> so the logic of this post is prett much ass-backwards. If see a flaw in their logic please point it out. The existence of the LA aqueduct, hetch-hetchy or a

> so the logic of this post is prett much ass-backwards. If see a flaw in their logic please point it out. The existence of the LA aqueduct, hetch-hetchy or any other water logistics is not a counter point. When the vast majority of people are using 20% of the water that does not mean that "civilization centers are equally the problems" > The farming/food is to feed these people This would be a good point, but it's not really true. California exports lots of food and is perfectly capable of importing more food than it currently does. When water is scarce we don't need to use it to grow rice. Water is a valuable resource. If farmers want to grow rice in the desert they should pay for that valuable resource just like anyone else.