“Nobody has any idea how disastrous it’s going to be,” Mike Wade of California Farm Water Coalition told the Associated Press, as RT reports a growing number of communities in central and northern California could end up without water in 60 days due to the Golden state’s prolonged drought.
Zero Hedge
Here’s an idea. Stop subsidizing California avocado growers and permit Mexican imports. They’re much better avocados anyway, and they are growing them under rainfall, not irrigation.California dominates US [avocado] production, accounting for about 90 percent of the US avocado harvest. Nearly all of it takes place in Southern California, in a five-county region that straddles the coast from San Luis Obispo to San Diego.
Like the rest of the state, the southern coastal region is locked in a drought, and largely cut off from the flow of surface water from the state's big irrigation projects. The result has been strife in the avocado groves—sky-high water costs and a reliance on water pumped from underground aquifers.
Mother Jones
...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.
2 comments:
To enjoy "rights", humans must display an equal, or greater, amount of personal responsibility. Humans as a species are incapable of that level of thoughtful, longview responsibility. That in itself will eventually cause a collapse of the idea of democracy. E. Snowden is a self-serving, irresponsible freak.
well, you've left your comment on a post that doesn't seem appropriate. however, i finally got to it.
your comments are perhaps sincere, but they are not well thought out.
you begin with a totally illogical - or perhaps just plain incorrect - statement. "rights" exist without connection to responsibility. i would agree with your negative outlook on the moral state of many humans. i do think, however, some of your complaints could be argued to be cultural, and not species dependent. at any rate, "rights" are just that. you might not like it that people have certain rights, but in our country, at least according to our constitution, people are given rights by virtue of their citizenship, not by having earned anything. that's why they're called rights and not conditional states.
i can't see any logical route to a claim that edward snowden is self-serving, unless you are claiming that every action of any individual is self-serving, if only in an indirect way, if we consider a clear conscience gained by a particular action to be self-serving. it could be well argued that everything every person does is self-serving, if only to gain a particular mental state (eg. happiness, contentment, self-respect).
a freak? perhaps, if you define freak as being way off the norm. i can't think of many other people in his category.
irresponsible? to whom or to what? responsible may arguably be the most accurate descriptor of this young man.
Post a Comment