Should People Be Forced To Live Without A Shower And Drinking Water?

In the article “Richard Goode: California drought crisis is everyone’s fault,” Richard Goode (2015), states that California does not have enough water to provide and everyone is responsible for it. California’s water problem has been an ongoing situation for years. Hydrologists have predicted and advised us about the water deficit in California, but everyone chose to ignore it. California has been pumping its water straight from the aquifer for years and now it is becoming dry. An enormous amount of water is being pumped each year which causes the water table to go low. When the water table is low, wells go dry and people are left without water. Richard Goode mentions, that California will be in a drought until we are able to receive the same amount of groundwater that we withdraw. However, we might be too late.

My opinion is that California should not regulate groundwater because of farmers and financially. A Farmer would need more water for their crops, animals , accordingly themselves. That is a large amount of water , I do not think that is fair because what would happen if the farmers ran out of water ;they would have to use other residents water. Farmers would have to buy less pickups,employing less people, moreover buying less tractors.In source 1 it says that “the Farmers feel very disconnected with the

One of the main consumers of water are farmers, they account for 80 percent of water usage in California (Skelton). The problem with cutting water to farmers is money; the amount of money that California farmers generate is around 46.4 billion (Fox). Cutting water to farmers will cause unemployment to increase and a decrease in the amount of taxable income. Along with the loss of money and jobs an increase in the price for produce will be expected. Many of the smaller farmers will not be able to make ends meet with the increase price of water. Sure many of the mega farms will get by without a huge

What do you think would happen if your town ran out of water? In the town of East Porterville they have not had water in 5 months. Life is really bad for them. They can not do basic stuff that involves using water. I do think that California should control phreatic water.

Envision yourself, about to complete a straightforward, everyday thing such as washing the dishes, suddenly to your surprise there is no water coming out of the faucet. Well for the civilians of East Porterville this is their reality. California has always had very lenient and ineffective groundwater regulations. Today, this has become a major issue, especially with California's severe drought. The regulation of the aquifer is a necessity because cleanliness is a basic human right and by not regulating the groundwater and leaving civilians with no working water, that right is taken away. The right to bathe, wash your hands, and have a working toilet is simply no more. Furthermore there are scientific statements, proving that excessively pumping groundwater will lower the water levels, which will likely lead to the land level sinking as well.

Even though it is believed that World War I was initialized by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, others believe that there were a number of issues that played into the start of the war. There are said to be four areas that played into the cause of World War I, including the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the other three are imperialism, militarism, and nationalism. In this paper, we will discuss all of these areas to see how they played a part. We will also discuss what events drew the United States into World War I.

The first reason that California should regulate water usage is that due to the farmers are using an enormous amount of water, normal people are having trouble showering or using the bathroom. I quote section 2 “when she needs to go, i just take her outside”. No one should live like that. A man from California said that he needs to drive about 4 hours to his sister’s house just

Position: Farmers should be allowed to continue using the amount of water regulated by the government as an appropriate amount of water to use under drought conditions. Without enough water farmers would not be able to carry out their duties of providing food for the country and protecting the environment.

You name it, from top to bottom," said Pete Belluomini, the VP of Farming for Luhr Brothers Inc.” (Source 1). “Beatrice Sanders, the executive director of the Kern County Farm Bureau, agreed."I almost feel like farming will eventually become obsolete here," she said” (Source 1). ““If you own property, you can dig a well and you can pump as much groundwater as you a want,” says Famiglietti, “even if that means you are drawing the water in from beneath your neighbor’s property in your well for your own benefit. So it’s not unlike having several straws in a glass, and everyone drinking at the same time, and no one really watching the level”” (Source

Indians for example are being poorer. In 1853 E.A. Stevenson states, “The Indians in this portions of the State are wretchedly poor, having no horses, cattle or other property. They formerly survived on game, fish,acorns, etc. but it is now impossible for them to make a living by hunting or fishing”(Doc 2). This is due to miners turning the stream to mines to look for gold and they can do that because of the law of prior appropriations And after being use up, the stream become muddy causing fish to seek for new houses which will also be destroyed due to more miners using the streams carelessly. This causes Indians, animals and habitats to die. It is stated by Jerry Stanley in 1997, ”The gold rush meant death by starvation for thousands of Native Californians, and death from disease for thousands more”(Doc 7). This shows the consequence made by the miners. They use the water for their gold, polluting the rivers with mercury and to the Indians that drink the water they are die and if they don’t they will sooner ar later die of dehydrations. It also stated by Jerry Stanley that due the tree being cut downs, animals left which were a food source for Indians. The Indians are not the only one who were being harm. The environment is being harm. They cut down tree which are habitats for animals and the animals have to leave home and find a new one buts people will continue cutting trees and polluting water, and taking their home away again and the animals will sooner or later die out This create a cycle that will end with animals becoming endangered or extinct so we should start changing our water

What is the point of taking the water for the farm to make food if the people in the town need water to live also? California has been in a drought for 4 years now and the farmers are drilling wells and taking all of the water from the town for themselves. I think they should make a law. They prove them because it says that people can not do their laundry or drink water or wash dishes. It says that it affects prices and that it costs farmers a lot of money. You have to beg and pay extra to have them drill wells and they have to buy less stuff to be able to pay people to drill wells. I think we need laws because if they take all of the water there is no use for food because water is actually more important than food because you can die from

Over the years, conflict has emerged over whether the water that is distributed to the state of California should be equally provided to every part of the state, regardless of where the water has come from. People have argued that California has small water systems that they polluted by industrial uses, which makes them less efficient. People have also claimed that the state’s water systems are located in low income communities which makes it hard to gather funds for improvement. However, the distribution of water to all parts of California has many positive aspects to it. Many regions of the state have water restrictions and limited uses of water, which makes makes it more difficult for these regions. People have argued that the provision

Even though, “‘We are tied to the groundwater 100 percent,’ he said, ‘so ultimately it will have an effect on consumer prices. There's just no getting around that’” (Source1), citizens would be able to obtain water with more ease. "City folks just don't understand that they're biting the hand that feeds them, I'm afraid" (Source1). With laws, farmers will have less access to water, but the citizens will be able to have any access. They might have to pay more for food, but they will be able to get water.

The demands of the American people being met demonstrates the great democracy and progressiveness that many people want to be a part of. However, each group thus far that has chosen to fight for their rights in America, has initially gone through a struggle, in which hope was kept alive only by the strongest of believers. The recognition of these group’s importance and worthiness has especially been important to the people who faced discrimination all of their lives, or fought to death for change. Recognition of their values, beliefs, and traditions by the law, meant greater acceptance from the majority they were, -and still are-, a part of. Once African Americans paved the way beginning in 1865, women and the LGBT community followed suit to

Capital punishment, or the death penalty, has been a contentious issue in societies around the world for centuries, and is often considered the ultimate, irreversible punishment. In Canada, the first recorded use of the death penalty dates back to 1759, when Canada still resided as a British colony. Since then, 1,481 people have been sentenced to death in Canada, 710 of which were executed. Capital punishment was abolished in Canada on July 14th, 1976 after bill C-84 was passed by Parliament, supported by a mere 6-vote majority. In much of the United States, however, capital punishment still dominates as the preeminent punishment for severe crimes, having only been outlawed in 19 of the 50 states. Some consider the death penalty to be an adequate consequence of first degree murder. However, there are many moral, psychological, and financial implications associated with capital punishment. For numerous rationale, capital punishment should be abrogated worldwide as it is unethical, ineffectual, monetarily wasteful, and causes superfluous moral distress among justice and prison workers.