Comment: it's not about private property rights

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: And he is right. (see in situ)

it's not about private property rights

I agree that the mention of him being Jewish was unnecessary. But I think what he is talking about is not merely about respecting private property rights, but rather the privatization of public water sources. It's the kind of thing done in public-private partnerships, where the Government gives the ownership of public property to a private organization who will then make a profit off of it while promising to maintain it and make a more efficient use of it. I suspect that he want's governments to give the ownership of water to Nestle(his company), so it's almost like he is saying that he wants the Government to give public property to him. Obviously just a push to profit at the expense of peoples rights. It's really a matter of removing your right to access what is currently public property. When all water is privatized, it's not unforeseeable that large organizations might try to monopolize water and render natural sources like rain unusable through pollution or whatever for the sake of profit, and may push to outlaw water filters because of something like a supposed terrorist figuring out how to make a bomb out of one. Yeah, let property owners sell their own water, but giving public water sources away to private companies concerned with profit doesn't seem right.