Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Hillary Clinton: "We Should Abolish the Electoral College..."
Comments
-
That he did.CirrhosisDawg said:
Your grandfather chaired the Riverside County GOP back in the day, correct (love the bar at the Mission Inn btw)? So you saw San Joaquin valley and Colorado river water flowing voluminously and transforming the Coachella into an Ag powerhouse. Same thing in the San Joaquin valley (CVP)and eastern WA (BPA) Water, power, fertile land -- all delivered by taxpayers. Sounds like crony capitalism at its finest.YellowSnow said:
There you go again KaiserKewg - your ability to miss the point never ceases to amaze. No shit, BOR and Army Corps projects help subsidize the cost of food production; I never said anything implying that wasn't the case. But those farmers are also earning a pretty nice living as a result of tax payer subsidized cheap water. And I don't have a problem with them doing so, per say. My observation here is that if you live in fucking rural American you need to understand a little of the history of how you get to exist out there in the first place and quite hating on the federales so much. Who built the dams? Not private enterprise. Who brought the electrical grid and roads the rural parts of the US? It was big fucking guvmint, paid for with city slicker tax dollars.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Even through farmers still use most (80%) of California's water and we can argue about the economic merits of subsidizing them, keep in mind those projects would have not gotten built without the political clout of the agriculture interest in CA in the 1930- 60s. Without that Southern California doesn't exist in the way it does now. Some of you fuckers probably think that would have been a good thing, but go fuck yourselves.
-
They have to fix the Delta and the Freeways before they worry about bullet trains.RaceBannon said:
Sounds like a responsible use to tax dollars to open up land for people and agriculture. Government at its finest.CirrhosisDawg said:
Your grandfather chaired the Riverside County GOP back in the day, correct (love the bar at the Mission Inn btw)? So you saw San Joaquin valley and Colorado river water flowing voluminously and transforming the Coachella into an Ag powerhouse. Same thing in the San Joaquin valley (CVP)and eastern WA (BPA) Water, power, fertile land -- all delivered by taxpayers. Sounds like crony capitalism at its finest.YellowSnow said:
There you go again KaiserKewg - your ability to miss the point never ceases to amaze. No shit, BOR and Army Corps projects help subsidize the cost of food production; I never said anything implying that wasn't the case. But those farmers are also earning a pretty nice living as a result of tax payer subsidized cheap water. And I don't have a problem with them doing so, per say. My observation here is that if you live in fucking rural American you need to understand a little of the history of how you get to exist out there in the first place and quite hating on the federales so much. Who built the dams? Not private enterprise. Who brought the electrical grid and roads the rural parts of the US? It was big fucking guvmint, paid for with city slicker tax dollars.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Not bullet trains to Fresno -
People forget that Orange County once grew oranges and Knott's Berry farm was real farm. When we went to Disneyland in the 60's it was in the middle of nowhere relative to the urban area it is today.
The fabled 909 along the 10 from Pomona to Redlands was citrus central too at the turn of the last century.
Those half million and above houses for sale once housed migrant workers. The former owner house go for more.
The workers lived in shacks, the owners in Craftsman homes -
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy) -
True. salemcooger is still a huge pussy.RaceBannon said:
Sounds like a responsible use to tax dollars to open up land for people and agriculture. Government at its finest.CirrhosisDawg said:
Your grandfather chaired the Riverside County GOP back in the day, correct (love the bar at the Mission Inn btw)? So you saw San Joaquin valley and Colorado river water flowing voluminously and transforming the Coachella into an Ag powerhouse. Same thing in the San Joaquin valley (CVP)and eastern WA (BPA) Water, power, fertile land -- all delivered by taxpayers. Sounds like crony capitalism at its finest.YellowSnow said:
There you go again KaiserKewg - your ability to miss the point never ceases to amaze. No shit, BOR and Army Corps projects help subsidize the cost of food production; I never said anything implying that wasn't the case. But those farmers are also earning a pretty nice living as a result of tax payer subsidized cheap water. And I don't have a problem with them doing so, per say. My observation here is that if you live in fucking rural American you need to understand a little of the history of how you get to exist out there in the first place and quite hating on the federales so much. Who built the dams? Not private enterprise. Who brought the electrical grid and roads the rural parts of the US? It was big fucking guvmint, paid for with city slicker tax dollars.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Not bullet trains to Fresno -
RaceBannon said:
People forget that Orange County once grew oranges and Knott's Berry farm was real farm. When we went to Disneyland in the 60's it was in the middle of nowhere relative to the urban area it is today.
The fabled 909 along the 10 from Pomona to Redlands was citrus central too at the turn of the last century.
Those half million and above houses for sale once housed migrant workers. The former owner house go for more.
The workers lived in shacks, the owners in Craftsman homes
-
Northwest water should go south to California. Letting all that snow melt and rain go into the ocean is a waste.
The Romans are shaking their head at us -
no. I wouldn't have.salemcoog said:
Again, you wouldn't be swapping tears and cum with dhdawg if your candidate would have won.AZDuck said:
well, it isn't like you give a shit what the Federales say on your guns n' religion compound anyway, but both Houses of Congress as constituted favor rural over urban dwellers in terms of voting power, as well as the other unwritten archaic practice that the two rural states of Iowa and New Hampshire have an outsized voice in who gets to be Prez in the first place... so...PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
When an archaic institution, in this case the electoral college, gives an unfair electoral advantage to one side, in this case the right. It's usually the other side that wants to fix the system.
Crazy, isn't it.
-
The system worked better before congress got a cap of 435 in 1911. Remove that cap for electoral votes only (we don't need a 2,000 seat congress) and it would be mostly fine.dhdawg said:
no. I wouldn't have.salemcoog said:
Again, you wouldn't be swapping tears and cum with dhdawg if your candidate would have won.AZDuck said:
well, it isn't like you give a shit what the Federales say on your guns n' religion compound anyway, but both Houses of Congress as constituted favor rural over urban dwellers in terms of voting power, as well as the other unwritten archaic practice that the two rural states of Iowa and New Hampshire have an outsized voice in who gets to be Prez in the first place... so...PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
When an archaic institution, in this case the electoral college, gives an unfair electoral advantage to one side, in this case the right. It's usually the other side that wants to fix the system.
Crazy, isn't it. -
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy) -
This! Race gets it. The Columbia wastes about 260,000,000 acre feet of water per year into the Pacific.RaceBannon said:Northwest water should go south to California. Letting all that snow melt and rain go into the ocean is a waste.
The Romans are shaking their head at us -
I've lived here since 1989 after graduating from UW. At the time, people all around me were moving out because they couldn't recognize the California that had been their home for decades. In the ensuing 28 years, I have to say I am flabbergasted by the pace of change I've experienced. So cal is manifestly different from I when I arrived here for graduate school. And of course, public policy is driven to accelerate benefits to the wealthy at the expense of the middle class leaving a distinct rich/poor divide. Nevertheless, there is no stop to the rapid course of change. We are on ever-moving 18 mph treadmill. Things always seem to work out, however haphazard.RaceBannon said:People forget that Orange County once grew oranges and Knott's Berry farm was real farm. When we went to Disneyland in the 60's it was in the middle of nowhere relative to the urban area it is today.
The fabled 909 along the 10 from Pomona to Redlands was citrus central too at the turn of the last century.
Those half million and above houses for sale once housed migrant workers. The former owner house go for more.
The workers lived in shacks, the owners in Craftsman homes -
Not exactly. Most of So Cal's water comes from in state- i.e., diverted from the Northern watersheds in the State and diverted south through the CA State Water Project; and for LA, their Aqueduct from the Owens Valley. So Cal gets a portion from the Colorado River, but it's nowhere near the majority of their water. They also have a shit ton or reservoirs that capture rainfall and certain places - e.g., Orange County - have massive aquifers.salemcoog said:
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_interstate_water_pipelines_to_CaliforniaRaceBannon said:Northwest water should go south to California. Letting all that snow melt and rain go into the ocean is a waste.
The Romans are shaking their head at us
There have been a few plans to do that. -
From cankles eternal suckfest to water rights. All in a days work at HH headquarters.
-
The Northwest isn't going to divert its water to California just so they can water their lawns instead of paint them.
-
Every poast is like a box of chocolates.Swaye said:From cankles eternal suckfest to water rights. All in a days work at HH headquarters.
-
I've ordered food delivery twice today
-
I'm sure that works great during the 7 days per year when it rains. So you're saying, and just let me get this clear, cuz I'm a little slow, that So Cal has an abundant in state water supply?YellowSnow said:
Not exactly. Most of So Cal's water comes from in state- i.e., diverted from the Northern watersheds in the State and diverted south through the CA State Water Project; and for LA, their Aqueduct from the Owens Valley. So Cal gets a portion from the Colorado River, but it's nowhere near the majority of their water. They also have a shit ton or reservoirs that capture rainfall and certain places - e.g., Orange County - have massive aquifers.salemcoog said:
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Is that what you're really trying to say? -
Actually it's better wasted than providing sustenance for all of the polluters in So Cal that are contributing to climate change, no ?YellowSnow said:
This! Race gets it. The Columbia wastes about 260,000,000 acre feet of water per year into the Pacific.RaceBannon said:Northwest water should go south to California. Letting all that snow melt and rain go into the ocean is a waste.
The Romans are shaking their head at us -
Fer fucks' sake
ARE YOU NOT INTO TRAINS POAST O' THE DAY
The California bullet train is a necessity, if people are going to continue to cram in there. California is slightly larger than Japan, with much more urbanized land (if you can believe that - Cali housing density versus Japanese housing density).
Either that or sit on the freewayz until the end of time, or join the Elon Musk or Self-Driving Car cargo cults.
Or, you know, embrace a technology that's been successful everywhere it's been tried. Yes, America does it's level best to fuck up train travel, but it works well here too in places with sufficient population density and train frequency (East coast and Chicago).
FUCK -
Oh, and @YellowSnow
I enjoyed Cadillac Desert, but some of his points are from the Ehrlich-Malthus School of Environmental Scaremongering. You have to take the more extreme stuff with a grain or three of salt, and look at the points which are supported by data or solid science.
And that aquifer under the San Joaquin Valley is going, going, gone. They need to build an aqueduct from Oregon just to re-charge that fucker. -
The Duck gets it.AZDuck said:Oh, and @YellowSnow
I enjoyed Cadillac Desert, but some of his points are from the Ehrlich-Malthus School of Environmental Scaremongering. You have to take the more extreme stuff with a grain or three of salt, and look at the points which are supported by data or solid science.
And that aquifer under the San Joaquin Valley is going, going, gone. They need to build an aqueduct from Oregon just to re-charge that fucker. -
I guess all the reports of towns literally going dry 2 years ago were completely false then? The sharts showing groundwater dropping to un precedented levels up and down the state measured by satellites was all bunk???CirrhosisDawg said:
In years when it rains and snows at average or above, we are fine for 40+ million people and the worlds 6th largest economy. We are even doing a lot better in water storage. There are massive new resources (underground and reservoirs) in the Central Valley and riverside county. The wet winter pattern generally predominates (and it rains like a motherfucker that makes this Seattle native cringe when it's occurring-- not seattle mist and drizzle but a fucking shitstorm for days). Every decade or so, however, is interrupted with a 1-3 year drought. This last one was the most severe. In the end, CA is absolutely water independent with multiple back-up resources (water storage, reduction in use and desalinization) if necessary. Water is CA's weakest defense. If, however, you think it's defeating the single largest wealth creating entity in the world you are wrong.salemcoog said:
I'm sure that works great during the 7 days per year when it rains. So you're saying, and just let me get this clear, cuz I'm a little slow, that So Cal has an abundant in state water supply?YellowSnow said:
Not exactly. Most of So Cal's water comes from in state- i.e., diverted from the Northern watersheds in the State and diverted south through the CA State Water Project; and for LA, their Aqueduct from the Owens Valley. So Cal gets a portion from the Colorado River, but it's nowhere near the majority of their water. They also have a shit ton or reservoirs that capture rainfall and certain places - e.g., Orange County - have massive aquifers.salemcoog said:
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Is that what you're really trying to say?
It's hard for me to believe that one wet year fixes all that. -
Yes, most of So Cal's water comes the Sierra Nevada and Southern Cascades (both in state) and local aquifers and reservoirs. And then depending on the municipality some comes from the Cool-er-rado River, but not as much as you might think. In normal year, they have enough water believe it or not. In the severe drought years, they fucked.salemcoog said:
I'm sure that works great during the 7 days per year when it rains. So you're saying, and just let me get this clear, cuz I'm a little slow, that So Cal has an abundant in state water supply?YellowSnow said:
Not exactly. Most of So Cal's water comes from in state- i.e., diverted from the Northern watersheds in the State and diverted south through the CA State Water Project; and for LA, their Aqueduct from the Owens Valley. So Cal gets a portion from the Colorado River, but it's nowhere near the majority of their water. They also have a shit ton or reservoirs that capture rainfall and certain places - e.g., Orange County - have massive aquifers.salemcoog said:
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Is that what you're really trying to say? -
It's hard for me to believe your dads didn't bonk you on the head and use the milk to raise a pig instead.salemcoog said:
I guess all the reports of towns literally going dry 2 years ago were completely false then? The sharts showing groundwater dropping to un precedented levels up and down the state measured by satellites was all bunk???CirrhosisDawg said:
In years when it rains and snows at average or above, we are fine for 40+ million people and the worlds 6th largest economy. We are even doing a lot better in water storage. There are massive new resources (underground and reservoirs) in the Central Valley and riverside county. The wet winter pattern generally predominates (and it rains like a motherfucker that makes this Seattle native cringe when it's occurring-- not seattle mist and drizzle but a fucking shitstorm for days). Every decade or so, however, is interrupted with a 1-3 year drought. This last one was the most severe. In the end, CA is absolutely water independent with multiple back-up resources (water storage, reduction in use and desalinization) if necessary. Water is CA's weakest defense. If, however, you think it's defeating the single largest wealth creating entity in the world you are wrong.salemcoog said:
I'm sure that works great during the 7 days per year when it rains. So you're saying, and just let me get this clear, cuz I'm a little slow, that So Cal has an abundant in state water supply?YellowSnow said:
Not exactly. Most of So Cal's water comes from in state- i.e., diverted from the Northern watersheds in the State and diverted south through the CA State Water Project; and for LA, their Aqueduct from the Owens Valley. So Cal gets a portion from the Colorado River, but it's nowhere near the majority of their water. They also have a shit ton or reservoirs that capture rainfall and certain places - e.g., Orange County - have massive aquifers.salemcoog said:
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Is that what you're really trying to say?
It's hard for me to believe that one wet year fixes all that.
-
Believe what you want to believe (I'm sure you will). But here are the facts: sierra snow pack is strong, ground water reserves are recovering from near depletion, and reservoirs are full.salemcoog said:
I guess all the reports of towns literally going dry 2 years ago were completely false then? The sharts showing groundwater dropping to un precedented levels up and down the state measured by satellites was all bunk???CirrhosisDawg said:
In years when it rains and snows at average or above, we are fine for 40+ million people and the worlds 6th largest economy. We are even doing a lot better in water storage. There are massive new resources (underground and reservoirs) in the Central Valley and riverside county. The wet winter pattern generally predominates (and it rains like a motherfucker that makes this Seattle native cringe when it's occurring-- not seattle mist and drizzle but a fucking shitstorm for days). Every decade or so, however, is interrupted with a 1-3 year drought. This last one was the most severe. In the end, CA is absolutely water independent with multiple back-up resources (water storage, reduction in use and desalinization) if necessary. Water is CA's weakest defense. If, however, you think it's defeating the single largest wealth creating entity in the world you are wrong.salemcoog said:
I'm sure that works great during the 7 days per year when it rains. So you're saying, and just let me get this clear, cuz I'm a little slow, that So Cal has an abundant in state water supply?YellowSnow said:
Not exactly. Most of So Cal's water comes from in state- i.e., diverted from the Northern watersheds in the State and diverted south through the CA State Water Project; and for LA, their Aqueduct from the Owens Valley. So Cal gets a portion from the Colorado River, but it's nowhere near the majority of their water. They also have a shit ton or reservoirs that capture rainfall and certain places - e.g., Orange County - have massive aquifers.salemcoog said:
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Is that what you're really trying to say?
It's hard for me to believe that one wet year fixes all that. -
There's a valid poont here. Just by virtue of living in Southern California one uses a lot more energy then say the typical Seattle or Portland resident. It takes a shit ton of juice to pump all that water down from Northern California (or the Colorado River) and over the local mountain ranges into Southern California. The only exception to this is the LA Aqueduct (Owens River) which is all basically gravity fed.salemcoog said:
Actually it's better wasted than providing sustenance for all of the polluters in So Cal that are contributing to climate change, no ?YellowSnow said:
This! Race gets it. The Columbia wastes about 260,000,000 acre feet of water per year into the Pacific.RaceBannon said:Northwest water should go south to California. Letting all that snow melt and rain go into the ocean is a waste.
The Romans are shaking their head at us -
Of course, AZ Duck, but he gets the history right on of how all that shit got built which was my original point.AZDuck said:Oh, and @YellowSnow
I enjoyed Cadillac Desert, but some of his points are from the Ehrlich-Malthus School of Environmental Scaremongering. You have to take the more extreme stuff with a grain or three of salt, and look at the points which are supported by data or solid science.
And that aquifer under the San Joaquin Valley is going, going, gone. They need to build an aqueduct from Oregon just to re-charge that fucker. -
Not the case, fren.CirrhosisDawg said:
Believe what you want to believe (I'm sure you will). But here are the facts: sierra snow pack is strong, ground water reserves are recovering from near depletion, and reservoirs are full.salemcoog said:
I guess all the reports of towns literally going dry 2 years ago were completely false then? The sharts showing groundwater dropping to un precedented levels up and down the state measured by satellites was all bunk???CirrhosisDawg said:
In years when it rains and snows at average or above, we are fine for 40+ million people and the worlds 6th largest economy. We are even doing a lot better in water storage. There are massive new resources (underground and reservoirs) in the Central Valley and riverside county. The wet winter pattern generally predominates (and it rains like a motherfucker that makes this Seattle native cringe when it's occurring-- not seattle mist and drizzle but a fucking shitstorm for days). Every decade or so, however, is interrupted with a 1-3 year drought. This last one was the most severe. In the end, CA is absolutely water independent with multiple back-up resources (water storage, reduction in use and desalinization) if necessary. Water is CA's weakest defense. If, however, you think it's defeating the single largest wealth creating entity in the world you are wrong.salemcoog said:
I'm sure that works great during the 7 days per year when it rains. So you're saying, and just let me get this clear, cuz I'm a little slow, that So Cal has an abundant in state water supply?YellowSnow said:
Not exactly. Most of So Cal's water comes from in state- i.e., diverted from the Northern watersheds in the State and diverted south through the CA State Water Project; and for LA, their Aqueduct from the Owens Valley. So Cal gets a portion from the Colorado River, but it's nowhere near the majority of their water. They also have a shit ton or reservoirs that capture rainfall and certain places - e.g., Orange County - have massive aquifers.salemcoog said:
Correct. But the point is that So Cal would dry up in a month if they closed the gates to Lake Mead and other areas outside of the state where the wa wa comes from.YellowSnow said:
Your water doesn't go to Southern California.salemcoog said:
I agree. We should save our water by diverting it away from Southern California. I prefer my oranges from Florida anyway. Problem solved.YellowSnow said:
This is essential reading by the way, if you want to dig a little deeper into the subject.salemcoog said:
They aren't subsidizing the farmer, they subsidize the food you eat. Now go back to your topicalchica handle and poast a shitty pole. It's your wheel house.YellowSnow said:
Them cunty folk's hypocrisy about big guvmint makes me laff from time to time. Us here city slickers are the ones that subsidize their roads, schools, etc. If you're a farmer that irrigates at all in WA, CA, ID, etc, all that infrastructure came from big government boondoggles and they only pay pennies on the dollar for the actual cost of the water.PurpleThrobber said:
I'm sure you didn't do it on purpose - but those people who live in 'the country' don't much like city folks telling them how to manage their lands from behind desks.AZDuck said:it would be nice if people rather than acreage decided who runs the country
(yes, I had to edit that. it takes time to be pithy)
Is that what you're really trying to say?
It's hard for me to believe that one wet year fixes all that.The Central Valley aquifer extends for about 400 miles under the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys. The subterranean water, some of which seeped into the ground 10,000 to 20,000 years ago, constitutes the state’s largest reservoir. Agricultural pumping from the aquifer has gone unregulated and unmonitored for decades, and there are no good figures on how much water has been removed.
It remains unclear how California’s current, unusually wet winter may affect the state’s aquifers, if at all, researchers say.
