Saturday, June 27, 2015

what flavor tard will be first to squeal water rationing is communism?


alternet |  Rich people rarely tell you how they really feel about poor people. Occasionally, though, you get a glimpse. Earlier this week, the Washington Post published a storyabout Rancho Santa Fe, a small but extremely wealthy enclave in Southern California. Like the rest of California, the people of Rancho Santa Fe are dealing with a drought. As you might imagine, that means water is scarce and conservation is critical. For the denizens of Rancho Santa Fe, however, conservation is someone else’s problem, namely poor people.

According to Steve Yuhas, who lives in the area and hosts a conservative talk-radio show, privileged people “should not be forced to live on property with brown lawns, golf on brown courses or apologize for wanting their gardens to be beautiful.” Oh, the humanity! In case it wasn’t clear, Yuhas added that the right to water ought to scale with income: “No, we’re not all equal when it comes to water.”

And Yuhas isn’t alone. Gay Butler, an avid equestrian and fellow resident of Rancho Santa Fe, fumed for similar reasons. “It angers me because people aren’t looking at the overall picture,” she said. “What are we supposed to do, just have dirt around our house on four acres?” Perhaps Butler has a point. It’s one thing to demand sacrifice in extraordinary circumstances, but we’ve got to draw the line somewhere, right? If a woman wants to ride her finely manicured horse on a dirt-free prairie in the middle of the desert, what matters a little drought?

Brett Barbre, a fellow Orange Country aristocrat, also appears to get it. “I call it the war on suburbia,” he remarked. “California used to be the land of opportunity and freedom. It’s slowly becoming the land of one group telling everyone else how they think everybody should live their lives.” Barbre continued: “They’ll have to pry it [his water hose] from my cold, dead hands.”

You may be asking yourself: Do restrictions on water consumption during a historic drought really constitute an all-out assault on human freedom? Fair question. Most of us fail to see this issue in such grand terms. Maybe we’re missing something. Mr. Barbre is either a bold lover of liberty or a detached plutocrat with a penchant for hyperbole. You be the judge.

In any case, I see the decadence of the people in Rancho Santa Fe as a microcosm of America today, particularly corporate America. What these people exhibit, apart from their smugness, is a complete absence of any sense of collective responsibility. They can’t see and aren’t interested in the consequences of their actions. And they can’t muster a modicum of moderation in the face of enormous scarcity. Every resource, every privilege, is theirs to pilfer with impunity. These people are prepared to endanger an entire ecosystem simply to avoid the indignity of brown golf courses; this is what true entitlement looks like.

11 comments:

BigDonOne said...

If it wasn't for all those unWedReproducing PARASITic Swyperz taking showers, flushing toilets, washing clothes/LowRiders/Escalades, and required agriculture to produce food for same, there would be plenty of water for responsible, taxpaying, productive, no-nosense-fullyDocumented naturalBorn citizens of the USA////

Vic78 said...

You say this and gladly take Social Security money from the PARASITIC.

CNu said...

lol, old raisins desperate to extend their pathetic end-of-life sojourns in this veil of tears will be the death of us all...,

BigDonOne said...

It's part of the deal for responsible citizenship - 40 years productive working for a living provided an insurance policy that paid off./////////////////

BigDonOne said...

Go ahead and feel superior as you contemplate Mandatory Eubama-nasia at age 67.
You will be Soylent Cookies for the seething hordes of useless Idiocratic-IQ55z....///

CNu said...

lol, you're entitled to the ~ 4 years worth you paid in. Banking on the productive output of me and mine to support your continuing unproductive racetard flailings, however, would be the absolute epitome of poor FTO and IQ-75 parasitism old tape worm....,

Constructive_Feedback said...

(Here is where I get into trouble with my dear friend CNu)

OF COURSE abundant scarcity forces the need or "Central Planning" and Management.
It is even rational to regulate a market of (functionally) NON-REPLINISHIBLE Commodity Resources so that the wealthy can't hoard while the masses die of thirst and or have their lifestyle substantively diminished.

NOTE: I used the term "Functionally" because while it is true that applied billions of dollars could build a water desalination plant and a 1000 mile inland water pumping infrastructure.............TIME and LOGISTICS makes this a long-long term solution and not a short term choice


BUT MY DEAR FRIEND - What about the question of "ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LAWS" during a time of scarcity in which MAN'S demand for water is in conflict with the "Desert Smelt" and their need for a constant flow of water at a particular depth for survival and to maintain their ecosystem?

Would you agree that, in desperation, those same people who worked as "The Voice Of The Fish Who Had No Elected Representation" - should have their viewpoint more tightly scrutinized against the NEEDS OF THE LARGER HUMAN SOCIETY when it is at the brink of serious economic collapse (absent water resources)
?

CNu said...

Show me how that was a consequentlal factor leading toward the situation California currently finds itself in, and I will consider it.

ken said...

I think California is a little different scenario. Everyone knows their is a lack of water, it is caused by a drought. When there is shortage, we still are a community, communism if you will, and we choose leaders or representatives that given the same set of circumstances and information we would likely make the same decisions are leaders make. It's obvious to all water levels are down in California and there shouldn't be any debate if that is true or not. With that reality, that we all know and understand, I believe it is correct for all in California to use water sparingly and rationing is a viable and correct option under the circumstances. But make no mistake, it is communism, the water is the communities and the government controls the water, and in this case needs to do what it can to maintain whatever supply it has until a solution can be figured out or rain comes.


As a community, there a times where we have to change our method to attain a greater good for our freedoms later or for the sake of life. Take for instance the rationings in world war 2, that was a unified commitment to a certain goal and having everyone understand what needs to be done to attain it. Part of the ability to motivate people to community/communist efforts is trust in leadership. However, in California it is difficult to understand how individuals can't see the water shortage as everybody's problem, and not by experience and observation around you understand there truly is a shortage that you must be part of the conservative/conservation.

Constructive_Feedback said...

A HA!!
You ask me to show "Consequence" to the state of their environmental challenge.

I ARGUED that THE PRESENT SITUATION of their environment and their HUMAN DEMAND FOR WATER will ultimately FORCE THE PEOPLE who used to sell us on their 'High Minded Intellectualism' about the environment to say 'Forget Those Damned Fish'!


MIKE TYSON: "Everybody has a detailed plan for VICTORY until they get punched in the face"


CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK UNIVERSITY: When water and resources are plentiful the high minded will works as the VOICE FOR THE VOICELESS. When abrupt scarcity takes over the land...........anyone trying to break in front of them in the "Black Friday Sale at Wal-Mart" that is selling Flat Screen TV's for $99.99 will get PUNCHED IN THE FACE.

CNu said...

lol, uh..., the consequence is confined to the voices in your head which apparently include Mike Tyson. CFU: The comments serve the purpose of helping the subject Bro.Feed resolve various and sundry "disputes" among participant "agents" (including Mike Tyson) comprising his subjective field of auditory hallucinations.