RSS FeedsDampening growth
How should California handle population growth? Discuss round three of this week's Dust-Up.
Comments will close after two weeks.
1.
How are prices of natural resources set?
Are they set by sellers desiring to maximize profits?
Or by politicians trying to maximize votes?
2. My comment from yesterday was not posted, so I try again. 1) 2.5 million illegals are in CA. http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/17.pdf 2) Growth is a problem because water is too cheap. Make it expensive, and builders will make more-efficient houses (no-water yards). 3) Cheap water fueled SoCal sprawl.
3. Southern California can increase their water supply by 40% overnight by discontinuing the use of landscapes that require lots of water to survive. Its a dessert for the most part but the residents continue to try and make it a tropical oasis.
4. In a finite world, why does the government pay people to have children through tax breaks? This is insane. With increased crowding, the tax break should go to families with zero, one, or two children.
5. A peripheral canal is but one tool (there are many others) that when applied with the correct leverage upon the fulcrum of policy will result truly comprehensive reform. Anyone that thinks otherwise either is privy to some knowledge some of the best minds of our generation aren’t, or is completely naïve.
6. The key to such management policies is to limit its capacity to a sustainable level, in which (to Paraphrase Dr. Gro Brundtland) the current needs of California are met without sacrificing the needs of future generations. Such policies will likely promote recycled water, reduce point- and non-point source pollution, advocate better irrigation and land management practices, and set realistic limits of urbanization and growth. But these are simply the starting points of a greater piece of environmental reform that is required to revitalize our failing fisheries and endangered ecosystems.
7. Perhaps the strongest argument for the canal is water security, but on the flipside is the issue of unfettered demand, unchecked growth, and unsustainable use such security would bring. However, the canal isn’t the only means to ensure water security, but alternatives will have serious ramifications not only for delta and valley residents, but possibly for the entire nation in the legal precedents that they would set. That being said, the canal may be the best solution for the short term, provided, as Ms. McIntyre previously said, that it is managed correctly.
8. It is inconceivable that any one action taken to either maintain or restore the delta. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about the converse; any mismanaged action can and will lead to catastrophic failure of this ecosystem, and subsequently our economy and very way of life. The trick here will be to ensure, safe, reliable, and sustainable water use for people, industry, and agriculture, while simultaneously protecting the delta from further harm (if not restoring it). Easier said than done being the understatement of the century in this case.
9. 2 corrections: 1) I meant to say that "economics" was a bigot. 2) link for illegals population: http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/17.pdf
10. 1) Smart growth is not just regulations but HIGHER prices. Read about San Diego's silly water policie sin my blog: http://aguanomics.com/2008/03/developers-drive-sd-off-cliff.html 2) "Only" 2.5 million illegals in California http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/17.pdf 3) They are not buying houses in the thirsty suburbs -- no credit report :) 4) I am an economist, but "economist" sure talks like a bigot. S/he does not speak for economists -- who are often in favor of migration (legal better than illegal)
Submitted by: Prices
2. My comment from yesterday was not posted, so I try again. 1) 2.5 million illegals are in CA. http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/17.pdf 2) Growth is a problem because water is too cheap. Make it expensive, and builders will make more-efficient houses (no-water yards). 3) Cheap water fueled SoCal sprawl.
Submitted by: David Zetland
3. Southern California can increase their water supply by 40% overnight by discontinuing the use of landscapes that require lots of water to survive. Its a dessert for the most part but the residents continue to try and make it a tropical oasis.
Submitted by: Scott marotte
4. In a finite world, why does the government pay people to have children through tax breaks? This is insane. With increased crowding, the tax break should go to families with zero, one, or two children.
Submitted by: Herb
5. A peripheral canal is but one tool (there are many others) that when applied with the correct leverage upon the fulcrum of policy will result truly comprehensive reform. Anyone that thinks otherwise either is privy to some knowledge some of the best minds of our generation aren’t, or is completely naïve.
Submitted by: Michael
6. The key to such management policies is to limit its capacity to a sustainable level, in which (to Paraphrase Dr. Gro Brundtland) the current needs of California are met without sacrificing the needs of future generations. Such policies will likely promote recycled water, reduce point- and non-point source pollution, advocate better irrigation and land management practices, and set realistic limits of urbanization and growth. But these are simply the starting points of a greater piece of environmental reform that is required to revitalize our failing fisheries and endangered ecosystems.
Submitted by: Michael
7. Perhaps the strongest argument for the canal is water security, but on the flipside is the issue of unfettered demand, unchecked growth, and unsustainable use such security would bring. However, the canal isn’t the only means to ensure water security, but alternatives will have serious ramifications not only for delta and valley residents, but possibly for the entire nation in the legal precedents that they would set. That being said, the canal may be the best solution for the short term, provided, as Ms. McIntyre previously said, that it is managed correctly.
Submitted by: Michael
8. It is inconceivable that any one action taken to either maintain or restore the delta. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about the converse; any mismanaged action can and will lead to catastrophic failure of this ecosystem, and subsequently our economy and very way of life. The trick here will be to ensure, safe, reliable, and sustainable water use for people, industry, and agriculture, while simultaneously protecting the delta from further harm (if not restoring it). Easier said than done being the understatement of the century in this case.
Submitted by: Michael
9. 2 corrections: 1) I meant to say that "economics" was a bigot. 2) link for illegals population: http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/17.pdf
Submitted by: David Zetland
10. 1) Smart growth is not just regulations but HIGHER prices. Read about San Diego's silly water policie sin my blog: http://aguanomics.com/2008/03/developers-drive-sd-off-cliff.html 2) "Only" 2.5 million illegals in California http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/17.pdf 3) They are not buying houses in the thirsty suburbs -- no credit report :) 4) I am an economist, but "economist" sure talks like a bigot. S/he does not speak for economists -- who are often in favor of migration (legal better than illegal)
Submitted by: David Zetland
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT