Is Leaving California More Practical Than Water Rationing? (Simi Valley, Nuevo: transplants, insurance)

[ViolentDisasters]

Originally Posted by GoldenZephyr

Exactly, leftists are worried about population, except when it entails bringing in millions of illegal immigrants, then no problems at all. Also, they pay reduced water rates under CA's low income utility provisions, so again, no worries right?

Funny how you can have a lush metropolis like Dubai with virtually no water at all, you know, except the giant sea they border, kind of like we border the Pacific Ocean.

Big Ag uses more than 80% of the water in the state, but accounts for a small percentage 2-3% of GDP, and yet, all the punishments, I mean "mandatory reductions" are aimed at the 20% of residential and small users. So essentially a 5% reduction, but with lots of pain for the little guy. That's something that leftists always seem to enjoy.

Lol Dubai? Dubai is supported by virtual slave labor, and the "lush" areas you're talking about are places for the handful of wealthy locals and international tourists.

[dexter14]

I see the liberal, mainstream media is doing its job with their scare tactics. That way, when your water bills rise to make more money for this greedy state, you will think its for your own good. So many sheep....

California's water situation is troubling, but experts say decades worth of groundwater remain

No, California won't run out of water in a year - LA Times

[KingObeat]

Instead of wasting money on the high speed rail, the state should build some desalination plants on the coast.

[seain dublin]

Originally Posted by JeffSanDimas

Other states would guard their borders and not let us in!


Basically, this is what happens when you build mega cities in the desert. I am not surprised, although I am conscientiously refusing to comply with rationing due to my own feelings in regards to environmental regulations. Not paying the fines either. Gonna water my lawn as per course. I refuse to suffer because of the bad planning of our government.

Per your other post about your horrible roommate you're in a rental house with a few other college age guys, you don't own the house or the lawn.

Go ahead and water the lawn when you're not supposed to, and when your landlord gets a $500 fine, be ready to find another place to live.

That will solve your roommate problem, none of you will be living there.

[JeffSanDimas]

Originally Posted by seain dublin

Per your other post about your horrible roommate you're in a rental house with a few other college age guys, you don't own the house or the lawn.

Go ahead and water the lawn when you're not supposed to, and when your landlord gets a $500 fine, be ready to find another place to live.

That will solve your roommate problem, none of you will be living there.

I don't own the home or the lawn, but it is where I live. I moved to the Conejo area precisely because of how green and beautiful it is, no point in me living here any other way. I coouldve saved money and lived in Panorama City if I didn't want to live in a beautiful area.


Evictions take months, I will have graduated by then.

[DewDropInn]

Originally Posted by JeffSanDimas

, I am not here voluntarily even.

Sure you are. You're over 18 and it's highly doubtful someone has you chained to a eucalyptus tree.

Unhappy? Adios. You'll enjoy Arkansas. It's green, (when it isn't icy) it's pleasant, (when it isn't under a tornado watch) and it's full of unhappy Californians. You'll fit right in.

[JeffSanDimas]

Originally Posted by DewDropInn

Sure you are. You're over 18 and it's highly doubtful someone has you chained to a eucalyptus tree.

Unhappy? Adios. You'll enjoy Arkansas. It's green, (when it isn't icy) it's pleasant, (when it isn't under a tornado watch) and it's full of unhappy Californians. You'll fit right in.

I am moving after I graduate. I couldn't afford out of state tuition and this is where I was born and where my family is. For some people with more traditional values its hard to leave your family.

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by KingObeat

Instead of wasting money on the high speed rail, the state should build some desalination plants on the coast.

It's very expensive to desalinate water; however, spending money on a high speed rail makes zero sense for this state and would make much more sense using the money to find drought solutions.

California Turns to the Pacific Ocean for Water | MIT Technology Review

[opossum1]

Originally Posted by JeffSanDimas

I don't own the home or the lawn, but it is where I live. I moved to the Conejo area precisely because of how green and beautiful it is, no point in me living here any other way. I coouldve saved money and lived in Panorama City if I didn't want to live in a beautiful area.


Evictions take months, I will have graduated by then.

If you get eviction on your record, goodbye the dream of ever renting again for many years, think about it.

[Hardpan]

[quote=Hardpan;39089325]

Originally Posted by GoldenZephyr

Of course, because they've drained the reservoirs to keep river levels high for the delta smelt. CA should have much more water on hand, but instead no diversions to reservoirs, all for a fish.

I don't disagree that we've been in a particularly bad dry spell, it's just that there are many things that were already in place and could have been put in place to mitigate that, and they weren't, mostly because of the hard left governance of the state beholden to eco-oppression.

We could have fast tracked Desal plants years ago, instead, we're wasting billions on a choo choo to nowhere. The Carlsbad Desal plant costs about $1B dollars. Brown's choo choo to nowhere, $65-100B
That could be 65 to 100 new Desal plants that could replace a HUGE amount of water.

We could have built more reservoirs, we could have filled the ones we have. We could capture rainfall runoff, which is all shuttled right to the ocean, post haste.

We could force Big Ag to actually reduce their water usage by using drip irrigation and other techniques. Big Ag uses 80% of the water in this state, they've been asked to cut nothing. However, the little guy is asked to cut 25%, which amounts to only a 5% overall reduction in water usage, painful for the little guy, does nothing to help the drought. Big Ag could be asked to cut by measly 7.5% at it would result in 50% MORE water savings than we are doing now with these draconian reductions.

We do none of these things, why?[/QUOTE?
[
Money of course. The agricorps lobbyists at the capitol are very powerful.
.
Homeowners will be paying through the nose while big AG wastes water on
crops that are not a nessessity.

As for dams, let us not forget that the eco-terrorists have been trying to remove dams, not build new ones.

Originally Posted by JeffSanDimas

I am moving after I graduate. I couldn't afford out of state tuition and this is where I was born and where my family is. For some people with more traditional values its hard to leave your family.

What world are you living in , kid? You dont pay the water bill,the city can and will
shut it off and lock it. If you dont pay fines, you might even find that when you go to
renew your drivers license, that you wont be able to do so. The motor vehicle departments in all 50 states communicate with each other these days so no more deadbeats like you getting away scot-free, or didnt you know that? You have much to learn,
grasshopper.