djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,124
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 19, 2015 11:53:46 GMT -5
you want to see that problem exemplified? go visit Prescott or Phoenix, AZ. they get almost no rainfall in that state, but golfing and lush lawns are everywhere. imo: we should ban lawns. they are stupid. No, just charge them appropriately for there water usage. A lot of water is priced so that the more you use , the cheaper it gets. not every free market solution works. in this case, you are basically saying that is OK for rich people to waste water, so long as they can pay for it. the only problem with that idea is that most people don't view water as a private resource, fc.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,891
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 20, 2015 7:18:35 GMT -5
I heard a news report yesterday that talked about one possible solution to the Western water shortages all along the Colorado river basin - making a big ass pipe from the Mississippi River, where they often have too much water, out to the Colorado.
In theory I understand the appeal of this idea, but logistically, that would have to be some big ass pipe - and think of all the lift stations, and the energy required to move such a large volume of water over such a long distance - and over the Rockies.
This would require an enormous amount of money to build, and a significant amount of money to keep it running (all those lift stations!!!) so that would be some damn expensive water.
However, if that end of the country had enough water, they could increase their agricultural output, so I guess we would have to calculate the tipping point between cheaper food and expensive water.
And the big western urban areas ought to pay a big chunk of the cost - this would keep their real estate values from plummeting, after all, and keep their industrial base from relocating.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,891
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 20, 2015 7:31:33 GMT -5
i agree. but i doubt we agree on what we are likely to see. I would be interested in how you would see it playing out. As I said, I predict their would be massive civil unrest at some point and that the defecation would hit the rotary oscillator - a societal meltdown if you will. It wouldn't happen right off the bat like it would if the power grid went down because there would still be water available, just not easy to get. See, I also see a potential for widespread unrest, but not because the lower classes get greedy and want more entitlements, but because the current business model is to pay the very top tier of company executives enormous salaries and bonuses, while paying the lowest tier of employees the very least the company has to pay, and still get asses in the seats. Growing income inequality may be our launching point into massive civil unrest. You see it as an entitlement grab, I see it as a revolt by the lower classes to try to regain the American dream of a living wage, where one person working one full time job could earn enough to support himself. Some companies apparently fear the same thing and are taking steps - Aetna boosted the salaries of their lowest paid employees up to $16 per hour starting in April. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-leadership/wp/2015/01/15/companies-that-boost-their-own-minimum-wage/Unfortunately I think Aetna, Ikea, the Gap and Costco are going to remain in the minority, as most American companies will continue to funnel the company profits into enormous executive pay packages and company dividends, while they view their lowest paid employees as little as legally possible, fighting any minimum wage increase with all the lobbying power they have.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Mar 20, 2015 8:55:04 GMT -5
Eric Holthaus did a series of articles on water usage called The Thirsty West in 2014 for Slate.com. I think it was 7 parts. It was interesting.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 20, 2015 10:49:54 GMT -5
There are close to a million lakes in Quebec alone. Perhaps it`s time to declare war on Canada.
Known as “la belle province” (the beautiful province) to its locals, Quebec is Canada’s largest province and home to approximately 7,900,000 people. Quebec is a vibrant multicultural province, often earning it recognition as the “Europe of North America”. Quebec is also famous for its vast forests, rolling hills and countless waterways. In fact, Quebec has over 1,000,000 lakes and waterways, giving it more fresh water than any other province.
www.canadavisa.com/about-quebec.html
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Mar 20, 2015 10:55:16 GMT -5
Yeaa, Go ahead, just rub it in welts.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 20, 2015 11:08:15 GMT -5
You can justify it by saying we have weapons of mass destruction.......poutine!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 11:13:51 GMT -5
I would be interested in how you would see it playing out. As I said, I predict their would be massive civil unrest at some point and that the defecation would hit the rotary oscillator - a societal meltdown if you will. It wouldn't happen right off the bat like it would if the power grid went down because there would still be water available, just not easy to get. See, I also see a potential for widespread unrest, but not because the lower classes get greedy and want more entitlements, but because the current business model is to pay the very top tier of company executives enormous salaries and bonuses, while paying the lowest tier of employees the very least the company has to pay, and still get asses in the seats. Growing income inequality may be our launching point into massive civil unrest. You see it as an entitlement grab, I see it as a revolt by the lower classes to try to regain the American dream of a living wage, where one person working one full time job could earn enough to support himself. Some companies apparently fear the same thing and are taking steps - Aetna boosted the salaries of their lowest paid employees up to $16 per hour starting in April. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-leadership/wp/2015/01/15/companies-that-boost-their-own-minimum-wage/Unfortunately I think Aetna, Ikea, the Gap and Costco are going to remain in the minority, as most American companies will continue to funnel the company profits into enormous executive pay packages and company dividends, while they view their lowest paid employees as little as legally possible, fighting any minimum wage increase with all the lobbying power they have. California's economy and population levels might be at a peak due to a limit of water availability. Unless the weather patterns change of course. At the continuing rate of population growth, there will soon be more areas like California, unable to support the sheer number of people present (and their economies). As population growth continues to accelerate, expect areas of "die back" to become a problem. People will continue to breed at a prodigious rate, negating any short term positives from wage equalization. If anything, wage equalization would allow for even faster population growth, as more kids would become more affordable for more people.
|
|
Artemis Windsong
Senior Associate
The love in me salutes the love in you. M. Williamson
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:32:12 GMT -5
Posts: 12,314
Today's Mood: Twinkling
Location: Wishing Star
Favorite Drink: Fresh, clean cold bottled water.
|
Post by Artemis Windsong on Mar 20, 2015 11:13:57 GMT -5
I have rellies in central California. Major concern for their well being. Any large bodies of fresh water are way to far to truck water in or pipeline. Over the last 20 years, water has been pipelined to the SW part of our state. That was a major, expensive undertaking. There is very little irrigation for the farms. They rely on rain and soil moisture. With the oil field and nasty, muddy trucks, a lot of the car washes are recycling the water by separating the dirt, etc. The newly built ones, of course.
|
|
Artemis Windsong
Senior Associate
The love in me salutes the love in you. M. Williamson
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:32:12 GMT -5
Posts: 12,314
Today's Mood: Twinkling
Location: Wishing Star
Favorite Drink: Fresh, clean cold bottled water.
|
Post by Artemis Windsong on Mar 20, 2015 11:16:55 GMT -5
What would Las Vegas, the driest large city in the U.S., be without all its hotels' outdoor water fountains and 60 plus golf courses. Las Vegas isn't exactly sitting with a full Hoover Dam and other dams in the area.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 11:18:07 GMT -5
You can justify it by saying we have weapons of mass destruction.......poutine! No need for any justification. You're in our area of direct influence (like Ukraine to Russia)). If we want that water, we'll just take it.
|
|
wyouser
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:35:20 GMT -5
Posts: 12,126
|
Post by wyouser on Mar 20, 2015 11:18:57 GMT -5
There are close to a million lakes in Quebec alone. Perhaps it`s time to declare war on Canada.
Known as “la belle province” (the beautiful province) to its locals, Quebec is Canada’s largest province and home to approximately 7,900,000 people. Quebec is a vibrant multicultural province, often earning it recognition as the “Europe of North America”. Quebec is also famous for its vast forests, rolling hills and countless waterways. In fact, Quebec has over 1,000,000 lakes and waterways, giving it more fresh water than any other province.
www.canadavisa.com/about-quebec.html
You're safe for now Welts, first we have those 10,000 lakes in Minnesota to plunder!
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,891
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 20, 2015 11:21:59 GMT -5
See, I also see a potential for widespread unrest, but not because the lower classes get greedy and want more entitlements, but because the current business model is to pay the very top tier of company executives enormous salaries and bonuses, while paying the lowest tier of employees the very least the company has to pay, and still get asses in the seats. Growing income inequality may be our launching point into massive civil unrest. You see it as an entitlement grab, I see it as a revolt by the lower classes to try to regain the American dream of a living wage, where one person working one full time job could earn enough to support himself. Some companies apparently fear the same thing and are taking steps - Aetna boosted the salaries of their lowest paid employees up to $16 per hour starting in April. www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-leadership/wp/2015/01/15/companies-that-boost-their-own-minimum-wage/Unfortunately I think Aetna, Ikea, the Gap and Costco are going to remain in the minority, as most American companies will continue to funnel the company profits into enormous executive pay packages and company dividends, while they view their lowest paid employees as little as legally possible, fighting any minimum wage increase with all the lobbying power they have. California's economy and population levels might be at a peak due to a limit of water availability. Unless the weather patterns change of course. At the continuing rate of population growth, there will soon be more areas like California, unable to support the sheer number of people present (and their economies). As population growth continues to accelerate, expect areas of "die back" to become a problem. People will continue to breed at a prodigious rate, negating any short term positives from wage equalization. If anything, wage equalization would allow for even faster population growth, as more kids would become more affordable for more people. Actually, the more educated and middle class a family becomes, the lower their birth rate is. A big chunk of educated professional women never have children. Unplanned pregnancy and unplanned birth for low income women are very high. go.nationalpartnership.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=30507&news_iv_ctrl=0&abbr=daily2_So if poor people get a bump in income and can afford to send their kids to college, their kids will most likely have fewer kids than their parents did.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 11:29:12 GMT -5
California's economy and population levels might be at a peak due to a limit of water availability. Unless the weather patterns change of course. At the continuing rate of population growth, there will soon be more areas like California, unable to support the sheer number of people present (and their economies). As population growth continues to accelerate, expect areas of "die back" to become a problem. People will continue to breed at a prodigious rate, negating any short term positives from wage equalization. If anything, wage equalization would allow for even faster population growth, as more kids would become more affordable for more people. Actually, the more educated and middle class a family becomes, the lower their birth rate is. A big chunk of educated professional women never have children. Unplanned pregnancy and unplanned birth for low income women are very high. go.nationalpartnership.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=30507&news_iv_ctrl=0&abbr=daily2_So if poor people get a bump in income and can afford to send their kids to college, their kids will most likely have fewer kids than their parents did. I've only have seen population increasing regardless of what happens in income or education. Globally, I don't think it's possible to elevate everyone to a US middle class standard of living. I don't have an answer to the problem. I can only see the unfeeling law of nature controlling it.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 20, 2015 11:38:44 GMT -5
You can justify it by saying we have weapons of mass destruction.......poutine! No need for any justification. You're in our area of direct influence (like Ukraine to Russia)). If we want that water, we'll just take it. Yep. I can see that happening. Or, if that peckerhead, Harper, is still in power, he'll just sell it to you. He's already sold us to Big Oil and foreign corporations in more ways than one.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 11:48:58 GMT -5
No need for any justification. You're in our area of direct influence (like Ukraine to Russia)). If we want that water, we'll just take it. Yep. I can see that happening. Or, if that peckerhead, Harper, is still in power, he'll just sell it to you. He's already sold us to Big Oil and foreign corporations in more ways than one.
I was just being facetious about the taking it. In this global economy, it just isn't Canada's resources being sold somewhere else.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,474
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 20, 2015 12:24:20 GMT -5
What would Las Vegas, the driest large city in the U.S., be without all its hotels' outdoor water fountains and 60 plus golf courses. Las Vegas isn't exactly sitting with a full Hoover Dam and other dams in the area. I know. That is why I commented on it. Water wasted on outdoor water fountains and golf courses. The water evaporates and its gone.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 12:35:00 GMT -5
Las Vegas isn't exactly sitting with a full Hoover Dam and other dams in the area. I know. That is why I commented on it. Water wasted on outdoor water fountains and golf courses. The water evaporates and its gone. Well it's not really gone. Besides, those public fountains are beautiful works of art.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,474
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 20, 2015 12:37:17 GMT -5
I know. That is why I commented on it. Water wasted on outdoor water fountains and golf courses. The water evaporates and its gone. Well it's not really gone. Well it sure ain't gonna fall any time soon back on Las Vegas! It may pop up later in tornadic storms in yours and mine areas.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Mar 20, 2015 12:38:57 GMT -5
The Romans built aqueducts to bring water to Rome well over 2000 years ago. You telling me that "the mighty American civilization" can't do today what they did so long ago? Did the romans have any Catterpillar or John Deer to dig arround? Or at least a decent pipe system? None of it and yet they did it. And not just in Rome. But I guess they had enough will power to do it and not just sit around and bitch and moan about. If an oil company has enough money to invest in building thousands of miles of pipeline that could possibly polute, how come a state like California just waits arround for something to hapen? And Weltschmerz "poutine"...really? That's a new low!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 12:41:28 GMT -5
Well it's not really gone. Well it sure ain't gonna fall any time soon back on Las Vegas! It may pop up later in tornadic storms in yours and mine areas. I'll fill a tanker truck and sell it back to them as green recycled water.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 12:44:52 GMT -5
The Romans built aqueducts to bring water to Rome well over 2000 years ago. You telling me that "the mighty American civilization" can't do today what they did so long ago? Did the romans have any Catterpillar or John Deer to dig arround? Or at least a decent pipe system? None of it and yet they did it. And not just in Rome. But I guess they had enough will power to do it and not just sit around and bitch and moan about. If an oil company has enough money to invest in building thousands of miles of pipeline that could possibly polute, how come a state like California just waits arround for something to hapen? And Weltschmerz "poutine"...really? That's a new low! Because it's mostly a liberal state and their waiting for someone else to pay for it. (Sorry, I couldn't resist as I duck and run for cover)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 12:56:17 GMT -5
you want to see that problem exemplified? go visit Prescott or Phoenix, AZ. they get almost no rainfall in that state, but golfing and lush lawns are everywhere. imo: we should ban lawns. they are stupid. No, just charge them appropriately for there water usage. A lot of water is priced so that the more you use , the cheaper it gets. Isn't that how it works when there's distribution fees on water bills. That's the way it works here anyway. Distribution fee + water rate.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Mar 20, 2015 13:04:22 GMT -5
Jma 23, I think you got that backwards. While generaly speaking they are as a state a more liberal state, they also pay for their s..t. See for example the fact that they just built a new bridge over San Fran's Bay that cost them about $7 billion On the other hand you have states like Louisiana that after being hit by a hurricane wants the fed to rebuild a city that shouldn't be there in the first place. Did I mention that Louisiana is absolutely conservative? So, wrong argument, don't run, just duck for cover and whatever Weltschmerz decides to call you!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 29, 2024 19:37:07 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2015 13:14:33 GMT -5
Jma 23, I think you got that backwards. While generaly speaking they are as a state a more liberal state, they also pay for their s..t. See for example the fact that they just built a new bridge over San Fran's Bay that cost them about $7 billion On the other hand you have states like Louisiana that after being hit by a hurricane wants the fed to rebuild a city that shouldn't be there in the first place. Did I mention that Louisiana is absolutely conservative? So, wrong argument, don't run, just duck for cover and whatever Weltschmerz decides to call you! Not only was it a bad joke, it was a stupid erroneous one also. Can't win today. Although the poutine was aimed at a previous poster. Small comfort there.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Mar 20, 2015 13:26:02 GMT -5
Liberal of conservative states are at the end of the day run by politicians and I don't believe that class of people has any allegiance or affiliation.
And to support your point/argument about them waiting for someone else to pay for, I personaly believe you are right. But then again that is a political game: "look what I've done for you Californians so elect me again!" type.
One day, when the good people of the state will realize that they are in bind in regards to water, they will react.
And thruth to be told, the farmers are using the most of the water and if I remember correctly this is a realy old issue. A lot more water is used and is needed than what California has in the southern part of the state.
Maybe the federal government should pay them not to farm and let the farmers in the MidWest do their jobs and use the land for the intended purpose.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,124
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 20, 2015 16:48:35 GMT -5
Liberal of conservative states are at the end of the day run by politicians and I don't believe that class of people has any allegiance or affiliation. sure they do. they have absolute allegiance to their main doners, somewhat less to their smaller doners, and none whatsoever to their non-doners.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Mar 20, 2015 20:50:56 GMT -5
Jma 23, I think you got that backwards. While generaly speaking they are as a state a more liberal state, they also pay for their s..t. See for example the fact that they just built a new bridge over San Fran's Bay that cost them about $7 billion On the other hand you have states like Louisiana that after being hit by a hurricane wants the fed to rebuild a city that shouldn't be there in the first place. Did I mention that Louisiana is absolutely conservative? So, wrong argument, don't run, just duck for cover and whatever Weltschmerz decides to call you! Not only was it a bad joke, it was a stupid erroneous one also. Can't win today. Although the poutine was aimed at a previous poster. Small confort there. What are you talking about? The poutine wasn't aimed at anybody
|
|
Artemis Windsong
Senior Associate
The love in me salutes the love in you. M. Williamson
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 19:32:12 GMT -5
Posts: 12,314
Today's Mood: Twinkling
Location: Wishing Star
Favorite Drink: Fresh, clean cold bottled water.
|
Post by Artemis Windsong on Mar 21, 2015 20:53:38 GMT -5
The Romans built aqueducts to bring water to Rome well over 2000 years ago. You telling me that "the mighty American civilization" can't do today what they did so long ago? Did the romans have any Catterpillar or John Deer to dig arround? Or at least a decent pipe system? None of it and yet they did it. And not just in Rome. But I guess they had enough will power to do it and not just sit around and bitch and moan about. If an oil company has enough money to invest in building thousands of miles of pipeline that could possibly polute, how come a state like California just waits arround for something to hapen? And Weltschmerz "poutine"...really? That's a new low! Oil companies have money. California does not.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Mar 22, 2015 9:03:50 GMT -5
The Romans built aqueducts to bring water to Rome well over 2000 years ago. You telling me that "the mighty American civilization" can't do today what they did so long ago? Did the romans have any Catterpillar or John Deer to dig arround? Or at least a decent pipe system? None of it and yet they did it. And not just in Rome. But I guess they had enough will power to do it and not just sit around and bitch and moan about. If an oil company has enough money to invest in building thousands of miles of pipeline that could possibly polute, how come a state like California just waits arround for something to hapen? And Weltschmerz "poutine"...really? That's a new low! Oil companies have money. California does not. But there is a federal budget where we allocate billions/trillions to fight wars against enemies that don't exist or help bring water to places arround the world that we never heard of and don't have the money to take care of the needs of the people living in our yard! That's a new kind of F"" up!
|
|