[nolidad]

80,000 farm workers and rising have lost their livelihood and dozens of farms have gone belly up in California. Is it because of the drought?

NO! It is because of a tiney littel minnow sometimes getting mushed up in the powerful pumps that push water to the farmers. Because of this-- the EPA ordered a 90% reduction of water rations to farmers in the very lush growing Central valley.

Gov. Scwarzenagger had to spend 14.5 million to buy food for these displaced workers. This valley is considered to be the besat farmland in America. Is this a coincidence or worse.

Van JOnes- this year in a conference said we have the wrong agricutural system and we need to replace it. Could this be the start of that change? 80,000 families out of work, dozens of farmers bankrupt. Land losing its topsoil. Massive price increases expected this fall for vegetables. Over 350,000 acres idled by this water restriction and rising.

Doesn't sound to green to me.

[JerryLove]

So then America has a food shortage now?

Wait. We don't.

So I guess that the supply-side needs are being met. So unless these 80k people were welfare-farmers, or mytical, some other 80k people (perhaps the same ones) are somewhere else farming whatever farm-thing the market was demanding before the minnow and is demanding now.

I didn't know you were so opposed the the free market.

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

So then America has a food shortage now?

Wait. We don't.

So I guess that the supply-side needs are being met. So unless these 80k people were welfare-farmers, or mytical, some other 80k people (perhaps the same ones) are somewhere else farming whatever farm-thing the market was demanding before the minnow and is demanding now.

I didn't know you were so opposed the the free market.

No one talked of food shortages. We are talking about the govt. throwing 80,000 farm workers out of work and causing dozens of farmers to lose their farms for reasons many would say needlessly.

And yes maybe many of them found work elsewhare on other farms or maybe they didn't. Most of them are migrant workers in this section so one can't be sure.

And how is being against the govt. shutting water off to farmers that caused this job loss oppossed to the free market?

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

No one talked of food shortages. We are talking about the govt. throwing 80,000 farm workers out of work and causing dozens of farmers to lose their farms for reasons many would say needlessly.

You can't have one without the other.

Either the farmers were not providing an in demand good, or when they stopped farming demand would outstrip supply.

In the former case, how were they making money. In the latter, capitalism would open up other jobs for them.

And how is being against the govt. shutting water off to farmers that caused this job loss oppossed to the free market?

Because of your anti-capitalist belief that the government is responsible for making sure people have jobs.

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

You can't have one without the other.

Either the farmers were not providing an in demand good, or when they stopped farming demand would outstrip supply.

In the former case, how were they making money. In the latter, capitalism would open up other jobs for them.

Because of your anti-capitalist belief that the government is responsible for making sure people have jobs.

Well they were farming and then because of Covt intervention they weren't. It has already been shown that prices for several produce items will go up because supplies will be reduced.

Leslie Eastman: Calif. farmers fight to prevent Dust Bowl II There will be many shortages of certain vegatables and fruits nationwide.

In the former case they were making money because the farms were growing goods and selling them. Then the govt. made a decision to reduce the water to these farms by 90% so they lost crops and are unable to continue growing--that is farming 101


Well capitalism doesn't open up jobs magically no matter how much you imply it can. Maybe they can find work in other areas maybe they can't for a whole host of reasons you are well aware of.

I never held that govt. is responsible for making sure people have jobs. I also hold that govt. should not interfere with people to lose their jobs unless it is because of danger or high possibility of death. 80,000 workers being thrown out of work for a minnow that is not even endangered is bad govt. policy.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Well they were farming and then because of Covt intervention they weren't. It has already been shown that prices for several produce items will go up because supplies will be reduced.

Then they can go farm elsewhere. Your lack of faith in capitalism and ingenuity to make jobs is disappointing.

In the former case they were making money because the farms were growing goods and selling them. Then the govt. made a decision to reduce the water to these farms by 90% so they lost crops and are unable to continue growing--that is farming 101

But there's a demand so they find a way to offer a supply and make profit. That's capitalism 101.

Well capitalism doesn't open up jobs magically no matter how much you imply it can. Maybe they can find work in other areas maybe they can't for a whole host of reasons you are well aware of.

You seem to be saying that capitalism only works when the government makes jobs.

I never held that govt. is responsible for making sure people have jobs. I also hold that govt. should not interfere with people to lose their jobs unless it is because of danger or high possibility of death. 80,000 workers being thrown out of work for a minnow that is not even endangered is bad govt. policy.

It's funny: your article seems worried about a dust-bowl; which you may recall was caused by over-farming of unsuitable land.

[nolidad]

Then they can go farm elsewhere. Your lack of faith in capitalism and ingenuity to make jobs is disappointing.

Well maybe they can go to Fl. and farm you rfront yard Capitalism works- farms just don't spring up- but you know that already.

But there's a demand so they find a way to offer a supply and make profit. That's capitalism 101.

Well if the govt. let the water alone- yeash they could but in this case- govt. is hindering capitalism. But you know that already.

You seem to be saying that capitalism only works when the government makes jobs.

No that is what you want to imply. I am saying that 80,000 farm workers lost their jobs because the govt. interfered with the farmers ability to gorw goods and stopped them from doing so. Yeah if they are not illegal migrants- most if not all will find work elsewhere.

It's funny: your article seems worried about a dust-bowl; which you may recall was caused by over-farming of unsuitable land.

And yet through ingenuity and hard work it became one of the richest crop growing areasd in teh country. What a tribute to the ability to do great things for people.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Well maybe they can go to Fl. and farm you rfront yard Capitalism works- farms just don't spring up- but you know that already.

Well if the govt. let the water alone- yeash they could but in this case- govt. is hindering capitalism. But you know that already.

Water rights are indeed government perview. I'm surprised you don't trust farmers to find a way to do it without government help

No that is what you want to imply. I am saying that 80,000 farm workers lost their jobs because the govt. interfered with the farmers ability to gorw goods and stopped them from doing so. Yeah if they are not illegal migrants- most if not all will find work elsewhere.

Darn the government making rainfall patterns. If only they would back off weather control.

And yet through ingenuity and hard work it became one of the richest crop growing areasd in teh country. What a tribute to the ability to do great things for people.

And government aid with water infrastructure. You seem OK with that government interference. Odd.

[nolidad]

And government aid with water infrastructure. You seem OK with that government interference. Odd.

Capitalism does not preclude the govt from working WITH private industry to coordinate things.
But you know that already.

Water rights are indeed government perview. I'm surprised you don't trust farmers to find a way to do it without government help

And I guess throwing people out of work and causiong farmers to lose their farms over a non threatened minnow is govt. perview as well.

And seeing as the farmers pay for the water to cover the cost of building the aquaducts- that does make it the farmers as well.

Darn the government making rainfall patterns. If only they would back off weather control.

Well if this was drought related that is one thing. But this is the govt. forbidding farmers from using available water (the farmers watch the water flow to the ocean) because of a fish. So your comment isn't based on th efacts of the case. The water is availabel for use- the govt. wopn't let the farmers use it.

[nolidad]

Water rights are indeed government perview. I'm surprised you don't trust farmers to find a way to do it without government help

Well if there wasn't too many govt. regulations telling farmers what they can and cannot do- I know that farmers would find a way! Just too bad that they would go to jail for doing many of the things to solve this govt. created problem.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Capitalism does not preclude the govt from working WITH private industry to coordinate things.
But you know that already.

You, and the right, have repeatedly called that socialism.

And I guess throwing people out of work and causiong farmers to lose their farms over a non threatened minnow is govt. perview as well.

No one was "thrown out of work". Conditions changed (water from elsewhere became unavailable). If the businesses chose to lay-off workers because of an inability to adapt: that's the nature of a free-market economy.

And seeing as the farmers pay for the water to cover the cost of building the aquaducts- that does make it the farmers as well.

If I pay the cost of the power drill that gets me into the safe, is the money mine?

Of course the water isn't theirs. Don't be silly.

Well if this was drought related that is one thing. But this is the govt. forbidding farmers from using available water (the farmers watch the water flow to the ocean) because of a fish. So your comment isn't based on th efacts of the case. The water is availabel for use- the govt. wopn't let the farmers use it.

That's their choice. Go look up who owns the river. The government isn't required to give you something just because you want it. Your sense of government-supported entitlement is really left-wing.

Well if there wasn't too many govt. regulations telling farmers what they can and cannot do- I know that farmers would find a way! Just too bad that they would go to jail for doing many of the things to solve this govt. created problem.

Sure. I recall in the 1920s quite a few took guns into banks. That was a way... till the oppressive government shut them down.

I knew you advocated small government, I didn't know you were now an anarchist.

[nolidad]

You, and the right, have repeatedly called that socialism.

That is a lie . but you know that already and are just being inflammatory.

No one was "thrown out of work". Conditions changed (water from elsewhere became unavailable). If the businesses chose to lay-off workers because of an inability to adapt: that's the nature of a free-market economy.

Wrong again-- the water was still there- the govt. just shut the farmers off. And I know you are not as stupid as the last part of your statemetn here makes you seem to be.

And I didn't know that someone as liberal asd you was actually that cold hearted towards the plight of as many as 300,000 of his fellow citizens. Maybe its true after all that true Christian Conservatism is more compassionate than any other ideology on the face of the earth!!! I know the records of donation of mooney, time, and talent bear that out!

If I pay the cost of the power drill that gets me into the safe, is the money mine?

irrelevant example- but you knew that already.

That's their choice. Go look up who owns the river. The government isn't required to give you something just because you want it. Your sense of government-supported entitlement is really left-wing.

Maybe I should paint my house red then

That's their choice. Go look up who owns the river. The government isn't required to give you something just because you want it. Your sense of government-supported entitlement is really left-wing.

Well seeing it is not a natural river we could argue all day. But if it was a natural river, the politicians do not own it. If you say the govt does own it then that fits the definition of socialism here.

Sure. I recall in the 1920s quite a few took guns into banks. That was a way... till the oppressive government shut them down.

I knew you advocated small government, I didn't know you were now an anarchist.

I don't, but you knew that already! You get some perverted pleasure out of being inflammatory.

[Hopeful]

Originally Posted by nolidad

I don't, but you knew that already! You get some perverted pleasure out of being inflammatory.

Inflammatory? Not Jerry!

An atheist comes to a Christian site. Go figure...

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

That is a lie . but you know that already and are just being inflammatory.

Of course you did, and if you'll bet your religion I'll do your foot work and go look it up for you.

Wrong again-- the water was still there- the govt. just shut the farmers off. And I know you are not as stupid as the last part of your statemetn here makes you seem to be.

The government owns the waterways. The government is not beholden to give you anything.

And I didn't know that someone as liberal asd you was actually that cold hearted towards the plight of as many as 300,000 of his fellow citizens. Maybe its true after all that true Christian Conservatism is more compassionate than any other ideology on the face of the earth!!! I know the records of donation of mooney, time, and talent bear that out!

Coming from the guy who opposes giving children basic healthcare, you can understand if I'm unmoved.

So you don't believe capitalism will work here? I just want to be clear because you seem more interested in rhetoric than addressing the issue.

irrelevant example- but you knew that already.

"Irrelevant" = "devastating to your argument"

Maybe I should paint my house red then

Whatever color you like.

Well seeing it is not a natural river we could argue all day. But if it was a natural river, the politicians do not own it. If you say the govt does own it then that fits the definition of socialism here.

Then every government in the world is socialist and always has been.

I don't, but you knew that already! You get some perverted pleasure out of being inflammatory.

"Inflammatory" = "calls you to task on your hypocrisy, lies and distortions"; but you knew that already.

[nolidad]

Of course you did, and if you'll bet your religion I'll do your foot work and go look it up for you.

Well I am sure there are some on the right that want real anarchy so I cant agree there-- but yeah go research the cgr archives and show me a qoute that says I do not believe in any govt. regulation--wear good shoes for your foot work.

The government owns the waterways. The government is not beholden to give you anything.

spoken like a true socialist

Coming from the guy who opposes giving children basic healthcare, you can understand if I'm unmoved.

lie to the core! You ruse of Olinskis tactics of lying and then calling your opponent one doesn't buy much-- also if you want to talk about my hideous lack of compassion to children open a new thread on it. Try to stay on topic-- I am sure you will find enough to flame me for in your disgust of me.

So you don't believe capitalism will work here? I just want to be clear because you seem more interested in rhetoric than addressing the issue.

It was working fine till the govt. halted capitalism at work and shut off water from a 95% full resevoir to protect an unendangered fish. The issue isn't whether capital;ism will work- but why does the govt cause a highly productive valley get destroyed? Why did the govt. unneccesarily put the unemployment rate to 40%

As much as I like playing silly games with you oneo f two things are clear here:

1) You do not know the facts of the situation and jsut want to go off on rabbit trails to spew vitriolout. At which I would encourage you to learn the facts of the case. So that maybe we can hold an intelligent conversation w/o all your acid.

OR

2) You do know th efacts and don't care and jsut want to throw your slander and accusations at me which you enjoy so much. Which will make trying toi have an intelligent conversation with you impossible

I will review this thread to see what your foot work produces-- and to see if you want ot talk about this issue or use it to soapbox on all the reasons why I should be taken and flogged which I will justy ignore.