Some purport that their quantity of usage of freshwater ought to be unlimited. Meanwhile, others argue for the opposite belief due to the restrictions in the total amount of such resources. Although both viewpoints retain their separate reasons, I agree with the latter point for several reasons.
On one hand, unconfined usage of freshwater guarantees a higher standard of living. For certain minorities living in secluded areas that do not have sufficient access to freshwater, the right to use it provides them with the opportunity to use freshwater without any unwanted control. Through this process, their levels of sanitation are increased and their health is benefitted, as they can maintain their hygiene by washing themselves more often with water. For instance, those living in third-world countries — such as Africa — would be greatly aided by receiving access to water, as they could use it to maintain sanitary living environments.
On the other hand, unregulated usage of water would significantly harm the environment and destroy the world in the long term. As many people — especially those coming from richer backgrounds — lack knowledge relating to the importance of conserving water, they are extremely likely to waste water in unnecessary aspects due to the lifting of a limit on water supplies. However, as the total amount of water in the world is exhaustible, their wastages could lead to water shortages elsewhere — such as in highly vulnerable third-world regions. In addition, the process needed to filter used water and reuse it is extremely energy-demanding. As a result, this procedure, combined with the massive amount of water wastage, could contribute majorly to climatic issues, such as global warming.
In conclusion, as choosing to not curb usages of water could lead to environmental harm and significant amounts of wastage, the existence of a water limit is necessary.