Will there be blood?

[Little Hater]

Seventy percent of the surface of the Earth is covered with water, much of it miles deep. The whole 'OMG, we're running out of water!' nonsense chaps my ass. It's just another way of controlling people politically.

Our water 'crisis' is that it isn't where we need it to be, in a form we need it in. Those are just engineering problems, and we're really good at solving those. Drink up and don't panic.

[Yorkshire pud]

Seventy percent of the surface of the Earth is covered with water, much of it miles deep. The whole 'OMG, we're running out of water!' nonsense chaps my ass. It's just another way of controlling people politically.

Our water 'crisis' is that it isn't where we need it to be, in a form we need it in. Those are just engineering problems, and we're really good at solving those. Drink up and don't panic.

Those are just engineering problems, but being engineering problems, they cost money: Money that people are reluctant to spend if it doesn't benefit them directly, because humanity is basically a 'me me me me' species. I've seen it touted that western 'civilisation' is three days from anarchy in the event of a food or water shortage. That's when marauding mobs kill any and all..Just look what happens when the snow falls for more than two days and the shops look like a plague of locusts have been, clearing out milk, bread and anything else that will have perished by the time it's used.

[albrecht]

I saw a story the other day that some place in Oregon is going to empty their town's 30+million gallon reservoir because some kid pissed in it. That is the kind of absurdity we deal with. While there is a lot of water on earth most of it is salty. That is the problem. We should also encourage people to use gray water for their lawns etc. I'll bet a lot of water could be recycled that way. In the old days ice would be trucked to places. Apparently it was economically feasible then (hence the old "ice box" before modern refrigerators.) We have constant floods, icedams, and frozen lakes up north. Why can't we figure a way to pipeline, via rail or truck, etc some of that ice/water to places like the Southwest that is always in drought? Help with the flooding in the upper midwest and Canada and help with the drought in Texas, California, etc?

[wr250]

I saw a story the other day that some place in Oregon is going to empty their town's 30+million gallon reservoir because some kid pissed in it. That is the kind of absurdity we deal with. While there is a lot of water on earth most of it is salty. That is the problem. We should also encourage people to use gray water for their lawns etc. I'll bet a lot of water could be recycled that way.

i agree

In the old days ice would be trucked to places. Apparently it was economically feasible then (hence the old "ice box" before modern refrigerators.) We have constant floods, icedams, and frozen lakes up north. Why can't we figure a way to pipeline, via rail or truck, etc some of that ice/water to places like the Southwest that is always in drought? Help with the flooding in the upper midwest and Canada and help with the drought in Texas, California, etc?

well most places west of the continental divide in the southwest are classified "desert" , which means its in a perpetual drought.  as far as shipping ice/water, the climate change alarmists would point at the amount of fuel burned to move the ice/water.
we have a series of dams that would prevent flooding throughout the midwest,, but the environ-mentalists have ensured (through lawsuits and and other court actions) that that will never be used to its potential to stop flooding and low water levels by storing water in reservoirs when plentiful and releasing it when not. 

[Yorkshire pud]

I saw a story the other day that some place in Oregon is going to empty their town's 30+million gallon reservoir because some kid pissed in it. That is the kind of absurdity we deal with.

Do the town planners all subscribe to homeopathy I wonder? Unless they're terrified of the multi billion dollar lawsuits that would inevitably come their way...But it's pathetic. Those who have made this decision ought to spend a month in Sudan where they'd give anything to drink horribly contaminated water through no fault of their own. If the story is true, then they've simply had it too good for too long and don't know when they've got it easy.

[albrecht]

Do the town planners all subscribe to homeopathy I wonder? Unless they're terrified of the multi billion dollar lawsuits that would inevitably come their way...But it's pathetic. Those who have made this decision ought to spend a month in Sudan where they'd give anything to drink horribly contaminated water through no fault of their own. If the story is true, then they've simply had it too good for too long and don't know when they've got it easy.

When I first heard the story I thought it must be some joke or "right wing" attack on silly government etc. But apparently it is true and they also are charging kid for public urination n trespass. (Not sure if they are also going to civilly charge him $$ for the water they are going to dump.) Patently absurd and whoever is in charge should be fired. Do they not think animals (and probably other drunks) piss in the water all the time? Hell, if the kid was so drunk he was probably pissing water out anyway!
ps: I seem to recall that Lyndon LaRouche (of the Queen is a drug-dealer and various other conspiracies fame) had some grand water scheme for the USA? Maybe I'm misremembering but I recall some huge plan with regard to water to solve drought and make power that would solve all of our problems.

[Yorkshire pud]

When I first heard the story I thought it must be some joke or "right wing" attack on silly government etc. But apparently it is true and they also are charging kid for public urination n trespass. (Not sure if they are also going to civilly charge him $$ for the water they are going to dump.) Patently absurd and whoever is in charge should be fired. Do they not think animals (and probably other drunks) piss in the water all the time? Hell, if the kid was so drunk he was probably pissing water out anyway!
ps: I seem to recall that Lyndon LaRouche (of the Queen is a drug-dealer and various other conspiracies fame) had some grand water scheme for the USA? Maybe I'm misremembering but I recall some huge plan with regard to water to solve drought and make power that would solve all of our problems.

Dilute it? Make it go further..

[b_dubb]

It's real simpe: Does Clive own the land? No.  Is he paying to use the land? No.  How is that not stealing?

The fucker should pay his damn bills and shut his stupid yap.

[NowhereInTime]

i agreewell most places west of the continental divide in the southwest are classified "desert" , which means its in a perpetual drought.  as far as shipping ice/water, the climate change alarmists would point at the amount of fuel burned to move the ice/water.
we have a series of dams that would prevent flooding throughout the midwest,, but the environ-mentalists have ensured (through lawsuits and and other court actions) that that will never be used to its potential to stop flooding and low water levels by storing water in reservoirs when plentiful and releasing it when not.

You and Albrecht are onto something; why not aquaducts?  (Please, stop laughing.) So many rivers in the northern part of the country flood with the melting snow each year.
It would be a public works effort even larger than Hoover Dam but not quite as intensive as the Interstate system to build a series of aquaducts from flood zones to water challenged areas )at least East of the Rockies).  The ducts would be set to siphon off water from flood stage to the Great Midwest dust bowl area to help irrigate crops suffering from localized drought. (And this way, potable water could be conserved for, you know, "poting"..)
Anyway, its a thought.  It would alleviate flooding while hydrating the heartland.  I suppose if it were cost effective it would have been done, but what if there were technological barriers would could engineer around?  We sent men to the moon, couldn't we send water to Oklahoma?

[NowhereInTime]

Do the town planners all subscribe to homeopathy I wonder? Unless they're terrified of the multi billion dollar lawsuits that would inevitably come their way...But it's pathetic. Those who have made this decision ought to spend a month in Sudan where they'd give anything to drink horribly contaminated water through no fault of their own. If the story is true, then they've simply had it too good for too long and don't know when they've got it easy.

This was another grandstanding gesture by sanctimonious bureaucrats to overkill and oversell a message. This time they wasted water they could easily clean to proove a point.  Jerks.
Kid's a jerk too (speaking of "jerk", I hope that was urine...) but a little piss diluted through 38 million gallons wouldn't even transmit disease let alone pee-pee.

[wr250]

It's real simpe: Does Clive own the land? No.  Is he paying to use the land? No.  How is that not stealing?

The fucker should pay his damn bills and shut his stupid yap.

he was paying nevada to use the land.

[Jackstar]

It's real simpe:

I... concur.

[Jackstar]

Property rights can be complex. There's grazing rights; water rights; timber rights; mineral rights; mining rights; right-of-way rights--this list, does indeed go on.

These are the facts: Somebody wants Bundy's ass bad. So bad, all these shenanigans have happened, and are continuing to happen.

Irrespective of why these events have occurred... is it not blisteringly obvious to all that a very deep look needs to be taken here?

[VtaGeezer]

he was paying nevada to use the land.

There's no evidence of this Bundy claim. Before 1993, grazing fees were administered by the states.  1993 was the last year Bundy paid any fees for fattening his cattle and his substantial profits on public lands.  So far, every "fact" this con man had presented has been an outight lie. He's just a deadbeat rationalizing his larceny with doubletalk; all rejected in court twice.

[VtaGeezer]

These are the facts: Somebody wants Bundy's ass bad. So bad, all these shenanigans have happened, and are continuing to happen.

Yeah, they want his ass so bad they've let him slide and delay paying up for 20 years.

[Jackstar]

He's just a deadbeat

Lives in the desert. Creates food.

Like seriously... whatever. SNIPERS!!!

[b_dubb]

Lives in the desert. Creates food.

Like seriously... whatever. SNIPERS!!!

Yeah. And if he paid his damn bills no BFD.  But he didn't.  And here we are.

[VtaGeezer]

Lives in the desert. Creates food.

That's the silliest rationalization in this saga yet. A few days back, someone posted something about Bundy becoming a cult leader.  And I thought they were wrong. 

[Jackstar]

That's the silliest rationalization in this saga yet.

Those are not rationalizations. They are facts.

[Yorkshire pud]

Those are not rationalizations. They are facts.

Hmmm, it isn't an either/or. Something can be rationalised with facts. it doesn't make the rationalisation justified. "I shot the fed in the back with a Barrett .50 from a mile away because he gave Bundy a dirty look" might be fact, it doesn't rationalise murder.

I'm sure you'll rationalise your rebuttal....

[Zoo]

"As tensions regarding colonial lands and taxation increased during the 1760s and 1770s, many American leaders were influenced by the liberal and republican ideals espoused by Enlightenment writers such as John Locke. Key among Locke's theories was that of the "social contract" which stated that legitimate state authority must be derived from the consent of the governed. Also, that should the government abuse the rights of the governed, it was the natural responsibility of the people to rise up and overthrow their leaders. The ideas of Locke and other similar writers contributed to the American embrace of "republican" ideology in the years before the Revolution. Standing in opposition to tyrants, republicanism called for the protection liberty through the rule of law and civic virtue"Kennedy Hickman !!1

[Yorkshire pud]

"As tensions regarding colonial lands and taxation increased during the 1760s and 1770s, many American leaders were influenced by the liberal and republican ideals espoused by Enlightenment writers such as John Locke. Key among Locke's theories was that of the "social contract" which stated that legitimate state authority must be derived from the consent of the governed. Also, that should the government abuse the rights of the governed, it was the natural responsibility of the people to rise up and overthrow their leaders. The ideas of Locke and other similar writers contributed to the American embrace of "republican" ideology in the years before the Revolution. Standing in opposition to tyrants, republicanism called for the protection liberty through the rule of law and civic virtue"Kennedy Hickman !!1

They had revolutions in Spain, France and Russia too. All of them to overthrow monarchs/right wing dictators or both.... I'll let you work out the rest. We have some romantics in the UK who want a republic and get rid of the Monarchy, a spokesman (among a few of his persuasion) was the recently departed Tony Benn. He wanted to abolish our Monarchy years ago. He stood by his principles though; He gave up his hereditary peerage as he disagreed with the whole concept of the upper house. He was a deeply left of centre MP of many years, and disagree or agree, he was very much respected for his intellect and integrity by all sides.

[VtaGeezer]

"As tensions regarding colonial lands and taxation increased during the 1760s and 1770s, many American leaders were influenced by the liberal and republican ideals espoused by Enlightenment writers such as John Locke. Key among Locke's theories was that of the "social contract" which stated that legitimate state authority must be derived from the consent of the governed. Also, that should the government abuse the rights of the governed, it was the natural responsibility of the people to rise up and overthrow their leaders. The ideas of Locke and other similar writers contributed to the American embrace of "republican" ideology in the years before the Revolution. Standing in opposition to tyrants, republicanism called for the protection liberty through the rule of law and civic virtue"Kennedy Hickman !!1

The conveniently omitted difference is that when the American right uses "leaders" in that context, they refer to those elected by majorities, often several times.  Just not elected by them. 

[PB the Deplorable]

Yeah. And if he paid his damn bills no BFD.  But he didn't.  And here we are.

What do you make of the fact that he is the very last rancher in Clark County?  Everyone else (50 or so other ranching families)said the hell with it and left (they were intimidated, harassed, forced to give up their water and property rights, and if they didn't leave - bankrupted), Bundy said the hell with them (the BLM).

The others paid their BLM fees, and they are gone. 

Are we really supporting these Brown Shirts stealing the land on behalf of Harry and Rory Reid?  You know, the public servant snipers in camouflage who are just following orders. 

[PB the Deplorable]

Harry has become a very rich man during his years in public office. 

I guess that's ok because we love big government so much - anyone connected to it gets a free pass.  If Harry was a CEO somewhere, the very same people who are hating on Clive Bundy would be all worked up about Harry. 


This is an example of why government is more dangerous than private sector corporations.  They are much larger and more powerful.  They make the laws.  They control the police, the courts, the prisons.  They can change laws at a whim, or write new regs.  They can set up agencies, take over portions of the private economy, then force people to deal with them.  A sizeable percent of the population will side with them in any dispute, regardless.   An overwhelming percent of the Media in this country will support them, regardless.

The private sector has regulators, auditors, shareholders, to keep it in check, the government does whatever it wants with no accountability - the media is supposed to be the watchdog but they have become accomplices instead.  Creating a powerful organization like this and giving them more power over us than the bare minimum is a mistake.

The Left loves big government so much because that's the only way they can enact their Socialist agenda, but in building a government powerful enough to do that they are also building a government powerful enough to do anything else it wants as well.  This is very dangerous to our Liberty.  We get further and further from a system of self rule.  Our representative republic is fading away, as is the consent of the governed.

But, you know, government good, private sector baaad, and anyone resisting or otherwise in the way of government also baaad.

[albrecht]

You and Albrecht are onto something; why not aquaducts?  (Please, stop laughing.) So many rivers in the northern part of the country flood with the melting snow each year.
It would be a public works effort even larger than Hoover Dam but not quite as intensive as the Interstate system to build a series of aquaducts from flood zones to water challenged areas )at least East of the Rockies).  The ducts would be set to siphon off water from flood stage to the Great Midwest dust bowl area to help irrigate crops suffering from localized drought. (And this way, potable water could be conserved for, you know, "poting"..)
Anyway, its a thought.  It would alleviate flooding while hydrating the heartland.  I suppose if it were cost effective it would have been done, but what if there were technological barriers would could engineer around?  We sent men to the moon, couldn't we send water to Oklahoma?

North American Water and Power Alliance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Water_and_Power_Alliance
Good old Lyndon is still carrying the torch for this idea. Some of the ideas are a little "out there" for me (using nukes to help in the building of the system) but I would think some type of project (maybe not as vast as this proposal) would not only help out farmers (and cities) in drought prone areas but also help the seasonal flooding in the upper-midwest.

[Juan]

I'm not sure there's a significant difference between big corporations and big government.  Not with the way people shift so easily from one to another.

[NowhereInTime]

This is an example of why government is more dangerous than private sector corporations.  They are much larger and more powerful.  They make the laws.  They control the police, the courts, the prisons.  They can change laws at a whim, or write new regs.  They can set up agencies, take over portions of the private economy, then force people to deal with them.  A sizeable percent of the population will side with them in any dispute, regardless.   An overwhelming percent of the Media in this country will support them, regardless.

The private sector has regulators, auditors, shareholders, to keep it in check, the government does whatever it wants with no accountability - the media is supposed to be the watchdog but they have become accomplices instead.  Creating a powerful organization like this and giving them more power over us than the bare minimum is a mistake.

Typical polyannish view of private enterprise.
Oh, no! Government has no regulators!  I mean , its not like there are Inspectors General or a whole institution called Congress to oversee these things or even a way to get someone distasteful out of office, like an election or something...

But private enterprise?  Adhering to the strictist of moral codes!  You can go right into Citibank headquarters right now and tell them to knock it off with CDO's.  If you owned approximately 50 million shares at a mere $46 a pop.  Papes always leaves that little bit out.  You have no power when it comes to corporate America's misdeeds.  Regulators are understaffed and underfunded.  Corporate officers are beholden only to their respective boards, many of whom they incestuously interpopulate. 
But no, really, let's put our faith in people who's only goal in life is to get more.

The only reason government is "dangerous" is because so many people opt out.  These fucking midterms coming up are critical yet I guarantee less than 40 % of registered voters show up nationwide. That's registered voters, forget the unregistered who facilitate this crime.

International coporations pay no taxes and heed no laws off our shores.  Corporations gather information you don't want gathered using deceptive contractual practices.  Then they don't take care of your info (as they sell it back and forth to each other) because to do so wouldn't be "cost effective". So, fuck you if your identity is stolen off our ether.

But please, listen to Papes and put your faith into the most noble of our citizenry; the water polluting, landfill dumping, mountainside strip-mining, carbon tax resisting, carbon pollutant spewing, offshore tax dodging, politician buying, earthquake fracking, information stealing, health cost jacking, service denying, family foreclosing, farm foreclosing, personal rights denying, Art Bell deceiving, and George Noory promoting denizens of Corporate America!  In Corporata We Trust!

[Zoo]

GE made 105 billion dollars last year paid zero in taxes, is getting $34 million refund. This is both Government and Big Business  working together. People still want to blame the Democrats or Republicans and do not understand they are the same thing Big Business. They have are land they will get the water and even in Spain they have the Sun. So no matter what you think is going on these are facts and it will or has happened. So just sit back and relax and do not worry they have your best interest in mind. Enjoy your new world!!1

[albrecht]

Typical polyannish view of private enterprise.
Oh, no! Government has no regulators!  I mean , its not like there are Inspectors General or a whole institution called Congress to oversee these things or even a way to get someone distasteful out of office, like an election or something...

But private enterprise?  Adhering to the strictist of moral codes!  You can go right into Citibank headquarters right now and tell them to knock it off with CDO's.  If you owned approximately 50 million shares at a mere $46 a pop.  Papes always leaves that little bit out.  You have no power when it comes to corporate America's misdeeds.  Regulators are understaffed and underfunded.  Corporate officers are beholden only to their respective boards, many of whom they incestuously interpopulate. 
But no, really, let's put our faith in people who's only goal in life is to get more.

The only reason government is "dangerous" is because so many people opt out.  These fucking midterms coming up are critical yet I guarantee less than 40 % of registered voters show up nationwide. That's registered voters, forget the unregistered who facilitate this crime.

International coporations pay no taxes and heed no laws off our shores.  Corporations gather information you don't want gathered using deceptive contractual practices.  Then they don't take care of your info (as they sell it back and forth to each other) because to do so wouldn't be "cost effective". So, fuck you if your identity is stolen off our ether.

But please, listen to Papes and put your faith into the most noble of our citizenry; the water polluting, landfill dumping, mountainside strip-mining, carbon tax resisting, carbon pollutant spewing, offshore tax dodging, politician buying, earthquake fracking, information stealing, health cost jacking, service denying, family foreclosing, farm foreclosing, personal rights denying, Art Bell deceiving, and George Noory promoting denizens of Corporate America!  In Corporata We Trust!

With increased size and $$ come power. Ultimately more people have been killed by government(s)- though we will see how Fukishima plays out. Because the government have all the money (or can print more if they wish), have a legal monopoly on violence, and have sheer numbers to kill overtly or by mistake/purpose of public policy. Corporations can do great damage also though are still kept in check better, or slightly better, than government(s) due to having competition, lawsuits, government oversight, and consumer decisions (only the government -like with the ACA- can force you to buy something.) When the corporations meld with government (or certain ones) like we see with corporate lobbying and in Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama great damage can be done because one big "check" on their power is gone as the laws (-or increasingly as we see with this character Obama- regulations and executive orders) can be done to benefit certain corporations over others and businesses over people. And government "bails out" connected companies and people and let others, or the small guy/business, get hurt. There should be nothing "too big to fail" including the government and the bigger, powerful someone is the more possibility for corruption and damage to people. Though, not always, for example I worry more about environmental damage from small company "frackers" than say, Exxon-Mobil. Because the small guy is operating very lean and usually leveraged to do the deal. A bigger company can lose big time (in lawsuits, fines, and has deep pockets so more incentive to do it cleaner). Though accidents do happen by taking short-cuts: hello BP and Fukishima).