Welcome to Thunderdome

Who can save CA from droughts?

Beavers.

Leisher wrote: ↑Sat Dec 30, 2023 3:16 pmBeavers.

Bah. Wrong ones.

Looking like year two of a super strong wet period in California. We needed it bad and are well through to the other side. A bunch of dry lakes woke up! Wetlands and birds all over in the interior! It's been amazing to ramble around the State this year. There were park signs posted from the north to south telling people to be careful in "unusually cold, unusually swift rivers" that were still kicking late into the dry season this year.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/weather/art ... 472394.php

The only bummer I can even think of is that the vintages in wine country won't be as good these two years. Dry conditions lead to more flavorful wines.

Do you know if that rain is getting far enough west to the Colorado River basin, to put into those reservoirs before the Hoover Dam?

I've looked but can't seem to find that info.

GORDON wrote: ↑Sun Dec 31, 2023 12:41 pm Do you know if that rain is getting far enough west to the Colorado River basin, to put into those reservoirs before the Hoover Dam?

Looks like maybe some of it is? CO River discharge by year:



https://snoflo.org/river-levels/colorado-river

I WAS looking over 6 months ago. Data probably wasn't available yet. But I remember last winter was wet there, too.

Billionaires buying up farm land.

TLDR: A Czech man has wooed a bunch of billionaire investors into funding his dream project of building a new city.

NYT article about who and why and does a good job of not picking a side. Loads and loads of unanswered questions though. The vision is that CA needs to expand their cities and build new ones to lower housing prices and end homelessness. The article discusses a lot of the politics involved and how the project is positively and negatively affecting local farmers. What it doesn't discuss is the actual plans for the city, like how it will address power and water that always seem to affect the state.

Natural consequence of a "don't snitch" philosophy.

I think that removes too much blame from the local government and their policies.

I've got 2 issues where I'm Republican: Crime + Immigration. Oh, and death penalty, but I count that as crime.

What can the local government do aside from building a new jail beside in and out? The neighborhood will still not snitch on the people making their lives shittier.

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 24, 2024 3:10 pm What can the local government do aside from building a new jail beside in and out? The neighborhood will still not snitch on the people making their lives shittier.

More police, harsher penalties. Shooting people who do crimes.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Wed Jan 24, 2024 3:51 pm

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 24, 2024 3:10 pm What can the local government do aside from building a new jail beside in and out? The neighborhood will still not snitch on the people making their lives shittier.

More police, harsher penalties. Shooting people who do crimes.

This.

My ideas of twenty years ago to bring back the stocks in public square sound better and better, don't they.

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 24, 2024 4:53 pm My ideas of twenty years ago to bring back the stocks in public square sound better and better, don't they.

No, just shoot them.

TheCatt wrote: ↑Wed Jan 24, 2024 5:40 pm

GORDON wrote: ↑Wed Jan 24, 2024 4:53 pm My ideas of twenty years ago to bring back the stocks in public square sound better and better, don't they.

No, just shoot them.

It's just more efficient.

Clickbait headlines have recently said SF has started a "pay criminals $300/month not to shoot people" program.

This article explains it's not like that at all.

Uh...

Young adults who have been identified as being at very high risk of being involved in a shooting who are then enrolled in the SVIP Life Coaching program, may become eligible to receive small monthly stipends of $200-$300 to incentivize achievement. These same clients may also be enrolled in The City’s larger Guaranteed Income program that could provide an additional $200-$300 per month.

That’s it. No paying people not to shoot.

Well, in their defense, 'not shooting someone' doesn't get you the money. Doing a bunch of other 'life plan' stuff does. I see it as a group of people who see the inevitable coming because of involvement in "neighborhood groups, or clicks" and giving them other more constructive things to do with their time, and paying them when they follow through.

That writer just did a HORRIBLE job of explaining it.