Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
California’s water supply is shrinking rapidly (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
BladeRunner
Footballguy
So now that it has become a problem for CA, everyone else needs to drop everything and address it right away? You guys have had this issue for over a hundred years. This isn't something new.
Seems like this is an end-around to try and get people on board with taking their money under the guise of "climate change". I can't wait to watch how fast this money gets appropriated for other things on the liberal agenda and, once they have your money, "climate change" will suddenly cease to be a big issue.
Seems like this is an end-around to try and get people on board with taking their money under the guise of "climate change". I can't wait to watch how fast this money gets appropriated for other things on the liberal agenda and, once they have your money, "climate change" will suddenly cease to be a big issue.
Last edited by a moderator:
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
I’m…at a loss as to how to defeat this attitude. Scientific articles won’t do it, apparently. Record extreme weather conditions won’t do it. What will?
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Dude - you've had this problem for over 100 years - long before
Is the problem that you guys live in a desert-like climate?
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
The point I’m making is: either climate change is causing the problem, or it’s making an existing problem far far worse. Either way we have got to deal with climate change. We’re at the precipice of catastrophe if we don’t, that’s what all the scientists are telling us. When will we listen to them??
timschochet
Footballguy
As I wrote, I’m at a loss as to how to address this. All I will say is that this isn’t just my problem, it’s yours as well. And everyone reading this.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Spot on. Let’s address root causes:
1. Agriculture industry on CA uses too much water inefficiently
2. Too many people have moved to CA
3. Those people in CA are using water for personal purposes inefficiently
4. Climate change is reducing the water supply
Charge way more for water. Presto! Simple things will follow:
- the Ag industry will adjust and use less water
- people will contemplate higher water costs in their decision of where to live
- people (and businesses) will learn how to conserve water
- the above will free up scientists to figure out how much time and resource is required to address the climate change (supply) side of the equation
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
You don’t know that. You are making assumptions. You have no idea whether or not we can address the water crisis in CA by purely focusing on reducing demand/usage.
(btw - I don’t know either and don’t claim to. This is what we have experts for.)
BladeRunner
Footballguy
The problem isn't climate change, the problem is YOU and the rest of the people that live in CA.
A problem that de-facto exists because of the climate in general, you've made worse. And, as usual, now that CA made it worse it suddenly has become everyone else problem to solve. Why? So you guys can make it worse and then get bailed out again?
And then brag about how CA is so much greater than every other state and your economy is the X largest economy in the world?
Last edited by a moderator:
The General
Footballguy
Aren’t there drought issues all over the SW, Texas, etc?
Thanks for this, makes total sense. And my thinking how climate change affects the planet, and I could be totally wrong on this, is weather events are a little more extreme than in the past. The drought referenced in the article above is a little longer than normal. The hurricane season in the carribean and Atlantic is slightly longer than in years past with slightly more storms that are more intense. Subtle changes that greatly effect the planet but not big enough to change the minds of the people who think climate change is a scam.
timschochet
Footballguy
And the experts (all of them) are saying that climate change is at the heart of it and we have to deal with it.
The General
Footballguy
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I still remember the photos and videos of Hollywood celebrities and rich and famous ignoring CA water restrictions to have lush, green yards and gardens.
Keep in mind, these are the same people lecturing you on climate change and doing your part.
No, we have to deal with the lack of water. And I've already offered the solution to that. Mankind has dealt with issue after issue throughout history. Even if we assume you're right, that climate change is causing this, there is nothing we can do in the foreseeable future about climate change that will prevent the water crisis CA is experiencing. Of course, CA would be experiencing a water crisis regardless of climate change. Even you seem to acknowledge that. So, the solution to CA's water problem is desalination or some other solution if we can identify it. Muddying the discussion up with climate change will only delay the solution.
Why anyone listens to celebrities to decide anything is beyond me. If you're basing decisions in your life on what the guy who played the hulk in marvel movies is saying on twitter, you need to rethink your life.
timschochet
Footballguy
The problem with this solution is the same problem with the Green New Deal- you are trying to reduce consumption by punishing those who consume. It won’t work in our political system because the public won’t see immediate benefits and will then vote in the first politician who promises to end it.
We have got to find solutions other than penalizing usage, whether you’re talking about higher rates on water in California or higher taxes on gasoline nationwide. It will NEVER work. It’s a lazy solution IMO.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Yeah, I get that. We all get that. The problem with the activist types is that these people not only have the money and resource to actually do something AND also have a much bigger platform than average Joe's like you and me, are also the same ones preaching to you and me about climate change.
So when we see the loudest voices NOT doing what they preach, you can't expect anyone else to follow along.
timschochet
Footballguy
It’s not an either-or. We have to deal with California’s specific problems (I suspect your solution is the correct one) AND we have to deal with climate change.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
No they aren’t. The experts understand the issue is multifaceted. I’ve already shared multiple links with you in here. Here is another: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/05/_10_percent_of_california_s_water_goes_to_almond_farming.html
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
It doesn’t matter if it’s fair. It’s more. People won’t see it as fair if they’re used to paying less.
timschochet
Footballguy
I mean you just saw 40% of the population freak out over wearing masks. You think you can jack up their water bills and they won’t go crazy? Trust me they will. They will impeach the first politician who passes it. I’ve seen this game.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I think Tim think's you're talking about The Average JoeTM.
The gist I get from your posts is that people who are consuming MORE than what is normal - like businesses and rich celbrities and their mansions, yards and gardens - should be charged way more.
In fact, I would go as so far to give these abusers a quota. Once they've reached it - no more water for you until next month.
Last edited by a moderator:
True. This is the most maddening thing about both sides of the political aisle. Hypocrisy.
Not trying to argue, but isn't this similar to increasing the cost of oil/gas. It would hit the poor disproportionately and it would increase inflation.
Philo Beddoe
Footballguy
. It was a good line though 
dkp993
Footballguy
The big problem with the isolation of Cali water problems is the fact that Cali is the largest producer of food for the Country by a wide margin. What’s our problem is your problem too.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Go talk to your Dem and Progressive pals.timschochet said:
The Build Back Better bill has $500 billion in spending teed up. Manchin threw up on perhaps the most important provision (coal) but what can you do. He's still okay with the spending amount.
You say it's the #1 political issue? I agree.
So take all the other social welfare junk out of BBB and pass a climate spending bill tomorrow.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
1. So what?
2. Addressing inequality by bastardizing supply/demand for oil/gas/water is a really dumb approach
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I'm not sure of how the details would work, but we need to do something about on how to identify "abusers" versus normal, every day water use (drinking, dishes, showers, cooking, etc...).
Someone who has a sprawling 30 million dollar mansion shouldn't be able to use more water than someone who has a 1500 sq. ft. house.
Again, just spit-balling here so obviously there would be more details to hash out.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
What did we do 100 years ago when CA wasn't the biggest producer because, y'know, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY WATER!
dkp993
Footballguy
Well the US population was almost 1/4 what it is now (just over 100mil) and the population in general was more family farm based. We aren’t rolling either of those dials back so talking about practical solutions is probably a better idea then whataboutisms.What did we do 100 years ago when CA wasn't the biggest producer because, y'know, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY WATER!
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
I believe that if it were attempted, 100% of Republicans, plus Manchin and Sinema, would vote against it and kill it,
That being said I’m certainly in favor of trying.
Yeah. I guess you could do an escalating price or something. Your first x gallons cost one price, then over that it gets progressively more expensive per gallon. You'd probably have to do something different for farmers, maybe based on land size or something.
Water is a human necessity. I think pricing the poor out of water is probably a pretty big deal.
timschochet
Footballguy
??? water bills are based on usage. So the guy with the mansion is already paying tons more than the guy with the 1500 sf house. Not quite sure what you’re proposing here.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Grace Under Pressure
Footballguy
Some version of this seems about right. Consumption based pricing seemingly has to be a factor.
Addressing supply through desalinization seems fairly promising.
No offense to almond farmers, but there are a lot of substitutes for almonds. If that's responsible for 10% of water usage, it seems like an obvious area of focus.
timschochet
Footballguy
And he’s ignoring the practical reality. It’s not the poor who will complain if you jack up prices. The poor rarely complains; they usually accept their misery. The people who will complain the loudest are the middle class. They will see a $200 increase on their water bill and they will go ape####. You will see them at every supermarket getting petitions signed to impeach the politicians that did this. In the end their petitions will cost the state millions more than the effort to raise the prices in the first place. Is this rational behavior? Of course not. But this is the society we live in. @Alex P Keaton‘s idea won’t work.
But if you let the price of water increase based on increasingly sparse supply, then that is the logical conclusion. The poor will be priced out.
timschochet
Footballguy
If you can do this and avoid raising prices on the middle class, more power to you. But I don’t think you can.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
1. It’s not “my idea” but I’ll gladly support rational pricing
2. Your alternative is to force everyone else in the country — and hey, the whole world — to shoulder the cost of addressing climate change so that California can continue to over consume water.
But you think my idea is unfair and impractical? Truly amazing.
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
Unfortunately the California Coastal Commission (a body of unelected bureaucrats with immense decision-making authority) doesn't want them.dkp993 said:
Similar threads
