Why do U.S. aquifers and water supplies go nearly dry, and drought conditions occur when there is flooding every year in the United States? Seems the government would have built aqueducts hundreds of years ago to alleviate the problem. This is just one of many human problems that cross state borders - that the government could have or should address. Wasted Desert Lands Shouldn't there be underground cities with low rise buildings containing hydroponic gardens in the desert? Manufacturing Why is there so little manufacturing in the United States? Does the economy really require something on the scale of a world war for people to have jobs? Commerce Why is it so difficult to succeed at business in the United States? Every family should be able to do some kind of business to sell or barter their goods. Seems like an extreme waste of talent and potential human energy to insist that people work for mega corporations - wear suits (uncomfortable clothing) - and do things they don't enjoy to make a buck to feed, cloth, and house their families. Government I don't understand the conversation of government and politics. Why have they been talking trash for decades, rather than working to execute existing solutions to common problems. International Business Governments should be the only entities able to conduct and approve international business, and when they do the purse should be a government purse, not a private purse. This would stem from the government execution of their responsibilities with respect to its citizens, and then to the people of the world. There should be a strict limit to the types of business they can conduct in foreign countries. Corporate personhood That's just crap - pure and simple. Second, and while I'm on legal mumbo-jumbo, if a corporation is convicted of breaking a federal law - their license should be revoked, and their capital dissolved to pay their debts. The same people should not be able to engage in the same business ever again. Corporations and the end of this There should be a limit on how large corporations can get, where they can do business. Definitely interstate should be the absolute largest they can get. I'm for government as needed, small corporations, and family oriented societies. Everything else should devolve. Nobody should be blowing up buildings or bridges. That's just stupid. Sticks and stones should be the only weapons. Caustic and radioactive chemicals should not be dumped into rivers. People should have dental care. Pain should be minimized, and marijuana should be legal. Thanks for not TLDR.
The confounding factor in many of these argments (such as huge fines, or the shutting down of corporations) is that it takes jobs away. People without jobs are people who don't keep the economy going. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that it isn't a simple equation. Corporations are not actually giant mechanical machines (much as they are metaphorized so); they are people. They are the people. Corporations are not cancers, they're organs. You can't simply cut them out without killing the thing they're part of.
Just out of curiosity, do you really not know? • "Why do U.S. aquifers and water supplies ...?" • "Seems the government would have ...." • "... cross state borders ...." • "... that the government could have or should ...." We are Americans; we prefer poor governance specifically so that we can complain about the government; getting multiple state governments to work together is a bit like zombies trying to herd amphetamined cats into a flea circus―it's not something we look forward to. What results is usually a three-way argument: • How to get the water to as many people as possible. (Unacceptable) • How to make as much money for as few people as possible pretending those elitet own all the water. (Least worst outcome) • Fuck the government. Fuck 'em. Fucking fuckity fuck the fucking-fuck government. (Preferred) ↳ Gawddam guv'min' can'ever do an'thin' righ'! (How we try to feel better about ourselves) Why do U.S. aquifers nearly run dry? Because dry is how American voters want their aquifers. And if we can't have them dry, then we want them polluted. Watch what voters do. Watch what they approve and reject; watch who they elect and what those politicians do. Remember, ninety-nine percent of the bullshit American voters complain about they have invoked unto themselves. It wasn't King County government that voted to cancel EMS. It wasn't the state of Washington that voted against an income tax. The United States government did not elect George W. Bush. All of it, tip to toe, stem to stern, all around and throughout, that was what voters chose. Corporate personhood, though. Yeah, you can kind of blame that on government. But you also have to blame voters. But Santa Clara reminds of a basic truth; when voters choose policies or people to go forward, creating, encouraging, or allowing this chaos, it's generally a pretty one-sided affair. Just like McCleary, in Washington state, reminds that our problems with governance are pretty much a one-sided affair. And as long as the voters who constantly complain about government have enough influence to create and cultivate the problems they complain about, this is how it's going to go.
If water can be pumped out of an aquifer, could not treated/clean water be pumped back in? The high plains/ogallala aquifer has become so depleted in some of it's area as to have become useless. Meanwhile, several rivers pass over it. Perhaps rather than frittering away the wealth of this nation on needless military adventurism we would be better off if it were invested in positive infrastructure improvements. Echoes of the fall of Rome(when the army bled the state dry)?
Nope. 2nd Law of Thermodynamics applies. The rivers aren't clean, and all their water is spoken for. Go back in time and unelect Ronald Reagan in 198o. That was the last chance we've had. Although unelecting W in 2000 would open a window of possibility for today.
I am not sure what that word is supposed to be. If one were to add an h in there, it would mean one thing. If one were to, instead, pronounce that word with a long i that would mean something very different. Not a good place for a typo.
OK. Uh. Lot of ambiguity in there. And a bad place for ambiguity. CIC would have been unambiguous.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
If I thought the asshole deserved caps. I'd have given 'em to him.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I thought you were trying to say chic, or chick. Which is plausible in the context of the sentence. My second though was a misspelling of k*ke. Which, at a stretch, is still plausible in the context of the sentence. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The river itself might not be clean but the surroundings are, because the ground will filter water , The question what aquifer do you want to use deep aquifer or a shallow one . The deep aquifer holds ancient water and the shallow one is producing constantly as long there is rain or snow.
We do have gardens in the desert. Go to El Centro sometime. As for building underground - nothing wrong with that. But people, by and large, prefer not to. (Do you live underground? If not, why not?) Because people prefer to buy cheaper foreign goods. Nope. Which is why unemployment is at historic lows here. It's not - which is why we have more small businesses than nearly every other country on the planet. No one insists that people work for mega corporations. You are free to do whatever you like. So no more tourism? No more wine from France unless the government buys it for you? No more Boeing sales of 787's to Japan? Seems like that would do a lot of harm. Here, with VERY few exceptions, they're not.
I wonder why I think like I do, instead of like you (more positive and rational). I've been in labor management fights, and lived where there was a lack of water, and on and boring on. Thanks for the positive thoughts, and I can easily see that you are right on nearly every point.
