California: New law will limit water use to 55 gal/day per person

California Dystopia

The People’s Dystopia of California continues to be less and less livable.

Jennifer McGraw reports for CBS 13, May 31, 2018, that a new law signed by Governor Jerry Brown will restrict indoor water use to 55 gallons per person per day by 2022, and falling to 50 gallons per person per day by 2030.

Felicia Marcus, Chair of the State Water Resources Control Board, said that the water restrictions are “So that everyone in California is at least integrating efficiency into our preparations for climate change.” She blithely maintains that retrofitting homes with water-efficient fixtures could help cut back: “I think the average new home is 35 gallons per person per day, so we are not talking emergency conservation here.”

Just how many gallons do household chores take?:

  • An 8-minute shower uses about 17 gallons of water.
  • A load of laundry uses up to 40 gallons.
  • A bathtub can hold 80 to 100 gallons of water.

Tanya Allen, who has a 4-year-old daughter, said: “With a child and every day having to wash clothes, that’s, just my opinion, not feasible. But I get it and I understand that we’re trying to preserve…but 55 gallons a day?”

Originally from Texas, Rocka Mitchell and his wife Ginger are living in Sacramento for work. They say it would be hard to conserve because their family is too large and Ginger likes to bathe three times a day and does laundry all day.

Greg Bundesen with the Sacramento Suburban Water District says they already assist customers: “We offer toilet rebates, we offer complementary showerheads, we offer complementary faucets.”

The new laws also require water districts to perform stress tests of their water supply and curb loss due to leaks. Water districts who don’t comply face fines up to $10,000 a day. Marcus said that “Right now we lose up to 30 percent of urban water just to leaks in the system.”

Agencies believe fixing those leaks and educating residents, e.g., about how much more water a bath versus a shower uses, is the key. Bundesen said: “Some people may not be aware that you’re going to use a lot more water in a bath and you wouldn’t shower and it’s our job to make sure they’re informed.”

Outdoor water use is also covered by the new laws. Standards will be based on a region’s climate and other factors instead of just one standard for the whole state.

The ultimate goal is to make conservation water restriction a way of life in California.

H/t FOTM‘s MomOfIV

See also:


56 responses to “California: New law will limit water use to 55 gal/day per person

  1. Then the next step is to raise water rates for the loss of revenues do to using less water.
    My understanding is this is something they’ve brought upon themselves.

    Liked by 7 people

    • “Then the next step is to raise water rates for the loss of revenues do to using less water.”

      Exactly. That happens everywhere conservation is implemented. Good way to get more monies…

      Liked by 4 people

      • Californians who saved water in the last drought actually had their rates INCREASED because the water suppliers complained that, because of conservation, they made less money from selling less water. California is an Orwellian living nightmare.

        Liked by 7 people

        • Yeah, I actually think its a test bed. They want to try the most extreme forms of depravation and predation there to see if it will fly elsewhere.

          Liked by 4 people

      • When I grew up in Sacramento we paid $20.00 for all the water you chose to use. Many had swimming pools. There were three rivers there and all the water anyone could use.

        During the drought, they let Nestle have all they wanted for free. That is still the case. Now there are heavy fines for using “too much”. All of these laws and rules are based on the premise that The State is doing people “favors” to supply these things. The FACT is, they are paid to do this.

        Liked by 5 people

    • They did just that in the last drought! — Raised water rates BECAUSE of the drought, then raised water rated again AFTER the drought to make up the “lost” revenue from selling less water during the drought. Consumers are screwed either way and all ways.

      Liked by 5 people

      • That’s what they ALWAYS do. They do it with gas too. First they restrict it, then they raise the cost. The consumer ends up at least paying the same for less if not more. Basically, your quality of life goes down and those on the receiving end get more for less. Now, you’re supposed to feel good about “saving the planet”.

        Liked by 3 people

  2. The land of fruits and nuts is an understatement. Remember that the United Nations book, UN Agenda 21, wants to eliminate the world population by 85%. It also wants to limit water consumption per person to two gallons per day. In other words, you can’t shower, cook, flush a toilet, water a garden, etc. This is the ultimate in control, and since every freedom destroying law seems to start in California, a once beautiful state, one has to wonder how long it will be before North and South Carolina are as limited. Get this…CA city of Stockton is now offering murderers money not to shoot people.
    We can only hope that all murderers in America move to Stockton and become wealthy by not killing anyone. Oy vey, it is so danged bizarre, you have to wonder if they’re all smoking too much weed.

    Liked by 6 people

    • “The land of fruits and nuts” so appropriate, corruption, fires, homelessness, and the downfall from the “big one” quake coming will be one of the last signs given to the Californians to reflect how long they have accepted their liberal way of living. California so big and beautiful to sucumb to filth and submission that some have wanted to bring it down for so long.

      Liked by 2 people

      • When the “big quake” comes, mentioned by Alma, the commie New Age greenies will claim it was “Mother Gaia” (the earth itself) revolting & rebelling against the “terrible treatment” of the earth by “pathetic humans”; all definitely part of UN Agenda 21 (not reaching their goal by Year 2000, the 21st Century, they updated it to Agenda 2030).

        Liked by 2 people

  3. this is communism disguised as climate change.
    these satanists created “climate change” just to initiate this type of “law”.
    if commiefornia’s situation is so bad that they are recycling wastewater as drinking water and will soon have this 55gal law then why is the state inviting illegal aliens to live here and use up resources and why is there not a moratorium, for example, on construction of new homes? I see construction every where I go and every new thing built requires water to build it and people to access that space with….water usage.
    next thing you know they will charge us carbon credits for the size of our household “carbon footprints”.
    they are intentionally creating the perfect environment for communism to thrive.

    Liked by 5 people

    • You are correct Mom. These bastards are such liars. The fact that they let in hundreds of thousands of immigrants every single year refutes any claim they can make that we have limited resources that are stretched to far. I am so angry and disgusted with this I truly wish Brown and his cronies a swift trip to hell. And of BTW Brown has a Ranch somewhere here in California where he can go to and probably pump his own water out of a well.
      Now we can take showers and, drink and do laundry in water that has prescription drugs in it? Great just Great. I may be forced to leave what was once a paradise because of globalist assholes like Brown want to be the first to make Agenda 21 a reality. They are really trying to do everything they can to get people off their property here. There is also a movement afoot to try to rescind proposition 13 which was passed in the 70’s to stop the government of Ca. from continually raising property taxes. If they overturn it no one will be able to to afford to own a home here. Despite prop 13 our taxes continually go up because stupid idiot liberals keep voting for bond measures. Our taxes have doubles in the 30 years we have lived in our home.For anyone buying anew home here for the average price they can expect to pay 10,000 or more a year in property taxes. A pox on Browns house.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Smart homes for a properly dumbed down people. One picture showed the aluminum and other metals needed man for breathing, eating, and drinking in the form of chemtrails. And, Nestle, come right in, help yourself to our water, it’s only Americans using it, if they need it, they can buy it back from on you. As for toilets, if there is not enough putrescence from your home’s excrescence, inspectors will be sent there and your water shut off. If this will save the life of but one polar bear, it will be worth it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Brown is an A-hole. Just because he always wanted to be some aesthetic pseudo-priest doesn’t mean he can impose that on an entire state. I think the average consumption for a family of three is about 300 ga/dy.

        So you guys are gonna be dirty and smelly as well as broke. Nice! Keep paying those taxes and fees. There’s more to come. It’s gonna look like Medieval Europe soon with all the street poopers and the lack of hygiene.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Brown is a typical number 5 personality on the Enneagram which is a person who really does not like the messiness of feelings or people or being in the proximity of people in general. This is why some monks become monks and religious- so they can hide in their caves and monasteries, and not have to actually relate to anyone, not because they love God. My guess is this describes Brown. These are people who are also typical ivory tower intellectuals. Also think Paul Getty who would rather have his grandsons ear cut off that have anyone get a dime out of him.
          It looks like we are going to have to leave. I just keep seeing pictures of the scene in Dr. Zhivago where the doctor came home to his house filled with people that the state said he now had to were his co-occupants. I can’t say it enough… a pox, a thousand pox on Brown and his Communist cohorts.

          Liked by 3 people

          • To be honest, I really don’t believe that people vote these guys in. Edmund G. Brown, Jerry’s dad, was probably the last “acceptable” governor the state ever had.

            The rest were a wrecking crew. Just like Nancy Pelosi, I don’t think they really vote for her. Why would they consistently vote for people who make their plight worse?

            I suspect that Jerry is a little “light in the loafers”, if ya’ know what I mean. He has not aged well. His first installment was not as disgusting as this one. He was at least “personable”.

            It has been a long time since I lived there. I DO remember it. In terms of voting I don’w see much difference here. They NEVER seems to do what their constituents want. I suppose that’s because they don’t work for us.

            This is also why it annoys me when people blame those who live somewhere for the situation. They have zero control over it. It is true that you can leave, I did. But, you won’t have anymore control wherever you move to. The Owners don’t allow that.

            Looking around I don’t see any hope in major moral outrage. It isn’t there. I care about personal integrity. I expect those who know better to do better. We all need to do what we can and always be prepared to seize an opportunity if one presents itself.

            Liked by 3 people

      • Lana,just say the word,and I’ll find you a nice place with a few acres up in my area. (Northeastern Nevada) This goes for any of the good people on FOTM-You’re all the kind of people we need MORE of up here.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Now you’re talking.

          Liked by 2 people

        • What a sweetheart you are Truck! I might take you up on that when we get down to beginning our search. Actually Nevada came up as the first possibility in conversation with my husband tonight. He still feels he has to work another year or two before retiring, but I am of the opinion that a bit more in the retirement fund is not worth the potential costs to his health because of stress.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Quite right, it’s not worth it. I stayed in until I was 75, but that was by my choice and because I really like working with my clients, helping them achieve their life goals.

            There are very few occupations or vocations that offer this to we working stiffs, and here I am at 75, still stiffly working! I think there are a lot of older MDs who make excellent GPs, but here in British Columbia they are encouraged to take retirement at 65, supposedly to allow new doctors to come into the system. However, no matter where you go, with very few exceptions in British Columbia’s major metropolitan areas there is a constant shortage of doctors, so why have any retirement age as long as they’re needed?

            Liked by 3 people

            • I would imagine that since you have medical paid for by the Canadian gov, they simply do not want to have to pay more doctors. There are a shortage of doctors even here. The wait is too long to have to see someone, especially a specialist.
              My husband is soon to be 71. He had to work this far because I wasn’t eligible, age wise, for medicare, but now he is telling me he is going to work until 73. Some folks are lucky enough to love what they do, or have their own business which is like their baby, and they literally look forward to work each day, but such is not the case here. He is totally burnt out.

              Liked by 2 people

    • “This is communism disguised as climate change. These satanists created ‘climate change’ just to initiate this type of ‘law.'”

      Exactly!! Here’s an oldie-goldie Commie quote re that very thing:

      “The threat of environmental crisis will be the ‘international disaster key’ that will unlock the New World Order.”
      –Mikhail Gorbachev, quoted in “A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind“, by Marilyn Brannan, Associate Editor, Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, p. 5.

      That article also stated:

      “The collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans.”

      …which goes along with what marblenectlr said re “turning off the water in order to save one polar bear.” 🙂

      Those above quotes are from this CuttingEdge article from back when GW was President, circa 2003, re the “Re-Wilding Project.” It included some older laws enacted when Willy Clinton was President that GW kept in place:
      cuttingedge [dot] org/news/n1863.cfm

      And here’s the map from that article attempting to show the “corridors” of the USA that “they” want “re-wilded” while they shove all humans into smaller cramped areas:

      “They are really trying to do everything they can to get people off their property here.”
      –Lana nailed it with that observation!

      Liked by 2 people

  4. “Taxpayers offer toilet rebates, taxpayers offer complementary showerheads, taxpayers offer complementary faucets.”

    Fixed it for ya, Greg.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. On the right coast in more ways than one. . Written more in sadness than mockery.

    Liked by 3 people

  6. Rationing… like Venezuela, Obamacare, the USSR, Orwell’s novels, etc. (Ain’t socialism grand?)

    Liked by 3 people

  7. “she likes to bathe 3 times a day”

    Liked by 2 people

  8. The big joke re “water-conserving” toilets, faucet heads, shower heads, etc., is that:

    1_You have to flush 2-3 times to “take away” what 1-flush of a non-water-conserving-toilet could accomplish. So the amount of water used probably equals the same with the two systems.

    2_Aeriated Faucet Heads mix a lot of air with the water so you get more air-bubbles & less water which means if you are trying to rinse off soapy hands or soapy dishes, it takes LONGER! You end up running the bubbly-water LONGER to do what would take LESS TIME if the water was not full of air!

    3_Ditto “water-conserving” Shower Heads. It takes LONGER to rinse off a soapy head & body with a mere “sprinkle” of water! so the total water usage is probably the same as it was WITHOUT the “water-saving” device.

    Don’t their engineers realize these plain facts? (Six-of-one & a half-a-dozen of the other, duh.) It’s all a big joke.

    I think the “Smart” Water Meters also force a lowering of Water Pressure so you get even less water still! I’ve noticed that here, especially at night.

    Liked by 5 people

    • They made the same choices dealing with smog;An original ’62 Chevy Impala,with an 8 cylinder engine and a 3 speed manual transmission could fairly easily get 20 miles per gallon,run clean and make enough power to cruise all day at 75+ mph. The EPA improved the formula in the following years to a point where an original ’72 Impala ran slightly cleaner,required a substantially larger engine to make the same power and cruise at the same speed,ran worse,started harder,and got about half the gas mileage the ’62 got. Again,the Government expends TWICE as much to gain HALF as much. (BTW-the newer car also weighed a half TON more and cost twice as much as the similarly equipped ’62.) Progress?? Hardly.


      • Haha, good example re the Chevy Impalas. Then, because their “better newer cleaner heavier” versions were worse than prior models, they passed laws to force annual automobile inspections. Remember those?

        At some point (I can’t remember what year it was) FLA dropped out of the annual car inspection requirement, thankfully.


    • For some years now the building code in British Columbia has stipulated that all incoming water lines for every residential and commercial building must have a regulator to maintain pressure at 45 pounds as a maximum. This is a good working pressure for most uses and I have no problem with that. This is also based on a maximum of a 3/4 inch inside diameter main line. If you are fortunate enough to live on land classified either as “farm land use” or inside the Agricultural Land Reserve, then you are entitled to a full 2 inch inside diameter water line from your municipality or Regional District; this water comes in at 65 to 75 pounds per square inch, as line losses require more pressure to deliver working volume.

      I’ve lived half my life of 75 years in an urban situation and the other half in rural or farm land situations, and I can assure you that farmers do not normally waste water, however when it’s price too cheaply, then neither do they have any incentives to be vigilant in their use.

      A very difficult economic factor when considering water regulation is the value of the farm production. Unless my stats are out of date, farmers are only 10% of the population of California, but they have access to or control 70 or 75% of the total water use. Aside from a discussion of nutritional merits, growing plants in a closed environment such as a greenhouse or other grow system is far more efficient in its use of water with very little waste.

      The real problem in California is the few crops which are huge monocultures and are slavishly fostered in a very irrational misuse of resources. I will give you the top 3 wasters of water in California, and then you will see why there’s a problem.

      The number one of course has to be growing rice, which is done in a climate that is basically dry land, and requires water to be artificially diverted from a river bed to flood the producing land. Rice should be grown in areas that are subject to frequent natural inundation, such as Louisiana and parts of Alabama.

      Next will be cattle, who, if they are to be raised in a nutritionally sound way, require open range on grasslands. However, California no longer has substantial naturally irrigated grasslands, so cattle must be raised under one of two options: either on artificially irrigated pastures (which is, to my mind, the best solution), or on truly dreadful industrial-modelled “farm” feedlots, which to me is legalised animal torture that creates a nutritional disaster for people eating the so-called beef, loaded with white fat instead of proper creamy yellow fat from grass.

      Finally, another one which is simply bizarre, is the enormous waste of resources devoted to raising cotton. This crop has destroyed once richly fertile lands in Russia, which followed the same industrial model that is used in the United States; be assured that California will be just as ruined after 10 years of drought devastates those artificially irrigated acres. The hemp people are right: it is far more patriotic and ecologically sensible to use hemp for fiber instead of cotton. If it was good enough for George Washington, then I say it’s good enough for us today!

      Liked by 2 people

  9. OK….I’ll “sign up” for this here in CA when I see the palatial mansions around Hollywood, and all those “connected” addresses (including Mr. Al Gore’s—the Global-warming-monger/open borders/share MY wealth while he saturates his acres with potable drinking water and sends a wealth of contaminated air over me from his private JET) with expansive green/irrigated yards, 20 bathrooms, and a fleet of internal-combustion cars and recreational toys……getting the same miserable 55 gal. per day that I DO. FAT RAT’S ARSE this is going to happen with equal application to everyone in CA IF IT EVER DOES HAPPEN. The “rich” will be exempt, and the poor and illegal will be subsidized by my “middle class” dollars. I will be the only one paying “MY FAIR SHARE” (according to the Obamanites raised up in this last voting generation). CA stays the course throughout its years of craziness, killing off its own economic base……ONE DAY, when people like my husband and I finally escape the state…..(as are many others over the last decade-plus—-) they are going to wake up and “be” the “Greece of the USA.”

    Liked by 4 people

  10. Ummmmm…. Dudes(and Dudettes) , none of it is real! Follow the money.

    “Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act.” Geo. Orwell

    Liked by 2 people

    • Maybe it’s not,but it sure HURTS like real!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dear truckjunkie, your comment brings to mind what Boswell wrote when Dr Johnson was asked as to the validity of the philosophy of Bishop Berkeley. Johnson stopped walking and instead turned and then kicked a large stone, which of course he felt in the tip of his boot, saying “Thus I refute Berkeley!”

        Liked by 1 person

  11. Pretty special news coming from leaders that have made absolutely no preparation for snow run off. It all goes right into the ocean. I would think saving every drop counts. Other states seem to appreciate the run off.
    Ca. Was one of the first states to demand “smart meters” without concern of the dangers.
    Any bets on the odds Mr. Brown doesn’t abide by the new rules?
    Looks like another UN control measure, fine the people for obeying the new laws.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Where I live the City has been trying to get me to install (have THEM install) a water meter for about 20 years,but that’s not going to happen without a fight. My water is “Grandfathered in”,so they can’t touch it. My water bill is a flat $83.00,which seems high,but there’s a principle at stake here-if they meter my water,they can raise my bill as high as they want. As it is now,they have a LOT of legal stuff to do before they can raise my bill.


    • Since the ‘smart’ PoS meter was installed on my rented 1937 2 tiny BR very modest house [damned near a cottage, as it’s only 1000 sq ft] in Esquimalt, Zone 7a [I use USDA’s climate zones], in 3 yrs our Hydro bill went from C $
      125/mo to $225/month, with NO significant increase in usage. WAIT: it get better –which means = MORE horrific– because to ensure that Hydro got a cash cow, they created a fictive ‘overuse’ line in equally fictitious billing sands. So once yr AVERAGE monthly usage exceeds a baseline which is 50% more than yr average of the last 3 years, then a PENALTY of 50% EXTRA is added to your billing!

      Wait, it gets better: when I last phoned BC Hydro’s ‘direct line’ [directly to what, Hell & back?] I got a 40+ yrs employee who was a REAL mensch [a grand Yiddish word!] and we went through 45 minutes of truly tortuous Q&A time. BUT at long last I got answers, which may help FotMs readers when they go to cope w/this crapola.

      Q: I didn’t ask for this meter, pls take it off.
      A: Your landlord has to request that.
      Q: Surely BC Hydro set the penalty bar too low. I’m on pension, my income is under C$ 15,000 yearly, and I was forced off oil heat 5 years ago when a tank refill was $1,1000 all-at-once. So we were forced to rely on Hydro fpr Winter heating. After scrutinising the ‘smart’ billing I cannot see what we’re doing to justify such high consumption, IF that is what it s.
      A: You must check the 3 areas of large consumption: heating, laundry, and fridge.
      Q: We’re 3 adults who are not dull-witted. I set heater thermostats at 15’C [nearly 70’F]; the crybaby who had it warmer at night [even tho’ he’s 150 lbs overweight] had a heater used ONLY in his BR when sleeping. It was disconnected when he left. I insist clothes be dried as Perm Press at the lowest settings, BUT I admitted the water heater tank [not externally insulated] is set for 165’F, as there are 3 people using the bath/shower.

      Long story short: he did EVERYTHING he could to reduce the bill to more reasonable payback terms, i.e., $600 spread over six payments 2 weeks apart, but admitted there was NOTHING he could do to get the damned meter out, I get my slumlord –I mean Landlord!– to request meter removal. Look for Part 2 in this stuuuu-pid saga.

      Liked by 1 person

      • What a nightmare! I had them take the crap meter off within a couple months of putting it on without my consent. I had that luxury living in my home home though. Soon if they have their way, none of us will have our own homes.

        Liked by 1 person

      • So Sorry Joseph! The same thing has been happening here in CA for years with both our water bills and electric….they “classified” us on a tier of usage for both..(according to family constellation, ages, etc ) .and when and if we use OVER their classifcation of our restricted usage….we get charged up the ying-yang. We even dump our pet water bowls onto our outdoor plantings when we change water every AM so we don’t have to water them with “expensive” water. We dry our towels and heavy goods outside or, in winter, hung all over the house at night to humidify our heated air. We wash dishes by hand when a few, or allow day’s worth to acculmulate in the dishwasher for a “big load” etc etc……Years and years ago….the homes in our SoCal area used to have a “gray water valve” on their homes… shower water, washing machine water….running sink waters in the home….could be diverted into a cistern for watering yards and gardens …..WHY the heck did that ever go away? METHINKS in the interest of money-mongering water districts/electric districts (which here in CA are local governing districts with big “pooh-bah” administrators… having NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with “conservtion.” People are always right to “follow the money.”)

        Liked by 2 people

  12. Ginger Mitchell bathes three times a day? What is a rational reason for 3 baths a day, aside from obsessive compulsive disorder? And they must have quite a large family indeed, if it’s necessary for her to be a full-time laundromat. I can only conclude these people are speaking in hyperbole, or feel that they are not doing anything exceptional.

    Liked by 4 people

  13. Just found this site from a Breitbart comment.
    Although I hate government running our lives, 55 gallons/person/day sounds like allot of water. I guess it depends on how large the lawn is, or how many cars you wash and how often.
    Maybe desalinization will save us all. I think the technology should be there by now.


    • “55 gallons/person/day sounds like a lot of water”


      An 8-minute shower: 17 gallons
      3 toilet flushes (which is a low estimate): 10.5 to 21 gallons (@ 3.5-7 gallons per flush, depending on when the toilet was manufactured)
      = 27.5 to 38 gallons a day for just a shower and 3 flushes, which leaves 17 to 22.5 gallons for everything else, including drinking/cooking, washing of hands after toilet, laundry, watering plants…. And that’s assuming you shower instead of take a bath, which uses a minimum of 80 gallons. In other words, Californians are consigned to a future of no baths.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Let’s not forget pools, or for the not as well off, kids who would normally run through the sprinklers or have water fights with the hose and squirt guns on hot days. Sorry no fun for you kids!

        Liked by 2 people

        • It seems to me that this is really about “permission”. It somewhat establishes that “The State” ‘owns’ the water. Believe it or not, that is not traditional at all.

          They are doing the same thing with “federal lands”. It is a somewhat subtle change but they are to “manage” them. They don’t “own” them.

          Northern California had more than enough water. Then they started canal projects through the San Joaquin Valley. All this went for irrigation and to supplement needs of LA. After all, building a major city in a desert might not be a good idea.

          Over the years these resources have been hideously managed. At present all of these parasites are just employees of the New Odor. They don’t care why they do what they do. They just follow orders.

          I like to point to Nestle. During their draught, Nestle kept bottling, even though their permit expired YEARS previously. California’s government, like so many others, is SO corrupt it is irreparable. I suppose it is good to look on the natural beauty of the place. It IS stunningly beautiful. It has everything. As soon as all the trash leaves it should be worth reconsidering.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Thank you , lo, for bringing up this idea that “the State” owns water. In CA, for one, water districts ARE politically-based, and so, “State-owned.” For years, Nestle has been bottling water from wells at the base of the mountains here in CA that lead up to the Lake Gregory/Lake Arrowhead area. I thought I’d heard at one time that it was of no charge to Nestle …but I don’t know if I can believe that….but I DO KNOW that there MUST have been some sort of ‘comfortable” agreement between Nestle and the local governments…. either country or city or State……that most probably did NOT benefit the local citizenry in the way that it SHOULD have. My dau-in-law was the former general counsel (main lawyer) for Nestle’s (they are Swiss) concerns in the USA through another corporate holding, and, much of Nestle holdings in the USA today were bought out by an Asian concern……..this sort of foreign buy out of American companies has been happening for YEARS (in most countries….it is illegal for a foreign company or government to have ownership of property or companies in the country……you can’t even “buy” a home in Mexico if you are not a Mexican citizen, for example…..). My dad, rest his soul, was an agricultural economist for many USA concerns and the World Bank….and as long ago as 30 or more years….China and Japan bought out our middle-land wheat producing lands to run as a business…and even before that…the apple orchards, and peach orchards of the original, historic “bread belt” of the USA….PA/MD/VA and points south. I’ve been waiting for the “other shoe to drop” for many years, knowing all this pretty much first-hand: there will come a day when our food (& water?) supply and prices, controlled by other countries, will control our sovereignty. THIS is why we needed a TRUMP in the executive seat…and if he can’t gain a second term…we are in trouble unless we can find another internationally-saavy trade warrior in his place. The facts are stacked against us…..the “trade balance” is the LEAST of our problems in this commodity extravaganza……..the problem is that foreign countries are allowed to buy, run and maintain American agricultural and other concerns on our own soil……at the risk of holding us hostage to the products of our own lands…..(PS…..the apple orchards in Adams Co, PA, Gettysburg, for people who know the area….import thousands of illegal Hispanics yearly to pick apples…and yet…..the orchards are owned by the Chinese……..think of THAT every time you bite into an apple from PA…..The last time I visited Gettysburg to pay respects to a monument to the 56th PA Volunteers—-who helped lead off the battle—in which an ancestor had served valiently……a carload of Hispanic, Spanish-speaking only, pulled up alongside me at the memorial I’d gone to honor….and asked me a bunch of trivial questions in Spanish—I speak decent intermediate Spanish….I refused to recognize their requests….as they were trivial/sexually exploitive in nature/ and a total defacement of my visit to my ancestor’s memorial at this important battle site in the history of our country—-but these people did not KNOW or APPRECIATE this sacred place or WHY Americans might visit this sacred place, including ME on that day….and furthermmore…I NEVER IMAGINED that I’d be “solicited”or interfered with by illegal alien Hispanics, speaking Spanish to me at the 56th PA memorial site on the Gettysburg battlefield.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Thank you for sharing all that info. It is so much worse that any of us can know. We have all been sold down the drain. What you wrote makes me think of when all this really started to take rapid pace- back in Clinton’s reign with them selling the Long Beach Naval installation to the Chinese and allowing Military and technology to be stolen by the Chinese as well. As I recall Clinton also allowed our largest cleanest coal reserve to be sold to the Chinese. I guess Asians own most of the US by now, and culturally we are being inundated by everyone out of the third world. My chiropractor today told me that he attended his sons graduation with his family including a brother in law who is three quarters Hispanic who lives a half hour away. Upon arriving at the graduation the brother in law exclaimed, God, there’s so many White people here! Tells you loads…where he lives it all Hispanics, and somehow it is odd for there to be White people in a historically White country. Makes you want to lay down and weep.


    • Desalination has been around for years. Yet it is very costly due to fluctuating energy costs. And no doubt due to the amount of energy/facility footprint requirements, environmentalists will not like it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I know that you know this, but, instead of approving every developer’s mad money-making scheme they might say “no” once in a while. These monied interests just need to get approval to build. It then becomes the people’s obligation to provide water, etc..

        We have the same thing here. In fact, I think they are worse here when it comes to letting developers get off Scott free. They just keep raising taxes on home owners to pay for the new infrastructure associated with new developments. They should make the developers pay.

        Anyway, my pea-brain says “if there isn’t enough water, I guess you can’t build here”. Of course I don’t have wealthy scumbags stuffing bundles of filthy lucre in my pants either.

        So what’s it all mean? Well, those who have been paying are going to be told “you can’t use but this much water”. Why? Because “your government” let developers bribe them. When do we start chasing them through the streets?

        Liked by 2 people

  14. Californians should pick a day of protest. EVERYONE OPENS THEIR FAUCETS AT THE SAME TIME TO EMPTY THE TANKS.. SHOW BROWN HES A NUT,! Resist..


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s