FORECASTERS PREDICT DWINDLING CHANCES OF EL NINO

[nate]

We conserve more than the rest of the country does. Why should we do with less. Do we ask them to eat less because they can't grow as much?

 

I missed where there is a huge food shortage.

 

You should do with less because you live in an arid climate.

 

You people seem to think that water is some renewable resource and just because other areas have more they will be able to recover from the water you take.

[1nutkruk]

Nate definitely doesn't have a shortage of cheese.

[wopphil]

Overall water use.

Anyway I am going to remember this thread the next time the conservatives are bitching about government spending on programs that make up .1% of the budget but not cutting defense spending which makes up 75%.

I am fiscally conservative. And if I controlled the budget, the military is the first thing I would look to cut.

[Adam]

Nate,

 

I think you're right in most of what you've posted in this thread, but no one gives a shit about droughts, climate, shortages, surpluses or any natural resource or occurrence which potentially impacts more people than just themselves.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Using that same logic states that don't pull their own weight should do with less money from the feds.  If that were the case Wisconsin would be in a world of shit since they take more from the feds than they pay in.  Quite a few of those pesky liberal states like CA, NY, etc. are footing the bill for for those states that aren't pulling their weight.  You keep your water and we'll use some of that money to buy it from other states or build desalination plants.

[nate]

Double check that Cat.  Wisconsin has one of the lowest unemployment rates and they export far more than they import.  They are one of the strongest state economies in the US.

 

CA on the other hand is a fiscal disaster.  Nice try though.

 

By the way, consumers will be paying quite a bit more for ag products due to the drought.

[Lhalo]

Well it is a product of where you live.  You guys don't conserve more, that is bullshit.  Your lush green lawns and landscapes.  All of CA should have dead lawns and plants right now.  It is a desert landscape, you should live like it.  Even now there is no legislation restricting water use.

 

Wrong.

 

http://www.kcet.org/updaily/socal_focus/commentary/los-angeles-is-not-a-desert-stop-calling-it-one.html

[nate]

I stand corrected.  Still it is not the climate conducive to vast lush lawns.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_California

[mp170.6]

I missed where there is a huge food shortage.

 

Why do you suppose food prices are up across the nation?

[nate]

Why do you suppose food prices are up across the nation?

 

Right... I get that.  However there isn't a giant shortage.  If all of CA's ag went away there would still be plenty of food for everyone to eat.  It might not be what they want but they would.  There are no alternatives to water.

[mp170.6]

Right... I get that.  However there isn't a giant shortage.  If all of CA's ag went away there would still be plenty of food for everyone to eat.  It might not be what they want but they would.  There are no alternatives to water.

 

Again, you ought to research these things.  This is a good article and the statistics offered reflect official reports from the State of California.

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/explainer/2013/07/california_grows_all_of_our_fruits_and_vegetables_what_would_we_eat_without.html

[Blarg]

Overall water use.

Anyway I am going to remember this thread the next time the conservatives are bitching about government spending on programs that make up .1% of the budget but not cutting defense spending which makes up 75%.

I'm going to remember this thread as well since defense only is 22% of the US budget.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_budget_pie

[Adam]

Legislative blow-jobs makes up 33%

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Double check that Cat.  Wisconsin has one of the lowest unemployment rates and they export far more than they import.  They are one of the strongest state economies in the US.

 

CA on the other hand is a fiscal disaster.  Nice try though.

 

By the way, consumers will be paying quite a bit more for ag products due to the drought.

 

Like the pie charts about water usage you don't understand how federal taxation and spending work:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state

 

In 2013 the feds collected 46.4B from Wisconsin while paying out 83B to the state.  For every $1 Wisconsin citizens and businesses paid the federal government in 2013 the state got back $1.79.  In other words that low unemployment and strong economy were largely funded by federal tax dollars from other states.

[Blarg]

That's a lot of free government cheese.

[Jay]

LOL

[Adam]

Like the pie charts about water usage you don't understand how federal taxation and spending work:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state

 

In 2013 the feds collected 46.4B from Wisconsin while paying out 83B to the state.  For every $1 Wisconsin citizens and businesses paid the federal government in 2013 the state got back $1.79.  In other words that low unemployment and strong economy were largely funded by federal tax dollars from other states.

 

You're welcome, Nate. Now give us some water you freeloading sonofabitch

[nate]

I am at a loss dude, you are using tax income as a basis for state economy?

 

Taxes are cheap here, manufacturing is high and unemployment is low.  The budget is nearly balanced.

 

CA the budget is a disaster, taxes are at an all time high.

[Biergott]

Ive got my homeowners association after me because my lawn is dying.  Trying to levy fines on me.  Redonkulous.

[AngelsLongBall]

All this thread needs to reach completion is nate to blame USC or Pete Carrol for the drought.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

You realize that federal money helps to fund that state economy right?  Farmers and businesses get subsidies which spur the economy, the state gets money to make improvements to roads/infrastructure and so on.  You're not at a loss you just have no idea what you're talking about just like the pie chart.  No one said Wisconsin's economy wasn't good the state just happens to benefit by getting far more than they paid to the feds in 2013.  Meanwhile CA got $0.68 for every $1 they sent the feds in 2013.  F'in liberals, can't live with 'em and can't live without their money either.  

Edited September 25, 2014 by Catwhoshatinthehat

[nate]

You realize that federal money helps to fund that state economy right?  Farmers and businesses get subsidies which spur the economy, the state gets money to make improvements to roads/infrastructure and so on.  You're not at a loss you just have no idea what you're talking about just like the pie chart.  No one said Wisconsin's economy wasn't good the state just happens to benefit by getting far more than they paid to the feds in 2013.  Meanwhile CA got $0.68 for every $1 they sent the feds in 2013.  F'in liberals, can't live with 'em and can't live without their money either.  

 

Actually after looking into it more, most of the money goes as subsidy for the dairy industry which helps lower the cost of dairy for the rest of the country.  Your numbers aren't that black and white and you aren't as smart as you think they are.

[mp170.6]

Actually after looking into it more, most of the money goes as subsidy for the dairy industry which helps lower the cost of dairy for the rest of the country.  Your numbers aren't that black and white and you aren't as smart as you think they are.

 

How does it lower the cost? 

 

The irony of that statement is you working in the insurance industry -- where Federal government subsidy has NOT lowered the cost of healthcare.  It's no different for milk or cheese.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Actually after looking into it more, most of the money goes as subsidy for the dairy industry which helps lower the cost of dairy for the rest of the country. Your numbers aren't that black and white and you aren't as smart as you think they are.

From 1995-2012 dairy subsidies to Wisconsin farmers totaled 1.1B which doesn't come close to the billions the state got last year:

http://farm.ewg.org/progdetail.php?fips=55000&progcode=dairy

As I said in my prior post federal money goes to states for various subsidies amongst other things and I have no doubts more went to farmers in Wisconsin but please show me a source that shows most of that 83B going to dairy farmers. I'm not the smartest guy in the world but if I claim certain facts I at least present the source.

Edited September 26, 2014 by Catwhoshatinthehat

[nate]

I am not even bothering.  If you think that the economy in CA is better than in Wisconsin then you are crazy.  CA is the 6th largest economy in the world.  That doesn't mean they are better.

 

WI has one of the lower populations in the US.  They do tons of dairy, manufacturing and tech.

 

Finally money has nothing to do with this.  CA population grew way too big and sucked all the water out of the region.  Taking water from another region isn't the answer.  Water is a vital resource and sucking it dry has grave environmental impacts.