Some people believe that the state should rigorously manage the provision of fresh water, while others think individuals should have the freedom to use water as they feel fit. In this essay, i will discuss both views and i believe it is more beneficial if there are balance between the two perspectives.
Proponents of unlimited access to fresh water argue that individuals should have the freedom to use water as they want. This is because water is a gift given by nature and it should not be controlled or monopolized by anyone. This is also related to the principle of personal liberty and individuals should have control over water resources in their own nation. Furthermore, this will encourage people and organizations to use water for economic development purposes such as building water parks or aquariums. This can lead to increased productivity and prosperity for the country.
However, others in favor of strict government control argue that fresh water is a finite resource that must be managed carefully to ensure its availability for future generations. The state believes that without regulation, excessive usage could lead to depletion of water sources, ecosystem degradation, and even water crises. Moreover, if there is government intervention, water distribution will be more equitable and the state can balance water access between urban and remote areas. This leads to equitable water entrance and social stability.
In conclusion, I believe a balanced approach is necessary. Unrestricted usage of fresh water may lead to inefficiencies, and overconsumption if left unchecked. On the other hand, overly strict government control could stifle economic growth and individual freedom.
