The conclusion I've argued isn't dependent upon money or even markets.  It's generalizable to just giving people moral agency over choices between water and movies. Water can be less valuable to people in water-abundant reasons than movie tickets, even if people are dying of thirst in areas that lack water and if the people in water abundant areas prefer helping those thirsty people over going to movies.  The fact that wasting water in an abundant area in order to go to a movie will likely have no impact on alleviating thirst in a scarce area allows for this conclusion.