DADPATROL

Honestly though, subsidizing the cost of removing lawns seems better to me. People need water to drink, bathe, and cook among other things. It doesn't make sense (to me at least) to drive up water prices for neccesary uses rather than disincentivising or prohibiting wasteful uses like that of lawns.

Not to mention less money for Doctors means its more difficult to cut through the $200,000 medical school debt they've incurred to achieve that title.

Do other countries do this? Also does tiered pricing apply differentially to differently sized households? Say I have a family of eight people living under one household (sounds like a lot but I know people who have had 4-5kids and grandparents living under one roof), they will obviously use more water than a couple or a single person. Will they wind up paying way more for water despite using it for their basic needs?