Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Should California rich be able to use as much water as they can afford?
American Thinker ^ | 06/15/2015 | Rick Moran

Posted on 06/15/2015 9:07:54 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

There's a serious drought in California, largely the result of government action in saving fish species rather than building additional infrastructure.  Now government in that state has ordered severe restrictions on the use of outdoor sprinkling, causing most of the lawns and gardens in California to shrivel and die.

But many of California's wealthy citizens don't think those restrictions apply to them.  They can afford the $800-a-month water bills and don't see a need to stop the sprinklers.

One such community is Rancho Sante Fe, where residents increased their water usage by 9% following the announcement by Governor Jerry Brown of a 25% cutback. 

Washington Post:

But a moment of truth is at hand for Yuhas and his neighbors, and all of California will be watching: On July 1, for the first time in its 92-year history, Rancho Santa Fe will be subject to water rationing.

“It’s no longer a ‘You can only water on these days’ ” situation, said Jessica Parks, spokeswoman for the Santa Fe Irrigation District, which provides water service to Rancho Santa Fe and other parts of San Diego County. “It’s now more of a ‘This is the amount of water you get within this billing period. And if you go over that, there will be high penalties.’ ”

So far, the community’s 3,100 residents have not felt the wrath of the water police. Authorities have issued only three citations for violations of a first round of rather mild water restrictions announced last fall. In a place where the median income is $189,000, where PGA legend Phil Mickelson once requested a separate water meter for his chipping greens, where financier Ralph Whitworth last month paid the Rolling Stones $2 million to play at a local bar,


(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: california; drought; governormoonbeam; illegalaliens; jerrybrown; moonbeam; randnesty; rich; water

1 posted on 06/15/2015 9:07:54 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Leftist Uber-rich people are such hypocrites. Just look at Hillary! trying to pretend she can relate to those struggling in this country.


2 posted on 06/15/2015 9:10:09 AM PDT by originalbuckeye (Not my circus, not my monkeys.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
" Should California rich be able to use as much water as they can afford?"

Of course. And they should be able to use all the illegal aliens they can afford too! At 1.65 an hour.

3 posted on 06/15/2015 9:11:16 AM PDT by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They could look to Israel’s successful desalination projects as an example, but that would be too logical. Maybe the bullet train is more important than fresh water.


4 posted on 06/15/2015 9:19:07 AM PDT by dainbramaged (Get out of my country now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"It’s now more of a ‘This is the amount of water you get within this billing period. And if you go over that, there will be high penalties.’ ”

Unless the penalties are more than just monetary they will never have an effect on the uber-rich in California.

5 posted on 06/15/2015 9:19:11 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes, and they should be able to terminate at least a dozen people they don’t like.

It’s only fair.


6 posted on 06/15/2015 9:26:32 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Sure, but since California also has a budget problem it might be equally proper to raise their water bill enough to offset that.

Just sayin’.


7 posted on 06/15/2015 10:18:22 AM PDT by oldfart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Sure, but since California also has a budget problem it might be equally proper to raise their water bill enough to offset that.

Just sayin’.


8 posted on 06/15/2015 10:18:35 AM PDT by oldfart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Yes. As long as they pay their Hydrogen offsets.


9 posted on 06/15/2015 10:23:08 AM PDT by GreenAccord (Bacon Akbar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
causing most of the lawns and gardens in California to shrivel and die.

Because it's a damn DESERT!

10 posted on 06/15/2015 10:24:32 AM PDT by NorthMountain ("The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; newgeezer
Should California rich be able to use as much water as they can afford?

Food
Gas
Healthcare

This is a classic conservative vs liberal question. It should be easy unless you consider that there are a whole different set of laws for the elite.

11 posted on 06/15/2015 10:26:33 AM PDT by DungeonMaster (Of those born of women there is not risen one greater than John The Baptist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DungeonMaster
This is a classic conservative vs liberal question. It should be easy

Except that another factor preventing this from being a simple exercise in supply-and-demand capitalism is the sad fact that the government controls nearly all of the supply.

The poor sheeple move in, full of faith that the nanny state will maketh them to lie down in green pastures and leadeth them beside the still waters.

Then they wake up one day and find out the truth.

12 posted on 06/15/2015 10:44:55 AM PDT by newgeezer (It is [the people's] right and duty to be at all times armed. --Thomas Jefferson, 1824)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
No way! We have Politically Correct SHAMING ENFORCEMENT in CA!!!

Phhhhhhht!!!

13 posted on 06/15/2015 10:50:23 AM PDT by SierraWasp (Help Stamp Out Pernicious Progressives and Arrogant Activists With Their Liberalism!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Most of California’s fresh water is being dumped in the ocean. So this exercise is just another attack on the wealthy. Instead of using carbon, the left is now using water as the mode of attack. Unless rationing is instituted on what comes from civil sources, the wealthy are entitled to as much as they want to pay for.

It isn’t a matter of how much they pay or how much they use, it is a matter of availability. If the wealthy need this much water and rationing has been instituted, they can have water trucked in.

As long as it is cheaper to get the water out of a pipe than from a truck, the wealthy will get their water from a pipe.


14 posted on 06/15/2015 11:14:07 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Absolutely!


15 posted on 06/15/2015 2:06:14 PM PDT by SgtHooper (Anyone who remembers the 60's, wasn't there!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldfart
Sure, but since California also has a budget problem it might be equally proper to raise their water bill enough to offset that.

I remember that in the previous drought in California, some communities would turn off the water or install a limiter at the valve outside your home, if you continually exceeded mandated limits on water usage. Pretty effective, even if you had the money to pay the fines you would no longer be able to get the water. (Yes, these droughts are cyclic in California, but the state government won't create a cure and they help cause these droughts.)

16 posted on 06/15/2015 7:14:35 PM PDT by roadcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Of course. If you can pay for it, nobody should force you to not have it. What next? The wealthy get too much vacation and fun?


17 posted on 06/16/2015 6:37:44 AM PDT by sagar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...
The point here is, either there are water restrictions, or there are not. Otherwise, Governor Moonbeam is enabling -- gasp -- crony capitalists.
18 posted on 06/17/2015 11:08:25 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (What do we want? REGIME CHANGE! When do we want it? NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ahhh....

For an equitable outcome, water should be rationed in the same proportion as taxes paid.

Those that pay lots of taxes get lots of water.

Those that pay no taxes get no water.

Those with an excess of taxes and thus water can sell the excess to those with none

Those with no water and no money can return to the land of plentiful water in Mexico


19 posted on 06/17/2015 11:12:30 AM PDT by bert ((K.E.; N.P.; GOPc.;+12, 73, ..... No peace? then no peace!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sagar

All arguments aside about the government currently wasting water and its ineptitude.

In most cases, water isn’t a “want”, like “vacations and fun”, it’s a need. These folks “want” water for their lawns and extraneous uses. Those don’t qualify as “needs”.

In this case, I’m a bit torn between the free market and the realities we’re facing. The CLAIM is that there is very limited supply. Photos of reservoirs and measurements of the snow pack appear to buttress these claims.

Thus, the rule of supply and demand appears to hold sway here. The problem, as has already been noted, is that government has control of the supply. In addition, water is a necessity for life.

If these “rich” can continue to use otherwise potable water to water their lawns and other extraneous uses, it only serves to further constrict supply for those needing the water for hygiene (clothes, showers) and health(dishwashing, teethbrushing) reasons.

I’m doing my part, with regards to water conservation. I would expect others, regardless of station to do the same. They are not “elite”, nor entitled to special priviledges when it comes to conserving a natural resource that everyone needs.


20 posted on 06/17/2015 11:27:40 AM PDT by SZonian (Throwing our allegiances to political parties in the long run gave away our liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson