Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 67 of total 67 in this topic |
Maysho
climber
Soda Springs, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Nov 3, 2009 - 09:30pm PT
|
California's Deficit Of Common Sense
L.A. Times-11/1/09
By Rebecca Solnit
Opinion
California is rich. Even in the midst of a drought, we have lots of water, and in the midst of a recession, we have lots of money. The problem is one of distribution, not of actual scarcity.
This is the usual problem of the United States, which is not just the richest and most powerful nation on Earth now, but on Earth ever, and one of the most blessed in terms of natural resources. We just collectively make loopy decisions about how to distribute the money and water, and we could make other decisions. Whether or not those priorities will change, we could at least have a reality-based conversation about them.
Take water. My friend Derek Hitchcock, a biologist working to restore the Yuba River, likes to say that California is still a place of abundance. He recently showed me a Pacific Institute report and other documents to bolster his point. They show that about 80% of the state's water goes to agriculture, not to people, and half of that goes to four crops -- cotton, rice, alfalfa and pasturage (irrigated grazing land) -- that produce less than 1% of the state's wealth. Forty percent of the state's water. Less than 1% of its income.
Meanwhile, we Californians are told the drought means that ordinary households should cut back -- and probably most should -- but the lion's share of water never went to us in the first place, and we should know it.
Americans usually have fantastic visions of where our resources come from and go. A lot of Americans seem to believe that the federal government spends tons of money, rather than a small percentage of the federal budget, on the arts and foreign aid; but in fact, about half of discretionary spending goes to the military -- the largest and most expensive military the world has ever seen, one that costs nearly as much as all the other militaries put together.
In discussing the national financial crisis, the military was never really on the chopping block, even though its budget could, with a little paring, provide healthcare, education, environmental restoration, some cool climate-change adaptation and all the other pieces of a good society and a great nation. Do we really need several hundred military bases in more than 125 countries?
And all those expensive toys? And the research programs to do things like weaponize insects? Do we need them more than we need to keep children healthy?
Speaking of poor children reminds me of Sitting Bull, as good an authority on our economy as anyone, even if he wasn't an economist and even though he died in 1890. After the Lakota were defeated, he joined Buffalo Bill's Wild West show for a season, but he never got ahead financially. He gave the bulk of his earnings to the street urchins who hung around the show.
He was shocked that a nation powerful enough to conquer his people couldn't or wouldn't feed its own future. The white man was good at production, he concluded, but bad at distribution.
It's the same today. We have enough in this nation to feed, clothe, shelter, educate and provide medical care to everyone. If the will was there.
In California, the story is the same in spades. Take our state budget crisis. A British newspaper recently ran a rather melodramatic piece about California as a failed state and compared us to Iceland. It was a wacky comparison. Iceland went bankrupt because its bankers spent lots of money they didn't have. California is in conniptions because it has lots of money it won't spend.
I'm not talking about raising individual taxes, though it would certainly make sense to revisit Proposition 13, and we'd have an extra billion dollars if we hadn't phased out estate taxes.
But look at corporate taxes! According to the nonpartisan California Budget Project, if we taxed corporations the way we did in 1981, we'd have $8.4 billion more coming in. That would wipe out more than a third of the budget shortfall that led to the draconian cuts (and cover about what we spend annually on the world's second-biggest prison system).
We're home to the fifth-largest corporation in the world, Chevron, whose profits were $24 billion last year. Chevron has lobbied to keep corporate taxes low and to avoid paying an oil severance tax -- a tax on oil taken out of the ground (and we're abundant in oil too, for better or worse). Texas charges one, but we don't. A few years ago, Chevron worked hard to defeat Proposition 87, which would've levied a severance tax capped at 6% of the oil's value -- but Sarah Palin's Alaska raised its severance tax to 25%, a figure that would bring in an estimated $4 billion or more.
Examine the way that we changed corporate income tax policy in the crisis years of 2008-2009 to give a small number of corporations tens of millions of dollars a year in tax breaks -- $33.1 million apiece, on average, for nine corporations; $23.5 million to six others, according to the California Budget Project. There's money there, ripe for the picking, and powerful forces to prevent that from ever happening -- or maybe weak forces, because it's our Republican legislative minority that prevents us from ever achieving the supermajority to raise taxes (and our weak Democratic majority that goes along with crazy tax cuts amid a crisis).
Turning California into a Third World nation where the environment is neglected, a lot of people are genuinely desperate and a lot of the young have a hard time getting an education or just can't get one doesn't benefit anyone.
We're not poor in money or water. We've just chosen to allocate them in ways that benefit tiny minorities at the expense of the rest of us. We should at least have a conversation about how we distribute our abundant resources. Derek is right: California is a place of abundance, except when it comes to political sense.#
Rebecca Solnit, a product of California public schools from kindergarten to graduate school, is the author most recently of "A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities That Arise in Disaster."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-solnit1-2009nov01,0,881907.story
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
good luck with this thread bro.
we're about to pass a $10 billion dollar water bond to build the peripheral canal.
|
|
Jim Herrington
Mountain climber
New York, NY
|
|
She's one of my favorite writers out there today. Just worked with her on a San Francisco atlas project. Brilliant lady.
My photo of her from earlier this year:
©2009 Jim Herrington
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
The writer of that piece clearly doesn't understand the fundamental reality of California: "Water flows uphill toward money." It's been that way since before most of us were born, and will likely be that way long after we're all dead.
I wish it weren't so -- in California or anywhere else. I wish it were as simple as throwing out the current bums and electing the good guys. But that's just a pipe dream. This has nothing to do with Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative. It is, and always has been, about the ease with which money will buy politicians of any party.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
Beautiful California
|
|
I always thought it was crazy that it was Okay if Texas taxed oil production, but not okay for California to do it. If we do it, we are raising taxes. If Texas does it, well thats just smart business boys. Some day we have to wake up. And Ghost is right, money won that battle. How much did the oil companies spend to stop Californians from voting to tax oil production? It was mind boggling.
Awesome read Peter. Thanks for posting it.
Beautiful picture Jim. Your life certainly has allowed you to meet some cool people. Thanks for sharing the photo.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
The reason why money flows toward hack politicians is because we've ceded way too much power to the Government.
If the Government didn't have the power to pick the winners and losers among us, nobody would ever even think of buying off a politician.
Now, because so many people have so much money riding on which way Government policy goes, bribing officials is smart business.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
If California has so much water to spare, then how about returning some of what you take from Colorado every year that your clever politicians negotiated away from us so many years ago?
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
How does California take water from Colorado?
That can't happen.
Water flows downhill. Remember?
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
But agreements were made that Colorado had to let a certain volume flow downhill which it could now use itself.
|
|
Ray Olson
Trad climber
Imperial Beach, California
|
|
good thread Peter -
ask around and its pretty clear Cali
has a poor reputation as a place to
start/run a small business, light industry,
etc.
some have said: don't do it, go to another state.
high crime, also sited as a regional issue.
hope this thread doesn't get toxic,
sure seems like some relevant stuff.
good luck :-)
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
Higher business taxes, as advocated by Rebecca Solnit would fix that, wouldn't they?
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Okinawa, Japan
|
|
Higher taxes on the big companies with the big profits and lower ones on the small businesses would be the key.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
Not if they re-locate to one of the other states who are smart enough to have lower - or no - taxes.
Then California kills the Golden Goose and gets nothing (which is about what California Government deserves for being stupid)
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
Taxing businesses will make them move to another state? Absent spending billions and billions on a pipeline, how is Chevron going to relocate all that oil it pulls out of the ground?
|
|
Ray Olson
Trad climber
Imperial Beach, California
|
|
and socal is front and center on the immigration "issue"
read an interesting book about this,
in a nuthell, seems "illegal" immigrants
are subsidizing our salad bowls, pretty much.
I have no issue/stance on any of this, really.
but I did grow up within eye shot of the border,
my words for it: kinda heart breaking.
the "gang phenomena" (sp?) gang problem, is another...
ok, I'm better duck out cause the sh*t
might just start to fly and I forgot my flak jacket :-)
cheers
Ray
|
|
overit
Trad climber
Boulder
|
|
Texas doesn't have a state income tax. They have to get it somewhere. Californias income tax rate is about the highest in the nation.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
And the highest bracket kicks in at the lowest income, about $45,000.
People who make $45,000 a year in California pay the highest state income tax rate in America, the same rate as millionaires.
|
|
adam d
climber
closer to waves than rock
|
|
Why are we talking about the article when we can talk about Jim's amazing photo of the writer?!
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
Probably the same reason all the cool TR's only gather a few posts. No controversey.
|
|
Ray Olson
Trad climber
Imperial Beach, California
|
|
ok,
this relates to some Cali common sense,
Peter, if this is drift, sorry.
its been on my mind a while
and I wanna put it in here now.
immigation, and "illegal" immigrants are a common topic
in socal, ok?
and my point saying this isn't to point a finger
or come down on anyone.
but I hear this line a lot:
"immigrants are gonna come and "take" the jobs..."
ok, first off, its pretty hard for anyone to "take" a job.
you ever "take" a job?
employers "hire" people, and saying that shifts the
accountability a little bit, you see?
why do farmes etc.need to subsidize by hiring under the table?
I don't know, my point is, that this word usage seems to
kinda stigmatize a conversation, and its so common
I'm not even sure people realize what they're sayiing.
ok, hopefully no hard feelings.
I'm pretty much a humanitarian, full on.
and simply wanted to slide that in "for the record"
Now I'm going to re-read the article Peter posted,
maybe we can have a productive discussion.
thanks again.
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
If California Government had it's sh#t together, it wouldn't matter where the people here came from, or whether they were papered.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
"Common sense is that sixth sense that tells you the world is flat." Dan O'Neill, as told in Odd Bodkins.
If this is an example of common sense, please give me uncommon sense. Taxing businesses is about the best way I know to impose a tax whose individual incidence is unknown. Who pays, say, Chevron's income tax? Its shareholders? Its employees? Its customers? Tell me, since you know.
In fact, such indirect taxes as corporate income taxes, value added taxes and the like are popular among those whose living depends on collecting taxes precisely because they can hide the amount people pay.
Then there's that wonderful line that water goes to crops and not people. Just who consumes those crops? I suppose in her belabored mind, all people should get an equal allotment of water. That way the farmer and the lawyer have exactly the same amount of water. Hey, it may not be intelligent, but it's equal so it must be fair.
If someone really wants real common sense for California, they'll stop making proposals that put all the pain on someone else and none for themselves. I'm sorry but that article serves as a good prototype for why California remains ungovernable and self-destructive.
John
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
If we're all going to get the same ammount of water, how about we all pay the exact same ammount (not rate) of taxes?
If it costs $25,000 per American to run the country, we each should have to pay $25,000 every year. No deductions. No exceptions.
Your family of four is costing the Country $100,000 a year, and it's time you paid your fair share.
|
|
Ray Olson
Trad climber
Imperial Beach, California
|
|
Chaz,
I'm pretty much in the dark on a lot
of this stuff, but your comment on state
goverment sure rings true.
clearly its skewed, in favor of guess who?
wish I had something to add...
word on the street is, theft related crime is way up.
and as we all know, the meth problem is bigger than ever:
"epidemic" is probably about right.
in San Diego they over built to the point of freeway gridlock.
now people compare SD to LA, loosly of course.
I was gone for over ten years, modest home in chula vista
going for .5 mil?
amazing...
hope the next governor can help get small business and stuff
going, cause what I see is a real need for jobs. for sure.
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
socal
|
|
Okay, this is my first politics related post. The government oriented unions in Cali are sending us down the pike. Pay, pension and health care plans for government unions are out of whack with the people paying the taxes. It would be great if we could all have these perks, but the private tax payer is being heavily leaveraged to support government union perks. That is why Cali is losing private businesses. They and their employees can no longer afford the largess in Cali public spending that is out of control and has no comprehension of fiscal responsibility to the taxpaying public.
Then again, it does not really matter. The conservatives take our money and give it to the wealthy; the liberals take it and give it to the poor. Both parties have created a beauracracy that squanders the money. Either way, the taxes we pay get sucked out of the system and never support the causes they are supposed to be used for. The waste and graft is rampant. It makes me sick the way the politicos of either party have no concern for the taxpayers. Once uopn a time the elected officials worked for the electorate; now the tables are turned.
|
|
The Wedge
Boulder climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
Just in the last few years, has it been that The Owen's Valley is seeing 50% OR MORE water than they LA takes. It only took a 100 YEARS for this to happen.
Now they just pump more ground water!
And now they want to set up solor panel on dried up OWENS lake. Imagine what that would look like from the TOP OF MT WHITNEY!
|
|
Ray Olson
Trad climber
Imperial Beach, California
|
|
another "drop in" post
when the subject of socal Gangs comes up,
my feeling are that there is a wide range
of stuff that falls under that topic, or word,
a "spectrum" if you will.
so, referring to the "worst expression"
of the problem, what are Gangs?
to me, Gangs are an expression of real
human suffering and pain.
period.
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
"He was shocked that a nation powerful enough to conquer his people couldn't or wouldn't feed its own future. The white man was good at production, he concluded, but bad at distribution."
Statements like that show a huge amount of ignorance. He (Sitting Bull) never considered in that statement that this nation, that was powerful enough to conquer his people, got that way by not feeding it's own future. Everything is related and you don't cut back on military and feed people without something changing drastically. I won't say it's good or bad but it would change things and this would be a different country with different problems.
The article and general liberal point of view that cutting military spending to feed people will not have dire consequences. Again, I am fairly liberal and don't think it be a problem would but it's just unintelligent to not consider what a change of that nature would do to us as a nation.
Dave
|
|
guyman
Trad climber
Moorpark, CA.
|
|
JohnTP......
agree 100%.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
California's lack of common sense is evidenced in the fact that the state government, measured by revenue taken in, grew in size by 40% during Arnold's tenure as Governor.
And as usual California leads the way - now the Federal Government is heading down the same road.
I would say hide your wallet but unfortunately that doesn't help. They take the money before it gets to your wallet. Then they spend more than they took.
|
|
rotten johnny
Social climber
mammoth lakes, ca
|
|
so now the state of california is going to take more out of the workers paychecks....once again it seems that the people who can least afford it are once again asked to give more while gas , medical and the cost of living keeps rising.....LEB ....have you taken a pay cut in these tough times....? .......when are the people that don't have to suffer , the rich going to start sharing in the pain.....teachers being laid off and their pay chopped.....when are the politicians going to finally take a pay cut , after all , they are the ones responsible for this mess...? i also read an article stating that taxes on the corporations in california are not the highest in the US....so go ahead and move to some other state with a cloudy , cold miserable climate.....the trickle down theory is just more burgoise brainwashing to oppress the working class...if capitalism is so wonderful , how come it has fallen flat on it's face....? capitalism use to work until the rich legislated and maipulated it into oblivion to benefit the ruling class....if the ruling class doesn't want to pay the workers a livable wage let's just have socialism where people can be on th dole and get free medical care....isn't that what we are on the brink of...? oh , i forgot , the rich only get rich by exploiting the hell out of other humans...
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
rotten,
You state "i also read an article stating that taxes on the corporations in california are not the highest in the US." Did you read my earlier post asking who pays those taxes? If you know, I'd be curious to know how you know.
John
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
Reisner was right.
We have managed things poorly all the way down the line.
It is time to void the Colorado River Compact and reallocate far more conservatively.
There has to be a price for use, not a motive to abuse.
But I always laugh when people whine about how much water agriculture gets.
Ask them where their food comes from and they'll say the supermarket.
|
|
the kid
Trad climber
fayetteville, wv
|
|
Peter,
great article and i agree 100%.
Too much money and power is in the hands of the few for the few. 1% of our population controls 90% of our wealth!
keep up the good fight...
Kurt
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
It just keeps getting worse. We're looking at billions for new water projects to subsidize water delivery to corporate empires we already subsidize.
the final deal stripped the bill of provisions intended to prevent illegal diversions and black-market selling.
the starting price tag is $10billion, but that's only a fraction of the expected cost.
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=ye2jqnrstop449
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
Skip, you're talking about this passage?
My friend Derek Hitchcock, a biologist working to restore the Yuba River, likes to say that California is still a place of abundance. He recently showed me a Pacific Institute report and other documents to bolster his point. They show that about 80% of the state's water goes to agriculture, not to people, and half of that goes to four crops -- cotton, rice, alfalfa and pasturage (irrigated grazing land) -- that produce less than 1% of the state's wealth. Forty percent of the state's water. Less than 1% of its income.
The key numbers-- 80% of all water used in California goes to agriculture, and roughly half of that goes to cotton, rice, alfalfa and pasturage --are basically accurate. The variations I see on those numbers are fairly small.
Solnit's writing is usually simple, pretty much aimed at a 10th-grade reading level, and that's why it can appear in a newspaper. You're not going to get rigorous, scholarly work.
Anyone looking for the best rigorous introduction to California's water politics should begin with Norris Hundley, The Great Thirst.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
If you want to claim that 80 percent of all the water in California goes to "agriculture" feel free.
The rest of us know this statement is absurd.
The consensus figures usually range from 75-83%. Historically, the figure was higher, but it has declined in recent years as agricultural land has gone out of production. The figures are generally higher in the other arid western states. Again, you can see Hundley for the historical data.
http://www.amazon.com/Great-Thirst-Californians-Water-History/dp/0520224566/ref=pd_sim_b_1
This remains the single best book on the topic. It's cautious, judicious, exhaustively researched, avoids the sort of over-simplification and partisan ranting you can find on op-ed pages or on the websites of the various lobbyists and special interests.
Kahrl's California Water Atlas does a good job of illustrating the general water transfers.
|
|
Maysho
climber
Soda Springs, CA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 5, 2009 - 11:22am PT
|
The report she indirectly cites is found here: http://www.pacinst.org/reports/california_agriculture/index.htm
The Pacific Institute is a great source for information and more importantly solid solutions to grow the agricultural sector while increasing water efficiency.
Peter
|
|
rotten johnny
Social climber
mammoth lakes, ca
|
|
jelezarian..yes i get your your point , and agree with your who is going to pay the tax comments....i read your posting ........i'm not for reaming the rich or for excessive taxes on anybody and my point is that if the poor and middle class have jobs that pay a living wage , they will put that money back into circulation and keep capitalism rolling.....i think it just gets back to mayshos's point that the redistribution isn't working...rotten
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
I grew up on a farm in Central California. I know water and know it well.
You continue to make the mistake of mixing up "Water available for use" and "water that is legally allowed to be used."
Most of the folks who generate these figures are using water deliveries as measured in acre/feet, although it is important to look at the method of calculation. Others use different methods. But they all arrive at the same ballpark figure, and that's why most experts in the field accept the claim that 3/4 or more of the state's water is delivered to/used by agriculture.
The blurriest figure is groundwater since unlike the other western states, California doesn't enforce groundwater monitoring, thus allowing business to receive publicly-subsidized water, and then pump out the groundwater from underneath the business/farm and sell it on the gray or black market to other farmers (typically smaller and poorer ones).
I, too, grew up on a farm. I have a lot of sympathy for small family farmers. As I've said before, I think there's a good case for public subsidy-- including continued public subsidy of water --for small family farms and ranches. I think that there are good historical, cultural, environmental, and even economic rationale for that sort of policy, if it was done well.
But as you obviously know, most of the water is going to the biggest, most heavily-subsidized corporate empires that are sucking the rest of us dry.
I haven't seen the bills yet, so it's not entirely clear how many earmarks got spread around where, in order to pull together the votes. But it's got to be a really ugly bit of sausage at a time we can't afford it.
California simply can't keep doing business as usual.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
pdx
|
|
I almost stopped read and I'm calling bullshit on this statement "Take water. My friend Derek Hitchcock, a biologist working to restore the Yuba River, likes to say that California is still a place of abundance. He recently showed me a Pacific Institute report and other documents to bolster his point. They show that about 80% of the state's water goes to agriculture, not to people, and half of that goes to four crops -- cotton, rice, alfalfa and pasturage (irrigated grazing land) -- that produce less than 1% of the state's wealth. Forty percent of the state's water. Less than 1% of its income.
Meanwhile, we Californians are told the drought means that ordinary households should cut back -- and probably most should -- but the lion's share of water never went to us in the first place, and we should know it."
As someone who eats Californian rice (Calrose brand), wears cotton clothes and eats beef that ate Californian raided alfalfa and were then rotated to irrigated California pasturage in the spring, that's a total screwed up thinking upside down statement you'd expect from someone who has never ever created anything of substance or importance in the real world.
Where the hell does she think all those crops go? Into a massive garbage can someplace? They go to us people, and the massive industrial scale that they are grown keeps the costs dirt cheap for us all. I eat all kinds of produce from California: olives, almonds, Californian Tomatoes all winter long and the nights are often spent drinking Californian wines. I BENEFIT! YOU BENEFIT! The millions who's lives depend on selling the fertilizers, pesticides, farm equipment, to those who pick or pack the crops and drive the trucks. That water goes to a few huge Ag. producers no doubt, and it's a massive amount of water, but lets tell the whole damn truth here. Lets start there!
I BENEFIT! YOU BENEFIT!
Californians deficit of common sense is clearly seen in the writers work and her mind.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
Couchmaster, many of those crops grow well in other places where there is plenty of water.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
Let the water go to the farmers that need it. If you need more build damns and go and get it.
Yes, it is that simple.
I guess of you're hobby is permanently wrecking rivers than yeah, it is that simple.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
I have a friend who is working on her Ph.D. in hydrology at Davis, and I will try to get data and sourcing from her on estimates of comparative water use. I, too, remember a consensus figure of approximately 75-85% of water use for agriculture, but what I don't remember is if those figures accounted for water flowing to the sea to insure the maintenance of ecosystems. Most of us consider that an important use of water and, in any case, I would argue that it is as much a use of water as irrigation.
I also don't remember if this is just surface water, or it includes pumping of ground water. Again, I'll try to get the data and sources. Unfortunately, I have some urgent, paying, projects today so I hope my info will still be relevant once I receive it.
John
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
Where the hell does she think all those crops go? Into a massive garbage can someplace? They go to us people, and the massive industrial scale that they are grown keeps the costs dirt cheap for us all. . . . The millions who's lives depend on selling the fertilizers, pesticides, farm equipment, to those who pick or pack the crops and drive the trucks. That water goes to a few huge Ag. producers no doubt, and it's a massive amount of water, but lets tell the whole damn truth here. Lets start there!
Heh. At least this opens up something like a rational political discussion. And I appreciate the concession that we're no longer talking about free markets, since a free market in water would essentially end agriculture as we know it in the state.
We all benefit from all sorts of public investments. But we don't have the money to continue each and every one of them. Since everyone is determined to avoid tax increases by eliminating waste and fraud from the state budget, it's the height of foolishness to continue to reward one of the single largest sources of waste and fraud. And the associated costs are brutal-- salinization, petsticide accumulation, smog, and the importation of 3rd world labor.
With all the slash and burning of major public institutions in California, using tax-payer money to subsidize luxury crops (i.e. almonds)doesn't seem like the best use of the limited revenue. Especially if much of that money is going into corporate bank accounts in the Bahamas, helping to pay bonuses on Wall Street, and importing 3rd world labor.
And I like beef, and I'd happily have some of my tax dollars go to subsidizing small producers like Table Mountain or Montezuma, but let's face it: Americans are fat f*#ks, and the last thing we ought to be doing is subsidizing their diets of Whoppers and frozen Wal-Mart corn dogs. If the price of beef (and of corn, not so much a Cali issue) was actually set by a free market, we'd have a lot fewer sclerotics clogging the hospitals and jacking up our insurance rates.
If we're going to have big government, subsidized agriculture, and imported 3rd world labor, then let's at least try to shift the subsidies towards the smaller producers who are practicing healthier and less destructive farming. Let's actually end water mining. Let's at least try to eliminate a taxpayer-subsidized grey and black market in semi- or illegal water deliveries.
Tax payers in Cali want more service and lower taxes. They continue to dream that they can have it all, simply by eliminating "waste and fraud" in government spending. No better place to start than water subsidies.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
This article does nothing to begin a rational discussion. It says it's common sense to have someone else pay, and to have someone else suffer all the cuts. That's what almost all Californians say. That's why we're in trouble.
John
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
This article does nothing to begin a rational discussion. It says it's common sense to have someone else pay, and to have someone else suffer all the cuts. That's what almost all Californians say. That's why we're in trouble.
I was referring to "Couchmaster"'s attempt to justify taxpayer subsidies to corporate agribusiness by appealing to the public benefits of such a policy.
The good parts of the Solnit essay are just the same things everyone in the field has known for decades. The broad outlines just aren't mysterious. I don't have to endorse her facile treatment of the details (and her vague proposed solutions). And my guess is that plenty of the Sierra Clubbers outraged over water subsidies to agribusiness live in neighborhoods stocked with roses, rhodeodendrons, and water-sucking exotic hardwoods of every imaginable kind.
And yes, Californians want something for nothing. They want it now. And they're pissed off each and everytime they vote for someone who promises it, and then can't deliver.
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
And for those not inclined to work trhough the literature, here's a quick one-stop shopping link for current and historical data on water resources in the state:
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/WRCA/
This is probably the single most convenient and important research resource currently available. Predictably, it's going to close due to budget cuts.
Then folks really will be free to just make up whatever numbers they prefer.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
Sorry for my misunderstanding, klk. I hope more people pursue the link to Berkeley's Water Resources library. I've found it very useful, as I have most of Berkeley's other specialized libraries (particularly, as a climber and person interested in Sierra history, the bancroft Library), which budget cuts also affect.
John
|
|
Homer
Mountain climber
Santa Cruz, CA
|
|
According to the author, a person who died in 1890 is as much an authority on our economy as anyone? She believes that we haven't made any progress towards understanding our economic dynamics in the last 120 years, and that reality is that those dynamics have not changed? But she's still convinced that if we talk about it we can come up with a better reality, even though we don't understand the one we have? Gotta love the human spirit.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
But I always laugh when people whine about how much water agriculture gets.
Ask them where their food comes from and they'll say the supermarket.
Yea, but given that the central valley is an incredible resourse for growing all different sorts of crops, if there is enough water. Isn't it worth thinking about which crops we should spend our water on?
The author wasn't complaining that water was being used to grow crops. But rather that lower value more intensive water use crops were being grown. Cotton, rice, and irrigating grass to feed cows. You can grow cotton and rice in the Miss. delta. You can ranch cows all over the USA. But you can't grow all the fruits and veggies anywhere in the US. It seems pretty reasonable to me that the water in California that goes to agriculture should go to those higher value crops that can't be grown other places.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
It is not the responsibility of your fellow citizens to give up their business because other people have decided their water can be put to better use.
It's not "their" water.
|
|
Patrick Sawyer
climber
Originally California now Ireland
|
|
Hey, come to Ireland, there's lots of water here.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
And beer too, from what I've heard!
|
|
couchmaster
climber
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2018 - 09:22pm PT
|
The new stats are out on education. Calif is near last in education nationally. I'm sure it's been a lot of work to get below Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama and such, but clearly the work you Californians have put in has paid off. It's been a long road, educationally, to get your kids from first to last, but you're there now.
I suspect a brief assessment by any rational person would lead them to the only conclusion that Ca. must now immediately spend close to $100 BILLION (THAT'S $999,999,999 MILLION X A BUNCH) to speed up their rail service. They already have trains on these routes, this is only to speed the service up. Then the edumacation thing will follow.
If you could spend even 1/10 of the proposed money, say $999 million dollars X 9 to get your train service times down, clearly every child will be a much better reader. The money will trickle down, don't question the logic. You have to spend a few billion on the train to join the 21st century or you're facing having a state full of idiots. Or let us just say, more idiots than you have now. Worse even, they may be only morons instead of idiots. Or the reverse, I forget that whole classification thing. Regardless. Train, not education is the point. You're 50th, but can sink further if you try, say, below Nigeria or Benin or some such.
Remember, it's only money.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2018 - 10:19pm PT
|
Pretty bad when yer werse than New Mexico and Texass.
|
|
10b4me
Social climber
Lida Junction
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2018 - 10:49pm PT
|
some of the respondents to this thread complain about California, but still live here.
hmm.
I have an acquaintance who hated California, so he moved to Tennessee. Well, turns out he doesn't like the low wages, humidity, and cold weather. Now he wants to move back, but can't afford too.
|
|
Lituya
Mountain climber
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2018 - 10:53pm PT
|
Unfortunately, they're all moving up here to Washington State--and rapidly turning it into the same congested overtaxed liberal shithole they left.
|
|
Lituya
Mountain climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2018 - 10:49am PT
|
Geeeeezzz, hmmmmmmm, I wonder which political party runs the state of California? Oh, that's right! The same party you vote for--over and over and over.
You people are insane.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2018 - 10:53am PT
|
The estimates now stand at $20bil and we all know this Delta killing machine would in the end probably cost northward of $40 bil.
Why do you think it would be a "Delta killing machine"?
The current pumping regime is frequently limited by environmental issues based on both Fed/State law and regulations. The new tunnels would be subject to all of the same laws/regulations.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2018 - 10:55am PT
|
Geeeeezzz, hmmmmmmm, I wonder which political party runs the state of California? Oh, that's right! The same party you vote for--over and over and over.
You people are insane.
I am far from gung-ho about the Democrats. But the lessor of two evils is still the lessor of two evils.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2018 - 11:37am PT
|
It amazes me how we throw our money away. Why are we paying so much more than it was estimated? Corruption or incompetence, or both?
New Bay Bridge supposed to cost $250M, the final bill was 6.5B. A 26x increase.
Insane.
Whether you are talking about a kitchen remodel or building a new aircraft carrier, low-balling and costs overrun have been around for centuries.
It is sad that the country struggles so much to build any sort of infrastructure at anything close to a reasonable cost.
The low cost approach for the new bridge was for something that looked like an over sized highway entrance ramp. Nobody claimed a signature bridge could be built for that. And I thought the low cost estimate was $750M not $250M. And its not like that bridge would not have cost overruns also.
I wasn't knee-jerk opposed to the signature bridge idea. If local politicians approved it and local commuters paid for it. But I don't like the looks of the new bridge and it cost a ridiculous amoount. I don't think the bay area got their money's worth.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2018 - 11:38am PT
|
The entire purpose of the tunnels is to enable southern water users to take more water out of the Sacramento river. That increased supply will create increased demand in SoCal in the form of more houses - houses that cannot be recalled or "taken out of production" in the next extended drought.
The spice will flow. The delta will die.
The vast majority of the water that flows south goes to agriculture. That most certainly can be "taken out of production" in the next extended drought.
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2018 - 11:53am PT
|
Actually, the big gorillas in the room in SoCal, Orange and LA Counties, are on track to drastically reduce their use of distant water.
San Diego will want it. Imperial Valley will want it, the growers in the Central Valley certainly want it.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 67 of total 67 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!