This post is a joke, right?
And remember, according to Jislander, you can't use the term rake when referring to fire mitigation.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
California’s water supply is shrinking rapidly (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
This post is a joke, right?
And remember, according to Jislander, you can't use the term rake when referring to fire mitigation.
My comment wasn't partisan. YOU however are prepared to die on the forest floor for Trump.
Not at all. I'm simply correcting the notion that his criticism of CA for not performing recommend fire mitigation is warranted. Even the state acknowledges their shortcomings in this area. Anyone suggesting otherwise is clearly biased for some reason, and we all know where your biases lie.
It's ok. I get it. There are probably 10 pages in this forum just circling the wagons about his injecting bleach comment I will admit, this isn't as bad.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dickies
Footballguy
I’m glad Newsom isn’t trying to blame the federal government. They need to work together (and they are) to solve the problem, but unfortunately neither one is doing enough.
Trump is correct that more fire mitigation is needed, but he’s off base suggesting it’s all CA’s fault and his “raking” comment was ludicrous. He could have made some major changes to the way the US Forest Service mitigates wildfires, but to my knowledge nothing was done. Probably just easier for him to take no responsibility and blame it on someone else, like he always does.
dkp993
Footballguy
If I remember this correctly, and I believe I am, the situation you were referring to revolved around federal funds being allocated in a time of crisis. I remember the press conference well. And while I’m not defending any CA actions regrading fire mitigation I also remember we were in the middle of the worst fire season in history and in need of serious Fed support. Anyone with an ouch of sense knew the best way to get money from Trump was to agree with him. Newsom litigating fault at that time would have been the worst possible thing he could have done. The smart play was to eat #### and take the help.
* I now feel the need to go take a shower as I feel dirty from being forced to defend Newsom.
Sand
Footballguy
Looks like they need to jack prices way, way up at about 80 gallons/person per day.
I'm still wondering why they need to stick it on the beach. Just pipe the water inland to City of Industry or other dump no one cares about and pump the brine back out.
The problem is the cause of many of the fires CA deals with, regardless of whether we're in the "worst fire season in history" or not is that the mitigation has to be done BEFORE the fires happen. What has happened SINCE then? I posted an article above where Newsom committed to fire mitigation and then, not only did he not do what he committed to, he cut the funding for it. So, the next time there's a huge fire, he'll be begging for help AGAIN. It's not like this issue is new. Everyone knows about it. It's been there for decades. I grew up in CA. I know what I'm talking about. It was discussed when I was growing up.
I'm sorry you felt the need to defend Newsom. No one should ever have to do that. My point is simply that Trump's criticism was valid. You can disagree with that all you want. But at least I brought evidence to support my position. I'm getting a lot of grief in return from people who aren't presenting any.
And there you go. Proving your bias by making an assertion that is 100% false and has been proven so. Good job.
supermike80
Footballguy
Disingenuous. The article i posted was from June 2021. Trump was out of office. Instead what I will say is California realized trumps thoughts on it (while never very well articulated) were correct and California didn't want to admit it. That seems more likely
dkp993
Footballguy
dkp993
Footballguy
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Give him a break - he was required to get in his daily "BUT TRUMP!!!!" comment in.
Those are the orders handed down from on high.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Trump's criticism was indeed valid.
However, it wasn't presidential in the least because he failed to acknowledge the importance of larger, more important underlying causes.
Instead of taking pot shots at CA liberals, Trump should have advocated for better fire mitigation strategies as just one component of an "all of the above" climate change mitigation policy.
Isolating fire mitigation betrayed Trump's only motivation which was purely political.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditto.
Look, the reason I came in here was to point out its stupid this is political, but of course it is. I mentioned Trump's comment from the perspective that its similar to whats being said here ..."Hey, like fix your Blue State!" - --These are climate issues with no political boundaries. ---the "raking" comment was secondary.
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993
Footballguy
Not sure where my comments were disingenuous as they weren’t in response to your link. I was addressing John’s points about Newsom taking responsibility.
Look, I really don’t want to be in a position of defending a guy I’m not a fan of at all (Newsom) and believe to be the ultimate politician (in all the negative ways). But I also don’t think it’s as simple as pointing a finger at Newsom for something that obviously the Fed has a big (biggest?) part of as well. I can guarantee there is blame that lies at Newsom’s feet but there are likely failures on all sides as well. So I don’t agree with Trump pointing a finger in blame unless of course he was willing to own the federal part of that blame
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993
Footballguy
All true. I will add he needed to own the federal failures as well and be solution based. That’s what leaders do.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
It’s true. I’m on that email distribution too. It’s like a daily bible reading, except for liberals.
Go read my first post in this thread and then come back and tell me I said "Hey, like fix your Blue State!."
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I don't think we should underestimate the importance of doing this. I mean, there is a so much material to work with that you almost have to do it.
Last edited by a moderator:
FairWarning
Footballguy
Tact wasn’t Trump’s strong suit. If you need someone thrown under the bus, he’s your man.
the moops
Footballguy
Imagine a scenario where Biden tells Kansas that "they should build stronger buildings then" in response to tornado that ripped through the state.
That's sort of the equivalent, right?
BladeRunner
Footballguy
You literally said that what's being posted here is the equivalent of "fix your blue state." That's not true. There might be some of that, mixed in with good suggestions and discussion on how to help CA's water issue. Nice backtrack though.
Ben & Jerry's
Footballguy
Newsomes answer to a imminent water shortage crisis is to limit Californians to just 2 days a week OF WATERING THEIR LAWNS. What a complete disaster for a Governor.
Sand
Footballguy
Instead of funding water projects Cali is evidently wanting to send out checks instead. For those who say this is everyone's problem - maybe if your govt. spent money addressing the problem, at least in part, instead of buying votes with cash there might be some sympathy. That 18B could build some 20 plants.
Why help when the state won't help themselves?
The other day I mentioned how CA has a massive issue with unfunded pension liabilities. Instead of criticizing his state in any way Tim just laughed it off, acknowledging the issue, but saying "it's ok. We just kick that can down the road." That's a person who lives in CA's attitude towards a major fiscal issue. And you don't see anyone else from CA ever mentioning it or that it should be fixed. They just keep kicking all these issues "cans" down the road, until they become a crisis. That is not the proper way to govern.
FairWarning
Footballguy
The excellent news for California is they will replace Newsom with another who is like-minded.
timschochet
Footballguy
That wasn’t meant to be a serious response. It’s certainly a real concern, one I’ve been discussing for years, but whenever I raise it with my fellow Californians, both conservative and liberal, I get yawns. The main fault goes back to Gray Davis who negotiated prison guard pensions that were unwarranted.
I have an idea as to how to solve it: anyone who is receiving a pension can’t work in the private sector at the same time. Too many folks, former police and firemen and teachers, retire in their 50s from the government and then get private jobs, earning salaries and getting pensions at the same time. That shouldn’t be allowed IMO.
With regard to your last two sentences:
They just keep kicking cans down the road until they become a crisis. That is not the way to govern.
That made me chuckle. Social Security, the national debt, climate change, and about a hundred other issues that both Republicans and Democrats have studiously put off over the years. All I can say is, you could have fooled me.
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Scrolling down the article, some of the scientists opposed argue that there are other ways to reclaim water that are a lot more cost effective. I’d like to hear more.
supermike80
Footballguy
It totally is. Isn't part of the conversation right now about Miami building more hurricane resistant buildings?
dickey moe
Fingerpicker
timschochet
Footballguy
Here's the problem. CA needs the water NOW. This desalinization plant has been in the works for 20 years, and just NOW is getting rejected? If these "scientists" have such great ideas they should start a company and build them. They'd make a lot of money. I'm skeptical of people sitting on the sidelines criticizing others actually doing something when there is money to be made if they have a better way to do it.
timschochet
Footballguy
Look it was rejected unanimously. So it’s not gonna happen. I’m sure some of your criticism is warranted but it really doesn’t matter now. We need to find solutions that the Coastal Commission will accept. If these other solutions are at all practical they should be explored in full. The current desalination plan is, I’m afraid, a dead duck. Let’s move on.
dkp993
Footballguy
It’s short sided bureaucracy BS like this that earn Cali it’s sometimes warranted reputation. Absolutely awful and shame on them.
I must have missed it Tim but I saw nothing about scientist saying that in that article. All I saw was objections to how much it costs and that conservation is the route to take. Below is the quote I can find that was closest to your post. The short sightedness of statements like those in this article are mind blowing. We cannot conserve our way out of this. As temperatures rise and water becomes more scarce we will not be able to cut back anywhere near enough to sustain us. This is unbelievably stupid of them
“But desalination opponents argue less expensive and less harmful conservation tactics should be the first resort.”
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Maybe don't cultivate rice, about as water consuming a bit of agriculture as there is.
I should have known better than to take Tim's post at face value without actually reading the article. He is so often so imprecise with his words and tends to read what he wants to in articles instead of what is actually written. My bad.
DocHolliday
Footballguy
California reminds me of the girl I dated during my junior year in college. It is a beautiful and stunning state. It also has major issues and is simply crazy. Eventually you run away as fast as you can.
CA must take drastic water conservation measures immediately. I have little faith that the government is going to provide solutions to the water problem.
CA must take drastic water conservation measures immediately. I have little faith that the government is going to provide solutions to the water problem.
dkp993
Footballguy
As I’ve said time and time again here, we can not conserve our way out of this. There is simply to many people (near 40mil) and to much agricultural need (you know, feeding the entire country) for that.
@dkp993 apologies if you posted and I missed -- what studies/ assessments / estimates for conservation are they hanging their hats on? like if we install 5,000 cisterns to collect rain water and use for irrigation....etc. Or is it more the environmental impacts of the desalinization plant that are driving this? Have they studied the impacts of the one desalinization plant installed (in San Diego??)?
dkp993
Footballguy
The reasons for the new desalinization plant in Huntington Beach not being approved, from what I understand and have read, revolves around the concern regarding the Impact to marine life around it and the fact that where they were building it could possibly be in a floodplain many decades from now.
GroveDiesel
Footballguy
Almonds too.Ditkaless Wonders said:
djmich
Footballguy
Very valid point. Granted current earthquake construction design and materials are as resilient as ever, it's still a great risk.
Similar threads
