Palisades Fire - Los Angeles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Idk if "hold hostage" is a fair assessment. How many jobs do these many agricultural ventures provide? How much do they pay in taxes? How much revenue goes to the state? It's not like they benefit 100% as a couple and nobody else does.

They provide 2% of California gdp. they privately control many of Californias reservoirs and prioritize agriculture over urban supply. The Monterey plan was executed without state politicians or public input decades ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Idk if "hold hostage" is a fair assessment. How many jobs do these many agricultural ventures provide? How much do they pay in taxes? How much revenue goes to the state? It's not like they benefit 100% as a couple and nobody else does.

They provide 2% of California gdp. they privately control many of Californias reservoirs and prioritize agriculture over urban supply. The Monterey plan was executed without state politicians or public input decades ago.

So it sounds like they need to be taxed more, or relinquish some control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Idk if "hold hostage" is a fair assessment. How many jobs do these many agricultural ventures provide? How much do they pay in taxes? How much revenue goes to the state? It's not like they benefit 100% as a couple and nobody else does.

They provide 2% of California gdp. they privately control many of Californias reservoirs and prioritize agriculture over urban supply. The Monterey plan was executed without state politicians or public input decades ago.

Wrong - all of agriculture is 2% of California’s GDP.
However it consumes 80% of their water supply so the state has to buy their water from the privately owned reservoirs (ironically built by the state but handed over to private “water authorities”).

So counties like LA buy water when there is a drought from agriculture owners.

Total scam.

[Anonymous]

As a CA I am so sick of the right wing trolls spewing disinformation. School shooting deniers, attacking fire victims, there is no low that is too low, no shame, no decency. The right wing is almost as big a threat to our country as climate change.

CA recently passed a climate change bond, one which I’m sure right wingers voted against. The bond will help restore Los Angelos. In Texas, Arizona, or Florida people would be abandoned.

As gross and horrible as the Resnicks are their shady practices in buying up water rights are it did not impact the fire. Killing farmers and small communities in Central Valley yes, but Santa Ana winds no. The reservoirs did not run out of water. The fire did not start because the mayor is black and was traveling to a continent full of black people. The fire didn’t continue because fat GOP reps were living it up at Mara Lago while their constituents burned. If right wingers think this disgusting behaviors gets you votes, it doesn’t. More importantly it does the opposite of what you really do in suppressing the moderates, independents and liberals. The louder and grosser you become the less willing everyone else will be to sit home on elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Idk if "hold hostage" is a fair assessment. How many jobs do these many agricultural ventures provide? How much do they pay in taxes? How much revenue goes to the state? It's not like they benefit 100% as a couple and nobody else does.

They provide 2% of California gdp. they privately control many of Californias reservoirs and prioritize agriculture over urban supply. The Monterey plan was executed without state politicians or public input decades ago.

Wrong - all of agriculture is 2% of California’s GDP.
However it consumes 80% of their water supply so the state has to buy their water from the privately owned reservoirs (ironically built by the state but handed over to private “water authorities”).

So counties like LA buy water when there is a drought from agriculture owners.

Total scam.

I mean, I don’t pretend to know anything about farming in California, but this country does need food to eat. California grows food that we eat. And they have a pretty high GDP so the fact that farming is a low percentage doesn’t mean it’s not big. I’m not suggesting that there isn’t gross mismanagement and complete incompetence going on there because there obviously is, but let’s remember that we do need to eat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Idk if "hold hostage" is a fair assessment. How many jobs do these many agricultural ventures provide? How much do they pay in taxes? How much revenue goes to the state? It's not like they benefit 100% as a couple and nobody else does.

They provide 2% of California gdp. they privately control many of Californias reservoirs and prioritize agriculture over urban supply. The Monterey plan was executed without state politicians or public input decades ago.

Wrong - all of agriculture is 2% of California’s GDP.
However it consumes 80% of their water supply so the state has to buy their water from the privately owned reservoirs (ironically built by the state but handed over to private “water authorities”).

So counties like LA buy water when there is a drought from agriculture owners.

Total scam.

I mean, I don’t pretend to know anything about farming in California, but this country does need food to eat. California grows food that we eat. And they have a pretty high GDP so the fact that farming is a low percentage doesn’t mean it’s not big. I’m not suggesting that there isn’t gross mismanagement and complete incompetence going on there because there obviously is, but let’s remember that we do need to eat.

So first 2.5% of California’s GDP on agriculture translates to producing 75% of the fruits and nuts and 30% of the vegetables consumed in the US. California’s agri output exceeds all of France the largest agri producer in Europe. It’s important. Also GDP is fueled by not only Silicon Valley and Entertainment but all the other services like real estate, financial services, IT services and manufacturing. CA is more comparable to another country than another state.

Water rights in CA are Byzantine, a nightmare and entangled in long standing laws. It’s not a management issue, it’s a legal nightmare. You would need for the agricultural areas to turn blue, change the state constitution and laws and then disentangle all the water rights contracts and deeds going back 100 years. So if somehow you emerge from this quagmire, then what? CA has whiplash weather from climate change. Fill your reserves to the brim, and destroy communities with floods when it rains? Build fast, remove refs but then when an earthquake hits the damn or reservoir fails and you destroy communities. Fill every inch of land in the path of Santa Ana winds with concrete? OK you just raised the temperature and created stronger back cycles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Idk if "hold hostage" is a fair assessment. How many jobs do these many agricultural ventures provide? How much do they pay in taxes? How much revenue goes to the state? It's not like they benefit 100% as a couple and nobody else does.

They provide 2% of California gdp. they privately control many of Californias reservoirs and prioritize agriculture over urban supply. The Monterey plan was executed without state politicians or public input decades ago.

Wrong - all of agriculture is 2% of California’s GDP.
However it consumes 80% of their water supply so the state has to buy their water from the privately owned reservoirs (ironically built by the state but handed over to private “water authorities”).

So counties like LA buy water when there is a drought from agriculture owners.

Total scam.

I mean, I don’t pretend to know anything about farming in California, but this country does need food to eat. California grows food that we eat. And they have a pretty high GDP so the fact that farming is a low percentage doesn’t mean it’s not big. I’m not suggesting that there isn’t gross mismanagement and complete incompetence going on there because there obviously is, but let’s remember that we do need to eat.

So first 2.5% of California’s GDP on agriculture translates to producing 75% of the fruits and nuts and 30% of the vegetables consumed in the US. California’s agri output exceeds all of France the largest agri producer in Europe. It’s important. Also GDP is fueled by not only Silicon Valley and Entertainment but all the other services like real estate, financial services, IT services and manufacturing. CA is more comparable to another country than another state.

Water rights in CA are Byzantine, a nightmare and entangled in long standing laws. It’s not a management issue, it’s a legal nightmare. You would need for the agricultural areas to turn blue, change the state constitution and laws and then disentangle all the water rights contracts and deeds going back 100 years. So if somehow you emerge from this quagmire, then what? CA has whiplash weather from climate change. Fill your reserves to the brim, and destroy communities with floods when it rains? Build fast, remove refs but then when an earthquake hits the damn or reservoir fails and you destroy communities. Fill every inch of land in the path of Santa Ana winds with concrete? OK you just raised the temperature and created stronger back cycles.

Seems like they need entirely new water infrastructure. A big system of dams with the ability to pump between them. And yes the water coming from up north where they have too much of it (sorry Gavin but Trump is right on this one). I agree they don’t need more concrete (I used to live there and it’s hot and dry enough as it is). They do waste huge amounts of water in landscaping though. We were required by our HOA to keep our grass (must be grass) very green or they’d fine us. That meant sprinklers every other day. And we used to get letters in the mail telling us to use less water but we couldn’t do anything about watering the grass. That type of thing needs to be banned. They need more big trees to lower temps but less grass. Basically they need to embrace the fact that SoCal is a desert and stop pretending it’s not. Not unless you can bring a LOT of water down from the north in an economical way.

[Anonymous]

Yeah I looked up the controlled burns since some people here insisted that they do them. I was happy to see that there were some, but they were like 20 acres here and 60 acres there, a lot of them privately owned land. Meanwhile the wildfires are 20 THOUSAND acres or 60 THOUSAND acres. People need to understand the difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a CA I am so sick of the right wing trolls spewing disinformation. School shooting deniers, attacking fire victims, there is no low that is too low, no shame, no decency. The right wing is almost as big a threat to our country as climate change.

CA recently passed a climate change bond, one which I’m sure right wingers voted against. The bond will help restore Los Angelos. In Texas, Arizona, or Florida people would be abandoned.

As gross and horrible as the Resnicks are their shady practices in buying up water rights are it did not impact the fire. Killing farmers and small communities in Central Valley yes, but Santa Ana winds no. The reservoirs did not run out of water. The fire did not start because the mayor is black and was traveling to a continent full of black people. The fire didn’t continue because fat GOP reps were living it up at Mara Lago while their constituents burned. If right wingers think this disgusting behaviors gets you votes, it doesn’t. More importantly it does the opposite of what you really do in suppressing the moderates, independents and liberals. The louder and grosser you become the less willing everyone else will be to sit home on elections.

You are going to get killed in the next CA elections.
The voters can see your incompetence very clearly for what it is.
Several reservoirs were empty. FACT.
And I can sense your fear thru your unhinged post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a CA I am so sick of the right wing trolls spewing disinformation. School shooting deniers, attacking fire victims, there is no low that is too low, no shame, no decency. The right wing is almost as big a threat to our country as climate change.

CA recently passed a climate change bond, one which I’m sure right wingers voted against. The bond will help restore Los Angelos. In Texas, Arizona, or Florida people would be abandoned.

As gross and horrible as the Resnicks are their shady practices in buying up water rights are it did not impact the fire. Killing farmers and small communities in Central Valley yes, but Santa Ana winds no. The reservoirs did not run out of water. The fire did not start because the mayor is black and was traveling to a continent full of black people. The fire didn’t continue because fat GOP reps were living it up at Mara Lago while their constituents burned. If right wingers think this disgusting behaviors gets you votes, it doesn’t. More importantly it does the opposite of what you really do in suppressing the moderates, independents and liberals. The louder and grosser you become the less willing everyone else will be to sit home on elections.

Then why is the city of LA sharing that a reservoir was out of service?

https://www.ladwpnews.com/pacific-palisades-fire-correcting-misinformation-about-ladwps-water-system/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a CA I am so sick of the right wing trolls spewing disinformation. School shooting deniers, attacking fire victims, there is no low that is too low, no shame, no decency. The right wing is almost as big a threat to our country as climate change.

CA recently passed a climate change bond, one which I’m sure right wingers voted against. The bond will help restore Los Angelos. In Texas, Arizona, or Florida people would be abandoned.

As gross and horrible as the Resnicks are their shady practices in buying up water rights are it did not impact the fire. Killing farmers and small communities in Central Valley yes, but Santa Ana winds no. The reservoirs did not run out of water. The fire did not start because the mayor is black and was traveling to a continent full of black people. The fire didn’t continue because fat GOP reps were living it up at Mara Lago while their constituents burned. If right wingers think this disgusting behaviors gets you votes, it doesn’t. More importantly it does the opposite of what you really do in suppressing the moderates, independents and liberals. The louder and grosser you become the less willing everyone else will be to sit home on elections.

You are going to get killed in the next CA elections.
The voters can see your incompetence very clearly for what it is.
Several reservoirs were empty. FACT.
And I can sense your fear thru your unhinged post.

Exactly. And if someone who claims they weren’t , then maybe the other RW talking points ARE true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a CA I am so sick of the right wing trolls spewing disinformation. School shooting deniers, attacking fire victims, there is no low that is too low, no shame, no decency. The right wing is almost as big a threat to our country as climate change.

CA recently passed a climate change bond, one which I’m sure right wingers voted against. The bond will help restore Los Angelos. In Texas, Arizona, or Florida people would be abandoned.

As gross and horrible as the Resnicks are their shady practices in buying up water rights are it did not impact the fire. Killing farmers and small communities in Central Valley yes, but Santa Ana winds no. The reservoirs did not run out of water. The fire did not start because the mayor is black and was traveling to a continent full of black people. The fire didn’t continue because fat GOP reps were living it up at Mara Lago while their constituents burned. If right wingers think this disgusting behaviors gets you votes, it doesn’t. More importantly it does the opposite of what you really do in suppressing the moderates, independents and liberals. The louder and grosser you become the less willing everyone else will be to sit home on elections.

You are going to get killed in the next CA elections.
The voters can see your incompetence very clearly for what it is.
Several reservoirs were empty. FACT.
And I can sense your fear thru your unhinged post.

Snoorrrreeee. Don’t think you appreciate how short people’s memories are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a big difference between the rich who are losing their house and the super rich who control California and its water.

This was posted in politics but was enlightening.

While 40 million Californians suffer through unprecedented drought, one billionaire couple owns a massive share of the state's water system, largely seized in a series of secretive meetings two decades ago.

That system was largely paid for by the very taxpayers whose water these billionaires hold hostage. The Resnicks are the biggest farmers in California–as of 2007 they owned four San Francisco’s worth of farmland. Nearly half of Americans buy at least one of their products: pistachios, POM pomegranate juice, mandarins, flowers, and more.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4B19qb1Az94

Idk if "hold hostage" is a fair assessment. How many jobs do these many agricultural ventures provide? How much do they pay in taxes? How much revenue goes to the state? It's not like they benefit 100% as a couple and nobody else does.

They provide 2% of California gdp. they privately control many of Californias reservoirs and prioritize agriculture over urban supply. The Monterey plan was executed without state politicians or public input decades ago.

Wrong - all of agriculture is 2% of California’s GDP.
However it consumes 80% of their water supply so the state has to buy their water from the privately owned reservoirs (ironically built by the state but handed over to private “water authorities”).

So counties like LA buy water when there is a drought from agriculture owners.

Total scam.

I mean, I don’t pretend to know anything about farming in California, but this country does need food to eat. California grows food that we eat. And they have a pretty high GDP so the fact that farming is a low percentage doesn’t mean it’s not big. I’m not suggesting that there isn’t gross mismanagement and complete incompetence going on there because there obviously is, but let’s remember that we do need to eat.

So first 2.5% of California’s GDP on agriculture translates to producing 75% of the fruits and nuts and 30% of the vegetables consumed in the US. California’s agri output exceeds all of France the largest agri producer in Europe. It’s important. Also GDP is fueled by not only Silicon Valley and Entertainment but all the other services like real estate, financial services, IT services and manufacturing. CA is more comparable to another country than another state.

Water rights in CA are Byzantine, a nightmare and entangled in long standing laws. It’s not a management issue, it’s a legal nightmare. You would need for the agricultural areas to turn blue, change the state constitution and laws and then disentangle all the water rights contracts and deeds going back 100 years. So if somehow you emerge from this quagmire, then what? CA has whiplash weather from climate change. Fill your reserves to the brim, and destroy communities with floods when it rains? Build fast, remove refs but then when an earthquake hits the damn or reservoir fails and you destroy communities. Fill every inch of land in the path of Santa Ana winds with concrete? OK you just raised the temperature and created stronger back cycles.

Seems like they need entirely new water infrastructure. A big system of dams with the ability to pump between them. And yes the water coming from up north where they have too much of it (sorry Gavin but Trump is right on this one). I agree they don’t need more concrete (I used to live there and it’s hot and dry enough as it is). They do waste huge amounts of water in landscaping though. We were required by our HOA to keep our grass (must be grass) very green or they’d fine us. That meant sprinklers every other day. And we used to get letters in the mail telling us to use less water but we couldn’t do anything about watering the grass. That type of thing needs to be banned. They need more big trees to lower temps but less grass. Basically they need to embrace the fact that SoCal is a desert and stop pretending it’s not. Not unless you can bring a LOT of water down from the north in an economical way.

You need to study up on your California geography.

[Anonymous]

OMG the stupidity is insane. Look at it this way, if the reservoirs had all run out of water and it hasn’t rained then where is the existing water coming from? Why is Los Angelos not completely out of water?

You have been told several times that the local storage and hydrant pumping systems did not have the power to move the amount needed for a blaze that big in a short amount of time. The reservoirs did not run empty.

[Anonymous]

The Palisades supply ran out and was not refilled, by choice. That is all.