I’ve predicted for some time that the U.S will eventually restrict or ban bottled water. Of course, the parrots of received opinion like to opine that bottled water has “social costs,” but as with all EnviroSpeak, that never has a definition. It just makes one sound like they are concerned about the environment. “Social costs” is really a proxy for “we want to regulate, limit, or ban its production or use.” Or better yet, it means, “I don’t like it and therefore I think it should be banned.” Always remember that individuals typically have no problem forcing their choices on others by legislative fiat.
The New York Times published a piece titled “Quality of Bottled Water Questioned on Congress.” Of course, questioning its quality brings into question the “safety” factor, thereby setting bottled water up as something that is terribly dangerous to humans – especially the children! – which opens up the congressional floor for micro-regulation of the bottled water industry. From the NYT piece:
But at a hearing Wednesday, members of Congress were briefed on two new studies that question whether bottled water is safer than water directly from the faucet. Afterward, the committee sent letters to 13 companies requesting more information about the source of their water and how it is tested.
“Neither the public nor federal regulators know nearly enough about where bottled water comes from and what safeguards are in place to ensure its safety,” said Representative Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the oversight committee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, in a statement about the data the committee was seeking. “The majority of consumers purchase bottled water because of perceived health and safety benefits, but they actually know very little about the quality of the water they are buying.”
The point being that congressional miscreants, most of who are completely influenced by special interests that fund their re-elections and lavish lifestyles, should make the “safety” determination for us based on fraudulent and politically-influenced studies of water quality.
The thing that consumers need to realize is that bottled water, like anything else, is a consumer choice, and determinations of bottled vs. tap is to be left to each individual consumer based on his or her preferences. Allowing the paid agents of government to determine which is safer, bottled or tap, is like allowing Hewlett-Packard to decide which brand of laptop computer shall be required to be purchased by every consumer.
Those who hawk a rabid environmental, anti-human policy try to turn it into a collective safety issue in order to bring political (coercive) attention to their personal cause. Plastic bags, disposable diapers, water bottles, internal combustion engines - they all have to represent some “immediate danger,” otherwise the proponents of such nonsense would have to work hard to educate and persuade individuals of the benefits over the costs. But persuasion is a long and onerous course to take. Tyranny, as advanced by the political system, is a much easier route to enforcing an otherwise unattainable agenda.
