8 ms·

You should read "Cadillac Desert", if you live in the American Southwestern state--California, Arizona, and Nevada in particular. It has significant implication

You should read "Cadillac Desert", if you live in the American Southwestern state--California, Arizona, and Nevada in particular. It has significant implications for the future survivability of large-scale civilization in the region. Mark Reisner originally wrote the book in the early 1990s, and his predictions have turned out to be quite accurate over the last three decades. If you want to make informed decisions, as a voter and a resident, this is probably the single most important thing you need to get educated about.

kortilla 4y ago
It’s hyperbolic trash though. What is happening to the Colorado river has been predicted as a possibility since the dams were built. It has absolutely no implications for the survivability of large scale civilizations in the area because the vast majority of the water goes to farming. Residential and office usage is willing to pay far more than farmers and uses significantly less. The flow rate of the Colorado river could drop by another 70% and still support everyone living here (socal, az, nv). The instance things get a little dire, farmer rights will be stripped away by the voters, they’ll pay market rate like everyone else, and the problem will be solved overnight.
- SkittyDog 4y ago
  > It’s hyperbolic trash though. This is rude, and unnecessary. If your own counter-argument is actually sound, why are you bothering to label Reisner's as trash? It doesn't make you more believable--it mostly just undermines your credibility, because you apparently don't trust the soundness of your arguments to stand on their own. Have you read the HN comment guidelines? I'll quote something that you might want to consider: > When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Right now, I have zero interest in engaging with you, because of the unpleasantly combatitive way you've chosen to approach the topic. What would even be the point of trying to have a discussion with someone who believes it's OK to speak to strangers like this? Consider rewriting your comment, and maybe we can talk about the actual merits of Reisner... As it is now, good luck, and I hope you learn a better way to interact with the world.
- solardev 4y ago
  Water rights aren't going away without a fight. It's not something voters really understand. In the west, it's a super complex topic. There's a reason politicians go to "hey, don't water your lawn this year! No water at restaurants unless you ask for it!" mode whenever there's an issue now. That sort of worthless virtue signaling is the only thing they can really accomplish vs big water/ag. And the Republicans will weaponize rural water rights as just another thing to use against the libs. Even if you can redo water rights (which won't happen), what happens when farmers lose their water? People aren't going to be stoked about not having easy access to beef, almonds, etc. And the farm subsidies would have to massively go up even more, which Republicans will fight tooth and nail for while pretending to defend the small farmer. What isn't hyperbole is that cyclical mega droughts is part of our new norm and this is going to become an issue every year, alongside wildfires. None of it will be solved overnight, and it will probably get much much worse in our lifetimes. Welcome to the future lol.
  - google234123 4y ago
    You don't even have to directly deal with water rights. The state could easily make it completely impractical to farm with onerous regulation and taxes - something liberal states love to do in general.
    - SkittyDog 4y ago
      The "state" is not a unitary actor that somehow magically intuits and implements the desires of a majority of voters. All state policy, but especially legislation, is a massive hodge-podge of independent actors motivated by all sorts of factors, and very often in direct opposition to each other's interests. All those actors are just as selfish, ignorant, stupid, greedy, angry, racist, corrupt, and venal as the rest of the human race. The state's legislative apparatus will always do (and ONLY do) that which is achieved by the outcome of all the competing interests and their efforts at lobbying, contributing, marketing, persuading, bribing, intimidating, etc, etc. Occasionally there may be room for the individual conscience of a principled actor. But most often the ethics of individuals don't mean anything in the face of the economic, political, and cultural forces that shape state policy. Even with direct ballot intiatives, we've just shifted the target of all those lobbying efforts from the statehouse to your house. The mass of voters might be less immediately corrupt and power-hungry than professional politicians in the legislature, but we're also more ignorant, stupid, distracted, and impatient than the pros.. And since ballot initiatives because a thing, we've managed to create about as many serious problems as we've been able to solve. There is no such thing as "easily" when it comes to making laws--unless you're a dictator with a firm grip on power.
- LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago
  I'll give you another piece of 'hyperbolic trash': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water_Knife https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water_Knife ;-)
- arbitrary_name 4y ago
  Provide some evidence. Reisner's work is extensively researched and is well respected, generally. You have just showed up with your own hyperbole, and nothing to back it up.

kortilla 4y ago

It’s hyperbolic trash though. What is happening to the Colorado river has been predicted as a possibility since the dams were built. It has absolutely no implications for the survivability of large scale civilizations in the area because the vast majority of the water goes to farming. Residential and office usage is willing to pay far more than farmers and uses significantly less. The flow rate of the Colorado river could drop by another 70% and still support everyone living here (socal, az, nv). The instance things get a little dire, farmer rights will be stripped away by the voters, they’ll pay market rate like everyone else, and the problem will be solved overnight.

SkittyDog 4y ago
> It’s hyperbolic trash though. This is rude, and unnecessary. If your own counter-argument is actually sound, why are you bothering to label Reisner's as trash? It doesn't make you more believable--it mostly just undermines your credibility, because you apparently don't trust the soundness of your arguments to stand on their own. Have you read the HN comment guidelines? I'll quote something that you might want to consider: > When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3." Right now, I have zero interest in engaging with you, because of the unpleasantly combatitive way you've chosen to approach the topic. What would even be the point of trying to have a discussion with someone who believes it's OK to speak to strangers like this? Consider rewriting your comment, and maybe we can talk about the actual merits of Reisner... As it is now, good luck, and I hope you learn a better way to interact with the world.
solardev 4y ago
Water rights aren't going away without a fight. It's not something voters really understand. In the west, it's a super complex topic. There's a reason politicians go to "hey, don't water your lawn this year! No water at restaurants unless you ask for it!" mode whenever there's an issue now. That sort of worthless virtue signaling is the only thing they can really accomplish vs big water/ag. And the Republicans will weaponize rural water rights as just another thing to use against the libs. Even if you can redo water rights (which won't happen), what happens when farmers lose their water? People aren't going to be stoked about not having easy access to beef, almonds, etc. And the farm subsidies would have to massively go up even more, which Republicans will fight tooth and nail for while pretending to defend the small farmer. What isn't hyperbole is that cyclical mega droughts is part of our new norm and this is going to become an issue every year, alongside wildfires. None of it will be solved overnight, and it will probably get much much worse in our lifetimes. Welcome to the future lol.
- google234123 4y ago
  You don't even have to directly deal with water rights. The state could easily make it completely impractical to farm with onerous regulation and taxes - something liberal states love to do in general.
  - SkittyDog 4y ago
    The "state" is not a unitary actor that somehow magically intuits and implements the desires of a majority of voters. All state policy, but especially legislation, is a massive hodge-podge of independent actors motivated by all sorts of factors, and very often in direct opposition to each other's interests. All those actors are just as selfish, ignorant, stupid, greedy, angry, racist, corrupt, and venal as the rest of the human race. The state's legislative apparatus will always do (and ONLY do) that which is achieved by the outcome of all the competing interests and their efforts at lobbying, contributing, marketing, persuading, bribing, intimidating, etc, etc. Occasionally there may be room for the individual conscience of a principled actor. But most often the ethics of individuals don't mean anything in the face of the economic, political, and cultural forces that shape state policy. Even with direct ballot intiatives, we've just shifted the target of all those lobbying efforts from the statehouse to your house. The mass of voters might be less immediately corrupt and power-hungry than professional politicians in the legislature, but we're also more ignorant, stupid, distracted, and impatient than the pros.. And since ballot initiatives because a thing, we've managed to create about as many serious problems as we've been able to solve. There is no such thing as "easily" when it comes to making laws--unless you're a dictator with a firm grip on power.
LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago
I'll give you another piece of 'hyperbolic trash': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water_Knife https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Water_Knife ;-)
arbitrary_name 4y ago
Provide some evidence. Reisner's work is extensively researched and is well respected, generally. You have just showed up with your own hyperbole, and nothing to back it up.