You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

SilentCal comments on California Drought thread - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: SanguineEmpiricist 07 May 2015 06:44PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (90)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: SilentCal 08 May 2015 03:34:57PM 1 point [-]

A lot of press has focused on almond agriculture, which has the interesting property that missing one season of water destroys more than one season's harvest; it can kill the trees. This seems politically advantageous in a situation like the present one; by increasing the harm done by denying the water, it has a blackmail effect, yet without looking like blackmail.

Is there any politically realistic way to counter such incentives to be more vulnerable? I'd say it requires government either to take a consistent laissez-faire line so that farmers' failures aren't seen as public responsibility or to step in and regulate more, restricting who can grow almonds or at least requiring a drought plan registered in advance.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 09 May 2015 02:01:19AM 0 points [-]

How about politically realistic ways to counter the NIMBY and limits-to-growth style arguments that made it impossible to update the state's water infrastructure that led to this problem in the first place.