to those who refuse to pay?


Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/detroit-...ater-shutoffs/

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Interesting subject my friend.

To briefly just input my preliminary thoughts, out of hand i generally believe that a private company should be allowed the basic right of discontinuing a service that someone refuses to (or can't) pay for. You wouldn't for instance allow a person to take jeans, a car (Or Electricity) from you without paying what's owed in the transaction. If they refuse to pay- that's their choice and they then get the consequences.

BUT. When it comes to water, and this particular case, i really do consider water to be a basic human right for everyone- as such i think it's rather stupid that private companies are the one's who deal with water as it shouldn't be treated as a commodity. Instead Water use should be run by the State to it's citizens, levied from the collective public purse. So in the current context, i find it strange anyway that companies are the ones selling the water in the first place!

[Sphere]

BUT. When it comes to water, and this particular case, i really do consider water to be a basic human right for everyone- as such i think it's rather stupid that private companies are the one's who deal with water as it shouldn't be treated as a commodity. Instead Water use should be run by the State to it's citizens, levied from the collective public purse. So in the current context, i find it strange anyway that companies are the ones selling the water in the first place!

The Detroit Water and Sewerage Department supplies water in Detroit. Not a private company. It is currently $5 Billion in debt.

The overall public debt in Detroit is something like $18 Billion.

[hellheaven1987]

The problem can actually be easily solved by asking government to pay for them.

The Detroit Water and Sewerage Department supplies water in Detroit. Not a private company. It is currently $5 Billion in debt.

Interesting; as far as I know in US a lot of local government only control the sewage but not water.

[conon394]

Well Dante and OP the case is a little gray as we are not really in the case of Detroit talking about a private company but a public utility.

On the one hand if you don't pay for long enough it seems reasonable to loose service. However since in an urban area you don't have option of putting in a septic system, burning your garbage and drilling a well the public utility I think it does owe the people more than just 2 months or so and done. Payment options, deferments say if you lost a job etc. should be part of the mix. Afterall it has no competition thus it should be held to the highest standard when dealing with all of its customers - but it is not - below

The real critical issue is that the Utility is in fact not pursuing cooperate accounts as tightly or harshly as it those of people least able to have time, resources or education to contest or pay or work out options. That strikes me as Detroit born 'mitten' native as profoundly unjust for a public utility to do no matter what the overall budget situation is in Detroit.

Example:

http://www.metrotimes.com/Blogs/arch...ater-shut-offs

I love my home town for all its warts and decay and de-industrialization and crime and well name all the other problems. But to see a public institution of the city hammer the poor while giving the rich/corporations a 'reach around' makes me ashamed to even admit I'm from Detroit and Michigan, worse yet to see the State and Judges abet that is well - F- the Man!

At some point you are really dead beat and your life is screwed and you have face that, but rich dead beats or corporations should not get the silk glove while the poor dead beats get the iron fist.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

The Detroit Water and Sewerage Department supplies water in Detroit. Not a private company. It is currently $5 Billion in debt.

The overall public debt in Detroit is something like $18 Billion.

Ahh my apologies then, i brushed over the article and thought it had been privatized (like the UK's water suppliers)

Though as Hellheaven has in my view quite rightly pointed out, why not change the payment model? Ideally it should come out of standard public taxes straight from the federal level (or state i guess depending on your views on such things!) That way you'd never had this situation really.

Well Dante and OP the case is a little gray as we are not really in the case of Detroit talking about a private company but a public utility.

On the one hand if you don't pay for long enough it seems reasonable to loose service. However since in an urban area you don't have option of putting in a septic system, burning your garbage and drilling a well the public utility I think it does owe the people more than just 2 months or so and done. Payment options, deferments say if you lost a job etc. should be part of the mix. Afterall it has no competition thus it should be held to the highest standard when dealing with all of its customers - but it is not - below

The real critical issue is that the Utility is in fact not pursuing cooperate accounts as tightly or harshly as it those of people least able to have time, resources or education to contest or pay or work out options. That strikes me as Detroit born 'mitten' native as profoundly unjust for a public utility to do no matter what the overall budget situation is in Detroit.

Example:

http://www.metrotimes.com/Blogs/arch...ater-shut-offs

I love my home town for all its warts and decay and de-industrialization and crime and well name all the other problems. But to see a public institution of the city hammer the poor while giving the rich/corporations a 'reach around' makes me ashamed to even admit I'm from Detroit and Michigan, worse yet to see the State and Judges abet that is well - F- the Man!

At some point you are really dead beat and your life is screwed and you have face that, but rich dead beats or corporations should not get the silk glove while the poor dead beats get the iron fist.

Ahh thanks for clarifying mate, again apologies for misreading! I took this to be a straight case of private rights vs public 'good' for want of a better word.

So from what i amateurishly understand, it's more a case of the department going after the 'easy payments' of the lil guy over corporate debts? Interesting article too cheers.

Again just to briefly input, surely actual government control over the water would be a better and fairer solution for citizens? In terms of water coming out of the collective public purse and not paid for as a separate and individual expense. It would solve all these issues in a heartbeat.

[Phier]

AThough as Hellheaven has in my view quite rightly pointed out, why not change the payment model? Ideally it should come out of standard public taxes straight from the federal level (or state i guess depending on your views on such things!) That way you'd never had this situation really.

Detroit is currently answering the question "What happens to a major city when nature reclaims it." Detroit as a city currently has very little reason to exist.

Google "Detroit decay" as an image search.

[Sphere]

Again just to briefly input, surely actual government control over the water would be a better and fairer solution for citizens? In terms of water coming out of the collective public purse and not paid for as a separate and individual expense. It would solve all these issues in a heartbeat.

I consider myself a leftist, but consumers should pay for the amount of water they use. People/companies should have a direct incentive to conserve water, or in a place like Michigan (which doesn't have supply issues), reduce the volume of waste water needing treatment which in most places is the biggest expense water utilities have.

If you want to augment the income of the poor, do it through the tax code or welfare. But leave the proper economic incentives in place. When you don't and instead try to manipulate a market through things like rent control, unlimited water, etc. you often get really perverse outcomes.

[Phier]

"When there is genuine inability to pay, human rights simply forbids disconnections," said Catarina de Albuquerque, one of the experts. She is one of the two experts planning to visit Detroit Saturday. They're expected to hold a press conference Monday to announce their findings.

[Napoleonic Bonapartism]

Water should of course be available to all, up to a certain point - those who use what can only be termed excessive amounts should be charged. Of course what is deemed excessive has to factor in personal considerations; health etc. Same goes for all basic necessities.

[Mayer]

I don't think water supply should be handled by private companies, to be honest (except when the customers are big demanders).
edit: damnit, didn't read that it was public

It is of course the logical conclusion for every for-profit corporation to cease services for consumers who refuse to pay, it's a loss/waste of money to continue in such a case.
Maybe a compromise would be to limit the supply (a standardized ration) for people in debt? They get the incentive to pay without losing access outright.

[Treize]

They should be allowed to sell the people who refuse to pay.

[hellheaven1987]

"When there is genuine inability to pay, human rights simply forbids disconnections," said Catarina de Albuquerque, one of the experts. She is one of the two experts planning to visit Detroit Saturday. They're expected to hold a press conference Monday to announce their findings.

Right, so what is her opinion about Israel's public control of Palestinian water usage?

[Denny Crane!]

So if government put basic water manual pumps on every resident block, boom problem sorted. Want it pumped to your house, pay.

[Phier]

Right, so what is her opinion about Israel's public control of Palestinian water usage?

Don't care, not this issue, and not a "rights" issue, but a territory/treaty one.

[daelin4]

I think water should be restricted, though the method of implementing that might be understandably difficult.

But there's a difference between unable to pay and refusing to pay. Also, the amount used. Half-hour showers aren't exactly necessary. Refusal to pay ought to be interpreted as deliberately taking advantage of a service.

So if government put basic water manual pumps on every resident block, boom problem sorted. Want it pumped to your house, pay.

Actually it might be just as effective if it was free: only the most determined of wasters will waste their own time pumping more water than they need, especially if the pump was communal, ie someone else might be using it. It would encourage water management and sharing. It would also look bad on you by everyone else on the block if you're spending far more time pumping water or reasons that are likely not as urgent as, say, drinking.

And if they want more convenient service, pay for it.

[Denny Crane!]

That is what I figured, I really think the idea that people and businesses not all of whom simply can not afford it just get it anyway is a bad one.

[Mangalore]

I don't think water supply should be handled by private companies, to be honest (except when the customers are big demanders).
edit: damnit, didn't read that it was public

It is of course the logical conclusion for every for-profit corporation to cease services for consumers who refuse to pay, it's a loss/waste of money to continue in such a case.
Maybe a compromise would be to limit the supply (a standardized ration) for people in debt? They get the incentive to pay without losing access outright.

The issue is however if water supply counts as a basic service of society, thus is the monopoly of the state for every citizen to be supplied either via a public service or a heavily regulated market. The weird thing is to have people that are too broke for paying water bills but wouldn't need general welfare aid in the first place.

[Denny Crane!]

I think Phier is correct though, in many ways Detroit is a dying city and it should be left or even encouraged to rot and die. Like a forest after a bushfire whatever is left will be much healthier.

A similar idea has been proposed for certain areas in the UK, rather than constantly trying to prop up an ailing area like Middlesbrough (certain parts anyway) let them go and you lose having to subsidise a failed area and all the resulting social problems that happen there.

[sabaku_no_gaara]

Water is a basic right according to the UN, and it's barbaric to deprive your own people of water because they are too poor to pay the bill.


Don't you have Social tariffs for people under a certain income threshold for water, electricity, gas, and telephone? Maybe it's time you implemented them if you don't