some of the animals are more equal than others
on this animal farm. -- j
.

The enviros & climate alarmists want no part of a solution, because they helped cause the problem. And no surprise, they're using Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics to blame anyone else. Further reading: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/41...

Since when did water become a right? It's not a right, it's a value. Without it we cannot survive. But even so, because we cannot survive without it does not mean we are entitled to it without earning it. The "collective" water need is not even about water, but the collective asserting itself over the individual in an ideological battle for supremacy. Jerry Brown and the California legislature were given numerous warnings about this issue many years ago and took no action. Nuclear desalination plants, or reverse osmosis, or new pipelines. Were these implemented? No. Why? "Special interests." Special, indeed.

Well, up here we have PLENTY of water that I would be glad to sell maybe even give to those poor liberals in Kalifornia.

So, California has had money for recent grandiose plans for high speed rail, infrastructure, and free healthcare and education for more illegal immigrants as well as having a large number of global warming alarmists warning of rising sea levels, but they can't drain some from the ocean and desalinate?!?!? Nuts!

Given all our technology, there must be a way to get water to these people who want it and are willing to pay for it.

Parts of the Central Valley are at or near sea level and less than 100 miles from the Pacific Ocean. Start near Sacramento and tunnel at a depth of 50 feet below sea level to the Ocean. Meanwhile purchase land and have it excavated down to the -50' level in an area to be determined (a couple of miles wide, 30 to 50 miles long for e.g.). At the end of a year you have a Great Inland Sea from which vast quantities of water evaporate, move to the Rocky Mountains, condense and precipitate out. Restoring the rivers and waterways "changed" in the 20th Century. The tunnel could continue South under higher areas which could be lined with industrial windmills to lift the water to a second basin. It could then continue to Death Valley to irrigate the farmlands (after that evaporation, condensation, precipitation cycle). As a side benefit mineralogical industry could thrive, salt could be farmed, aquaculture could thrive and recreation could be created. All for a reasonable sum of taxpayer money.

I've been to Rancho Santa Fe. It should be called Rancho Santa Claus. Unfortunately, in this case, the bastard is right. If water was managed by a private firm, it would raise the price in order to ration it in that manner. However, if it were a private concern, I doubt if the drought would be affecting residents or farmers. There are many ways to conserve water in anticipation of a drought, but it would require foresight, investment, and incentive, none of which the state has.

I agree: This is about control and not about water. It is important that there be no desalination plants and no solution.

Jan

This follows the same logic as tacking a hefty tariff on gas-guzzling luxury vehicles. If the wealthy can afford it, let them pay and be happy. Class envy is pathetic.

Droughts come AND Droughts go!!!!! Take away the politicians hysteria and the media hype and you have a weather cycle. That is not to deminish the seriousness of it, but the pols see it as an opportunity to raise more money and take control of the water. Texas ended there State of Emergency for drought by issuing a State of Emergency for flooding when the State was covered with 33 Trillion gallons of rain... CA drought is an 11 Trillion gallon deficit. It is stupid public policy coming from Sacramento that is making the effects much more severe.

If they ever solved the problem, they couldn't use it to bash taxpayers over the head with continually. The goal is to extend the crisis as long as possible without solving the problem!

Because, in the view of the environmentalists, the solution to the problem is always making sure that people have less. The people that don't matter, that is, the enlightened ones can then consume more with a good conscience because they are working toward "saving the Earth".

Note it is always "working toward" because the plans never actually would achieve the goal.

The title of the article is correct - we're not equal... WE have the water, you do not. If you want water like those of us in the north state, develop your own resources. I know a good well driller or 2, and I'm sure that Lockheed Martin would be HAPPY to develop and build Desal plants that would give you ALL the water you think you're entitled to loot from everyone else...

Of course, that would rely on INDUSTRY, which I am sure would really not sit well with your hyperlib constituents down there...

What pisses me off... to no end... is while we are asked, pleaded, demanded, and legislated to do with less of the resources we have, and even some locales up here will fine those with green lawns, they feel it's their RIGHT as Southern Californians to pump water into their lawns, run it down their drains, and wash their cars, and then tell us how dare we ask them to --their-- part...

What astounds me is that they have a huge problem and won't even consider desalinization plants to address the needs.

Maybe they can buy their water from the CEO of Nestle'.

Dog, Iit appeared to me they did not want to have to be "bothered" with such trivial things as that, they just wanted to have their stuff given to them and pay whatever was demanded, I guess they have lots of people they can squeeze to get more money. Usually they work for large companies and get huge salaries that the company then lays off 100 or so employees to compensate for. Then the companies go bust and need a government bail out. Hopefully El Nino willl really deliver aall the water they can ever ask for this winter and then they can start over.

Excellent point. I believe this is the solution. Let money and the free market determine the allocation of scarce resources. Lettings prices rise will increase local revenue, enabling local suppliers to find alternate sources or improved methods for obtaining water. Or trucking it in will help out-of-state suppliers, which will increase their demand and so their prices, which will help distribute the cost of the drought to other states. Either way, rationing (cutting supply without reducing demand) always causes and exasperates shortages.

Obviously these people aren't bribing the right looters.
They live in a desert.
Wake up and smell the cactus.
Or move to a more free market location than CA.

This seems to be the inherent flaw in big government, in that the lawmakers have no skin in the game, therefor have nothing to lose when the Grand Scheme blows up.

It's one thing to give advice from a position of cover; it's something else entirely to risk it's merit at the point of attack.

I think the well-to-do should be able to use all the water for lawns, golf courses, pools, etc. that they can pay for. Simply hire tanker trucks and drivers to haul the water in from states that have a surplus. Problem solved.