5 ms·

I agree so strongly with this sentiment. There is always such a defeatist attitude on these threads that assumes California is somehow full and unchangeable. Ou

I agree so strongly with this sentiment. There is always such a defeatist attitude on these threads that assumes California is somehow full and unchangeable. Outside of the three metro areas, it's basically empty! Separately, in the metro areas, there's a lot of room for infill density. Three years back, I made the rational choice to leave because I could barely see a way to home ownership - not to mention having a family and sending children to a good school. California can solve all of it's problems if it wanted to. I think the problem is the number of people in California who have barely left the state and view the rest of the country as this underdeveloped backwater. Food for thought, California currently: - Is tied for the 3rd highest unemployment rate https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm https://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm - Has the 5th highest Gini coefficient https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_Gini_coefficient https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_Gini_... - Has the LOWEST high school graduation rate https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/high-school-graduation-rates-by-state https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/high-school... The first step to solving a problem is admitting you have a problem.

WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
California needs to drastically ramp up water availability from new sources. Otherwise there isn't much point to the rest of this conversation.
- epistasis 5y ago
  It won't take much water to support more people, and adding more people might even reduce water demand. Getting rid of old fixtures with née construction drastically reduces water demand. Replacing single family lawns with multi family and shared lawns typically allows far more people to live on the same amount of land and at the same time use less water. Even as my town's population has grown, water use has dropped: PDF, page 25: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20484267-2020-annual-water-resources-report https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20484267-2020-annual... The bigger problem is water supply reliability, and that's going to need some serious attention whether or not new people come. The water rights system in this state are absurd, and we use water in terrible ways because of it. We need to reign in the farmers, who have been abusing aquifers and living without thought for the next generation. And we probably need to start taxing water rights, based on the water rights value.
  - WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
    > It won't take much water to support more people I don't think this takes into account the ongoing decreases in CA's current water sources. Some of those sources are shared by multiple, growing, states. > The bigger problem is water supply reliability, and that's going to need some serious attention whether or not new people come. This seems to undermine any arguments about not requiring much water to support more people.
    - epistasis 5y ago
      If our water sources are decreasing, and building new infill housing for more people decreases water use, then more people's helps the water problem by changing our very infrastructure. But more people will help our water situation in other ways too. Those new people also bring the resources with them to address a changing climate that has more water variability. Because of Prop 13, a static population will starve local governments of funds to deal with their water issues. We require new people to reset tax assessments and bring in funds. A third way that more people help the water situation is that it wrests more control of water from economically exploitive water usages such as industry and towards more socially supportive uses. The current coalition of residents does not have sufficient political power to reform our awful water rights system. It will take an expanded electorate of residents to overpower the i democratic influence of the industrial uses of water that would be far better suited to other areas of the country.
- medium_burrito 5y ago
  Stop growing rice and fucknuts in the fucking desert. That solves the water problem.
  - WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
    And farm where? The aquifer used by most of the midwest is over half drained and can't be replenished. South of there is dessert. North is cold. East is populous and mountainous.
    - raldi 5y ago
      If we made no change other than to stop growing the almonds that we export overseas, that alone would free up enough water to accommodate about 20 new San Franciscos: https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/LA-vs-Exports_v3.gif https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/LA-vs-Exports...
      - WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
        While farming that uses even more water gets a pass? http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/05/11/cows-not-almonds-are-biggest-water-users/ http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/05/11/cows-not-almonds-...
        raldi 5y ago
        I mentioned almonds because California grows so many of them that the total water use of all the state's production outweighs the total for beef, but your point is valid that beef (in terms of water-per-pound-eaten) use even more water. This is another area we could free up the supply for residential use: Let other parts of the country develop stronger cattle industries. Or just let the price of meat go up.
      - scottrogowski 5y ago
        That's very interesting. Today I learned.
    - 5y ago
- scottrogowski 5y ago
  Disagree that the statistics I cited have water availability as a prerequisite to improvement. California can simultaneously have water problems and graduate more seniors. They are not mutually exclusive. Agree in the need to ramp up water availability. Though certainly simple solutions like reducing the number of water intensive crops would provide enough water for decades of population growth without new sources. The key is to allow people to imagine a slightly different California and not panic that there just aren't as many almond growers as there used to be.
sokoloff 5y ago
To what extent does the third datapoint drive the other two?
poloopolo 5y ago
California has had the same family as government for pretty much 80 years straight. Hard to be optimistic of change in less than decades let alone years.

WarOnPrivacy 5y ago

California needs to drastically ramp up water availability from new sources. Otherwise there isn't much point to the rest of this conversation.

epistasis 5y ago
It won't take much water to support more people, and adding more people might even reduce water demand. Getting rid of old fixtures with née construction drastically reduces water demand. Replacing single family lawns with multi family and shared lawns typically allows far more people to live on the same amount of land and at the same time use less water. Even as my town's population has grown, water use has dropped: PDF, page 25: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20484267-2020-annual-water-resources-report https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20484267-2020-annual... The bigger problem is water supply reliability, and that's going to need some serious attention whether or not new people come. The water rights system in this state are absurd, and we use water in terrible ways because of it. We need to reign in the farmers, who have been abusing aquifers and living without thought for the next generation. And we probably need to start taxing water rights, based on the water rights value.
- WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
  > It won't take much water to support more people I don't think this takes into account the ongoing decreases in CA's current water sources. Some of those sources are shared by multiple, growing, states. > The bigger problem is water supply reliability, and that's going to need some serious attention whether or not new people come. This seems to undermine any arguments about not requiring much water to support more people.
  - epistasis 5y ago
    If our water sources are decreasing, and building new infill housing for more people decreases water use, then more people's helps the water problem by changing our very infrastructure. But more people will help our water situation in other ways too. Those new people also bring the resources with them to address a changing climate that has more water variability. Because of Prop 13, a static population will starve local governments of funds to deal with their water issues. We require new people to reset tax assessments and bring in funds. A third way that more people help the water situation is that it wrests more control of water from economically exploitive water usages such as industry and towards more socially supportive uses. The current coalition of residents does not have sufficient political power to reform our awful water rights system. It will take an expanded electorate of residents to overpower the i democratic influence of the industrial uses of water that would be far better suited to other areas of the country.
medium_burrito 5y ago
Stop growing rice and fucknuts in the fucking desert. That solves the water problem.
- WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
  And farm where? The aquifer used by most of the midwest is over half drained and can't be replenished. South of there is dessert. North is cold. East is populous and mountainous.
  - raldi 5y ago
    If we made no change other than to stop growing the almonds that we export overseas, that alone would free up enough water to accommodate about 20 new San Franciscos: https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/LA-vs-Exports_v3.gif https://www.motherjones.com/wp-content/uploads/LA-vs-Exports...
    - WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
      While farming that uses even more water gets a pass? http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/05/11/cows-not-almonds-are-biggest-water-users/ http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/05/11/cows-not-almonds-...
      - raldi 5y ago
        I mentioned almonds because California grows so many of them that the total water use of all the state's production outweighs the total for beef, but your point is valid that beef (in terms of water-per-pound-eaten) use even more water. This is another area we could free up the supply for residential use: Let other parts of the country develop stronger cattle industries. Or just let the price of meat go up.
    - scottrogowski 5y ago
      That's very interesting. Today I learned.
  - 5y ago
scottrogowski 5y ago
Disagree that the statistics I cited have water availability as a prerequisite to improvement. California can simultaneously have water problems and graduate more seniors. They are not mutually exclusive. Agree in the need to ramp up water availability. Though certainly simple solutions like reducing the number of water intensive crops would provide enough water for decades of population growth without new sources. The key is to allow people to imagine a slightly different California and not panic that there just aren't as many almond growers as there used to be.

sokoloff 5y ago

To what extent does the third datapoint drive the other two?

poloopolo 5y ago

California has had the same family as government for pretty much 80 years straight. Hard to be optimistic of change in less than decades let alone years.