Nestlé CEO says water is not a human right and should be privatized

originally posted by: PsychoEmperor
ok he actually believes the exact opposite and this whole thing is silly. Legitimate Huffington Post Article Here's what he actually said.

The water you need for survival is a human right, and must be made available to everyone, wherever they are, even if they cannot afford to pay for it.

Thanks for this. I've definitely heard this OP claim before so I had a feeling it was a repost click bait article and the fact that the Nestle CEO's words were never quoted or sourced in the article was a HUGE red flag. So I wanted to see if the thread could provide a legit source for the OP's claim and here you are debunking it.


This thread is a hoax.

originally posted by: Hewhowaits
a reply to: FauxMulder

How about Bloomberg?

Parts of Michigan are in a water crisis, and Nestlé isn't supplying them with drinking water without charge. Yet they are bottling there.
Link

I dont see that in your link. Here are a few things I did take from it.

Compared with the water needs of agriculture and energy production, the bottled water business is barely responsible for a trickle; in Michigan, it accounts for less than 1 percent of total water usage, according to Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).

In addition to the softball fields, Nestlé has helped Evart finance other upgrades, including new well houses for its municipal water, parks, and a fairground that hosts a dulcimer festival in July. For decades the fairground was also home to Evart’s Fourth of July fireworks celebration, attended by as many as 10,000 locals. In 2015, Nestlé discovered contamination in the watershed from perchlorate in those fireworks. The likely carcinogen is banned at certain levels only in Massachusetts and California, which is why Evart hadn’t been testing for it. But because Nestlé sells in all 50 states, says Szakacs, none of its water can test positive for the chemical. The company has since stopped pumping from affected wells and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to clean them up.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Hewhowaits

The point is, he is in no position to dictate what are, and what are not human rights. Only the majority get to decide that sort of thing, and he is not in it.

Not so, its only a matter of time . What a large corporation wants, a large corportaion gets.


This is why its so crucial that the political cheerleaders stop fighting and blaming each other and join forces to take back control of our gov't from the lobbyist.

a reply to: Hewhowaits

Wow that's big $$$'s!
Good on you sharing water, I'd do exactly the same.
It's fairly uncomplicated to get a borehole sunk on your own land here as well, a friend of mine had one drilled recently, cost him £9000. This of course depends on the local geology.

a reply to: Jefferton

Are you retarded? Ok never mind... Sorry

Now you know how it feels to be asked a stupid question.

a reply to: FauxMulder

You are clearly better at sourcing things faster than i. Help me out a little.
Why couldn't they bother to maintain their permit to pump and bottle in California for 27 years?
And where's the article about all the help they give flint michigan residents?

originally posted by: Hewhowaits
a reply to: FauxMulder

How about Bloomberg?

Parts of Michigan are in a water crisis, and Nestlé isn't supplying them with drinking water without charge. Yet they are bottling there.
Link

A simple google search shows that Nestlé donated 1.5 million bottles of water to school children in the lead contaminated area of Flint, Michigan last January 2016. No charge.

It seems you have personal biased opinions that are not based on any real facts.

Edit add: Washington Post article

Though a simple google search: Nestlé donates water...would provide many more articles from a variety of sources.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Please look at the brief vid on page one. I think there is some "reading between the lines" to do. This little speech sounds sort of like lip service and damage control. I will have to look further in to this. There is something about this guy I'm not sure I trust.

a reply to: YouOkayHun

Yes it was expensive, but necessary. 107 ft deep, through dolomite... Hard stuff. Clean water though.

a reply to: Hewhowaits

You're full of B..S!@ lol

a reply to: CynConcepts

Yes I don't like corporate takeover of things needed for basic life requirements. 1.5 million bottles of water is not going to affect the profits of Nestlé whatsoever. It's more of keep quite payment. They also gave the local government bottled water to use a month before it was made public that the water supply was tainted by lead.
I understand that local government is to blame for not announcing that beforehand - however who stands to benefit from every giant corporate deal that make billions-
Some government jerky who licenses and permits the company to do so, after a nice donation of course. ..
It isn't just Nestlé I don't like/ it's all megacorps.

a reply to: angeldoll

This has been circulating since 2005 and gets reposted on a near yearly basis to discredit Nestle and feed CT outrage. I'm not lying when I said I've seen this posted before.

Here's an article from 2013 about this.
2014
2016

Check this out. The more I read about this on a variety of sites, the more I don't like it. I don't trust him.

a reply to: Hewhowaits

Those quotes I posted are from the article you linked.

As for the permit thing in Cali, from what I just read the permit is for trucking. Maybe Nestle is lazy or cheap or both, maybe California should do a better job of enforcing permits, I don't know. But how many golf courses are in California?

Nestlé Waters North America issued a statement saying that it used 705 million gallons of water last year, which the company says is about the same amount of water needed to irrigate two golf courses.

Link

a reply to: angeldoll

Believe what you want, but this story has all the signs of a nothing burger that fringe media uses to pull conspiracy theorists' heart strings. For instance, you are posting a video from RT to prove your point.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

What is CT outrage? I am asking, as I don't know what it means. I'm not up on all modern acronyms.

Nevermind, just saw it on your last post.
Conspiracy theories.
Should have been obvious.

a reply to: Hewhowaits

CT stands for conspiracy theorist. So what I meant was that this is a click bait story targeting conspiracy theorists to get them riled up over nothing.

Nestle's response to "Does Peter Brabeck-Letmathe believe that water is a human right?"

"Yes. Our former Chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe passionately believes that water is a human right. Everyone, everywhere in the world, has the right to clean, safe water for drinking and sanitation.
His critics use a video interview that Peter gave in 2005 to claim that he thinks all water sources should be privatised. This is simply false." - www.nestle.com...

do i believe them? well i think that's obviously what they would say to counter criticisms.

originally posted by: Hewhowaits
a reply to: CynConcepts

Yes I don't like corporate takeover of things needed for basic life requirements. 1.5 million bottles of water is not going to affect the profits of Nestlé whatsoever. It's more of keep quite payment. They also gave the local government bottled water to use a month before it was made public that the water supply was tainted by lead.
I understand that local government is to blame for not announcing that beforehand - however who stands to benefit from every giant corporate deal that make billions-
Some government jerky who licenses and permits the company to do so, after a nice donation of course. ..
It isn't just Nestlé I don't like/ it's all megacorps.

Misplaced focus indeed. I do not blame corporations or even lobbyists. The blame falls on the government locally, state, and federally who fail to represent their citizens effectively. If one focuses on the corrupted politicians, then the loopholes and side deals that you have an angst for, will be nullified.

a reply to: FauxMulder

Yes California should do better governing, as should nearly all states when it comes to due diligence.

As for the golf course thing, that's alot of water. To bad they didn't water the countryside instead- perhaps it wouldn't be burning right now.
I should add- I hate golf, so I am biased.