We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
San Fran Democrats were the ones demanding rationing...for others.
Classic case in point. Liberals want everyone to sacrifice and consume less UNLESS it going to affect them personally. Then heaven forbid they do with a little less to serve the greater good.
A unsolvable problem.. Combine environmental regulations with uncontrolled population growth and you have a disaster in the making.. Conservation can not solve this problem.. It only provides talking points for a government up to its ears in dust..
Think big like nuclear powered desalination / power plants.. Power and water at the same time..
But then again California isnt ready to turn its back on its other talking points.. Like wind and solar..
No, just stop trying to grow rice in the desert. That would go a long way towards solving the problem.
There are solutions, but most require shutting down the EPA to get them done.
Build more storage with a few Hydro dams, that can also supply more power.
Other problem agencies are the US Fish & Wildlife Service, US Army Corps of Engineers and NOAA Fisheries.
a lot of tough question regarding water in California - but one is easy - San Francisco drowned Yosemite's spectacular Hetch Hetchy Valley - the only time any of America's national parks have been so desecrated - it is time for them to invest in storage outside Yosemite National Park
And to export their water from the Delta, Spreck.
How is that bucket challenge doing in CA?
Wasting water, what else.
Here's an idea ...divert the Hetch Hetchy water to areas in need rather than give it to the Bay Area Libs, Queers and Trannies!!!
Where San Francisco's water comes from-http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...
E V E R Y issue " progressives" claim concern over is fake.
No, they really do believe in killing unborn children, right up until 1 minute before birth, or is it one minute after?
Water shortage and yet those in libs in California, especially those who elected Pelosi want to bring in more and more illegals to California to suck up even more water. Keep all those illegals in California but drink only your water if you can find any.
".... libs in California, especially those who elected Pelosi want to bring in more and more illegals to California....."
Anyone that voted for Bush or Obama, voted for 8 years of the illegal alien invasion.
Well, of course. Rules - and water usage limits - are for the little people.
This should come as no surprise to anyone. The elitists know what's coming, hence the militarization of the police. What I don't get is why they hate the average citizen so much as to let these illegal hordes in to suck up even more of these resources.
LIBS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW. !!!!!!!!!!
How is it that California can pledge $68 billion for a high speed train but cannot build a few $1 billion desalination plants? Just another liberal dumb-a$$ run paradise.
Is there any other kind?
(1) As has point pointed out below, San Francisco uses less water per capita for personal use than any other city in California. Every lawn in the Valley better be brown before they share SF's water.
(2) San Francisco is not stealing water from any farm. All of the water in the Hetch Hetchy flows from large mountains owned by the federal government. The farmers don't have any more right to it than the cities.
(3) Agricultue uses 80% of California's developed water supply. And agriculture provides only 2% of California's economy.
(4) Farmers pay a fraction the cost of water of what we in the Coastal cities pay. If we all paid one free-market price (it's called CAPITALISM), the farmers would use their water more efficiently and stop numbnut practices like growing flood-field rice in the desert.
So, you don't like benefitting from the bay area's economy and financial and tech industries?
I congratulate you on your conservation of water ....but..But that 80% usage provides 100% of your food.If they paid what you do for water what would your food cost?The rules of capitalism says a lot more. Or you as a consumer could opt to buy just that cheaper, sewage fertilized Chinese crap for your dinner table.It would really help the water usage situation if less people were using water, like those here illegally.A lot of this problem is of your own making..It's easy to accuse, harder to find a solution until you honestly examine the causes of that problem.Israel has no water problems, they use desalinization plants. Why don't you?Do you pay the federal government for their water from their mountains?.Isn't it only fair though that if others need you provide?"From each........ to each according to his needs"
Desalination on the scale of California is not economically feasible. The cost to power the plants far outweighs the water production.
The San Francisco Bay Area made a great deal for 'Hetch Hetchy' and manages it very well. Subsidizing farms and agricultural production is the antithesis of capitalism.
Without water, the kinky weirdo inhabitants of San Francisco might move here to the reservation. Give 'em their water.
I thought they would be great quarantined on the last island of the Aleutian Chain.
The rich Hollywood crowd will always get what they want over the peasants needs. Decrapio has declared war on the "common man" to save the planet.
Ah, the progressive pervs living in their little fantasy "bubble." They are ably "represented" by queen, "let them eat cake," Pelosi. Ain't unbridled hedonism grand?
The most liberal city in the country, now to taste dirty water..
This article makes no sense. Is the SF Bay area even in a drought? Does the water used in the SF Bay area leave less water for San Joanquin? Why should residents in the SF Bay area have water restrictions if they have a plentiful water supply? Just because they're in the same state doesnt mean the water supply is the same everywhere. The state covers a large area and conditions are very different between the north and the south. Drought doesn't follow our borders.
San Francisco's water ?
But SF steals water from Inland
It's the same old story - urban populations always take from rural people on the premise that the sheer number of bodies entitles them to whatever they can grab. That's why they rig the political system to favor densely populated urban areas, impose high fees and charges on the things they produce while maintaining control of the markets to minimize what they have to pay for rural products.
"That's why they rig the political system to favor densely populated urban areas." Uh, you mean DEMOCRACY?
But hey, tell you what - you want a free market, you can have it. Let's just sell California's water on the free market! No more artificially low prices for agribusiness.
No I'm talking about GERRYMANDERING where the urban controlled political machines carve up rural areas so that the voices of rural people are negated by the overwhelming numbers of urban dweller who vote themselves ever increasing services and pass laws solve their own problems that are detrimental or at best inconvenient to rural and agrarian people. Do you understand that there places in the US with an overwhelming amount of fresh water available that have to use one gallon flush toilets? That there are villages miles from major highways or railways that have to pay taxes to support mass transit? That there are farmers that who have to let there crops whither so that city people can keep their landscape pretty and green?
KEEP VOTING DEMOCRAT, YOU STUPID BASTARDS!!
Picture this: your neighbor knocks on your door and says:
"Chuck, you know our hours at the factory have been cut. And I know you've been careful with your spending over the years. You have no credit cards, no debt, and you've managed to put a bit in the bank...But see, I've spent all my money. And I owe big on my credit cards, and I've got payments on my car and boat and jetski. So give me some of your income, and some of your savings, because I need to pay for all my stuff."
What would your reaction be?
San Francisco has ALREADY cut back on water use. San Francisco uses less water per person for personal use than any other city in the state. You can read about that below. Guys, as long as Fresno has green lawns, and as long as agribusiness is making the dubious decision to try to grow flooded rice in the desert, you don't need our saved water.
Agriculture requires water.Sodomy does not
The chart is affected by so many outside factors, it means nothing. How about SF get water locally instead of stealing it from inland? Not only does SF steal water, they are trying to stop the creation of more reservoirs. Selfish Friscans.
From whom are we "stealing" it from? The Hetch Hetchy water all falls on mountains owned by the Federal government.
Does anybody actually fall for this?
The reason San Francisco has water available is because San Francisco already conserves far more than the rest of the state. San Francisco uses less water per capita for personal use than any other major city.
The cities in the Valley (Modesto, Fresno, Sacramento, etc) use THREE TIMES as much water per capita for personal use. Here's the source on that:
Hypocrites, you waste water massively, and then complain about San Francisco. Get the log out of your own eye.
The cite above is only for PERSONAL water use. It doesn't even start to measure the use of water for growing rice in places that God intended to be desert. That's another whole issue.
San Francisco doesn't waste water on yards, and neither should the Central Valley residents. Most residential water goes to water lawns. It's time for Valley residents to recognize that they live in a DESERT and let their yards go brown. Until then, no, you may not have any of the water that we so carefully conserved.