Had the third option of toilet paper with aloe and Vitamin E been available in 1963, the entire British government could have come to a paralytic halt for over a generation.

I don't know if a country whose EPA decided to save water by mandating the use of toilets that are so small they have to be flushed twice(increasing water use by about 50% overall) should be laughing at this.

I see. So the state can occasionally, perhaps even often, be slow, bureaucratic, or inefficient. Sometimes comically so. Please name for me an organization, of any note, that is not. And assuming that our well-being must, at least some of the time, be placed in the trust of an organization of some sort, is there no solace to be had in the fact that at least our government - along with the British government, for that matter - is at least nominally democratic?

The fact that I may trust the government with the issue of protecting me from nuclear attack does not mean I should cede to it the decision of how much water my bathroom flush toilet should need. The true role of government exists but it is infinitesmal compared to the octopus it has become.

Bart:

I see. If that's what you think, in the most abstract sense, then I have a few questions for you. Try to forget, for the moment, the matter of whether the government screwed up in mandating low-flow toilets.

Should water utilities be privatized?

During a water shortage, does the state have an interest in regulating your water usage? Should it have the authority to do so? If not, how should the community at large respond to a shortage?

In the absence of any state-mandated, or state-promoted, checks on demand, would it be reasonable for the state to raise taxes or rates in order to increase the water supply? If so, does it bother you that everyone else would be forced to pay for your high-flow toilet use (note that this scenario plays out the same way if water utilities are privately owned)?

Water is an easily replenishable resource. It is not really finite. If the existing supply of reservoirs doesn't provide enough water, build more or deepen your existing ones and pass the cost on to the consumer.

Water is private, a state-regulated monopoly owned by the family of (surprise!surprise!) a former governor. And in a metropolitan area with 47 in of rainfall a year, there is rationing every summer.

For me to cede to the state the right to limit my water usage, it better damn well be a real emergency, not a phony one due to poor planning or incompetent management. The private sector is just as capable of utter stupidity as the public sector.

I pay for my water and you pay for yours. It's just that simple. It's just like showering, I take two 10 minute showers every day, and if you have a Gallic aversion to hygiene, all that would happen is that I pay for my usage and you pay for yours. If my toilet uses more water per flush and we flush the same number of times, then I pay more, it's just that simple. If I use more than a certain amount of water per billing period, then I should arguably pay more for that excess, but then so should someone with a large family that uses more water.

Bart:

"I take two 10 minute showers every day"

Me and my buddies would like to have a litle chat with you about scarce resources.