TX


Just a convienently placed sign. The field is fallow. You do know what that means right? For centuries, farmers have left fields go un-sown every other year or so to let the nutrients replenish. Sometimes they will sow a silage crop, and after it has sprouted and grown some, they till it in to allow it to decompose and re-enrich the soil.


Looks like a wheat or alfalfa field after the harvest. They stop watering it on purpose. Why water the leftovers? The part that was valuable as a crop has already been removed.


This image is a dry canal. They all get like this at certain times of the year. Notice the green in the background? Give me a break. This doesn't prove a thing.

Also notice the whitish stuff in the bottom of the canal? That is the salts left over from all the chemical fertilizers that are used to grow the food. You should see what the farmlands of North America look like from 40,000 feet. It is easy to tell which way the surface water flows, as the salts collect at the "downstream" end of that surface runoff.


This is not a picture of a California farm field. It does look kinda artsy though. I like it.


This is just some poor snapshot some dope took of the desert along the highway. The area in the background has never been tilled and worked to produce crops. The sign was placed there to play on the ignorance of the masses.

Did it get to you too?


All orchards have a finite life. Trees that produce fruit, nuts, olives, etc. Eventually reach a point where they no longer produce in a commercially beneficial manner. You can see fields like this in Washington, Oregon, and even Georgia and South Carolina.


This image is nothing but a fallow field. Why water a field when there is noting growing in it?



This last picture could be anywhere that it gets hot and dry. Nothing in the photograph places it in California.

Not one of these images shows a "dustbowl". Nope, not one dust cloud.

The whole thing was a political jerk off, that likely cost the taxpayers billions of dollars.
View attachment 16132View attachment 16133View attachment 16134View attachment 16135View attachment 16136View attachment 16137View attachment 16138View attachment 16139
 
The entire valley looked like that. They don't do that to an entire region. Also, the fields would not lie fallow during the height of haying season.

Pull your head out of the sand. The people who live in that region are largely Liberals. They elect almost exclusively Democrats.
 
The ignorant are the ones that think taking tax money to irrigate a desert to produce crops so a "farmer" can live in a Beverly Hills mansion that has been compared to the palace of Versailles, while paying illegal immigrants minimum wage with no overtime, and having to buy bottled water to drink ( which the "farmers" also own the bottled water plant) is what is fair and just and right.
That is truly ignorant.
Throw your labels around all you want.
There is none so blind as those that refuse to see...........



As I tried to explain before, the little fish was the symptom, not the problem.
The REASON the fish were clogging the filters was BECAUSE there is not sufficient water left in the canal system.
IT IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE A DESERT.

As a comedian once said, "Of course there are starving people in Africa. MOVE! We have deserts in America too. We just don't live there!"
Unfortunately, that statement is glaringly ridiculous in light of what we have built in the desert southwest.
 
The ignorant are the ones that think taking tax money to irrigate a desert to produce crops so a "farmer" can live in a Beverly Hills mansion that has been compared to the palace of Versailles, while paying illegal immigrants minimum wage with no overtime, and having to buy bottled water to drink ( which the "farmers" also own the bottled water plant) is what is fair and just and right.
That is truly ignorant.
Throw your labels around all you want.
There is none so blind as those that refuse to see...........



As I tried to explain before, the little fish was the symptom, not the problem.
The REASON the fish were clogging the filters was BECAUSE there is not sufficient water left in the canal system.
IT IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE A DESERT.

As a comedian once said, "Of course there are starving people in Africa. MOVE! We have deserts in America too. We just don't live there!"
Unfortunately, that statement is glaringly ridiculous in light of what we have built in the desert southwest.

All of the ranchers live in mansions? Seriously?

And the fact they've converted the southwest from a barren desert into fertile fields for agriculture and big giant cities is nothing more than evidence of what can be done with ingenuity and a country with a healthy capitalist economy. Without capitalism, there would be nobody for the commies and socialists to steal from.
 
All of the ranchers live in mansions? Seriously?

Farmer is singular, not plural.
I never made reference to all farmers and ranchers. However, having researched the numbers and incomes of corporate farms and ranches disguising themselves as "family farms" I can tell you that most of them are in the wealthiest percentile in the nation, with the help of taxpayer subsidies of course.
Just "spreading the wealth, right?



And the fact they've converted the southwest from a barren desert into fertile fields for agriculture and big giant cities is nothing more than evidence of what can be done with ingenuity and a country with a healthy capitalist economy. Without capitalism, there would be nobody for the commies and socialists to steal from.


Surely you jest.
They built the Boulder dam with capitalist investment rather than tax money from the gov't?
They built those dams and canals, water, sewer and irrigation systems with private investor money rather than taxes collected?
Are you sure about that?
Now, I know who is profiting from all that infrastructure. I guess that is more redistribution of money taken from middle class and being distributed to the few at the top.
 
Farmer is singular, not plural.
I never made reference to all farmers and ranchers. However, having researched the numbers and incomes of corporate farms and ranches disguising themselves as "family farms" I can tell you that most of them are in the wealthiest percentile in the nation, with the help of taxpayer subsidies of course.
Just "spreading the wealth, right?






Surely you jest.
They built the Boulder dam with capitalist investment rather than tax money from the gov't?
They built those dams and canals, water, sewer and irrigation systems with private investor money rather than taxes collected?
Are you sure about that?
Now, I know who is profiting from all that infrastructure. I guess that is more redistribution of money taken from middle class and being distributed to the few at the top.
I would rather see my tax dollars building dams, canals ,sewer and irrigation systems then it being spent to build baseball, basketball, and football stadiums.
 
Farmer is singular, not plural.
I never made reference to all farmers and ranchers. However, having researched the numbers and incomes of corporate farms and ranches disguising themselves as "family farms" I can tell you that most of them are in the wealthiest percentile in the nation, with the help of taxpayer subsidies of course.
Just "spreading the wealth, right?

I said that on here once and a bunch of people claiming to be farmers got mad.

Surely you jest.
They built the Boulder dam with capitalist investment rather than tax money from the gov't?
They built those dams and canals, water, sewer and irrigation systems with private investor money rather than taxes collected?
Are you sure about that?

Yes. It was built with private funds that were stolen from private entities and from the citizens by the government. If it wasn't for capitalism, there wouldn't be anybody producing the wealth the government steals to use on these projects. The government doesn't generate wealth, it simply confiscates it and spreads it around.

If they're gonna steal people's money, it's good when they do stuff like build really kick-ass infrastructure that can turn a desert into viable farm land, (as long as they pay non-union American contractors to do the work) but the vast majority of money taken from the citizens is p***ed away on pet projects we don't need like wind mills all over the country, welfare for lazy people and illegal immigrants, and machine guns for Nazi storm troopers disguised as "police".

Why are we talking about California in a Texas thread. I bet the OP is pretty pizzed!

What's left to discuss about Texas? It's big, flat, boring, and full of people who think it's the greatest place on Earth because they built a big urinal shaped like a Taco Bell.
 
Yes, I too believe that spending tax money on dams, roads and other infrastructure is one of the few useful things a gov't can do.
But to make the claim that this was done with private investment from capitalist businesses is just too silly for words.
Then to allow those businesses to keep all the profit as a result of that infrastructure without giving back to the same people that provided it in the first place is even more ridiculous.
And y'all wonder why this country is in the shape it's in?

Just think about the highway system.
When we build a major interstate and businesses pop up all along it, do you honestly think those businesses just built their success all by themselves?
No one contributed to the people being able to get there and the supply lines for merchandise?
That's all private capitalism?
No redistributing of money?
You really think that if we didn't share responsibilities and share the rewards together that any of this would ever take place?

Think really hard before you answer that one.


Perfect example just posted by Mike of using infrastructure to provide a profit for some investor.

http://www.truckersforum.net/forum/f98/federal-program-subsidizes-toll-roads-70061/
 
Yes, I too believe that spending tax money on dams, roads and other infrastructure is one of the few useful things a gov't can do.
But to make the claim that this was done with private investment from capitalist businesses is just too silly for words.
Then to allow those businesses to keep all the profit as a result of that infrastructure without giving back to the same people that provided it in the first place is even more ridiculous.
And y'all wonder why this country is in the shape it's in?

Just think about the highway system.
When we build a major interstate and businesses pop up all along it, do you honestly think those businesses just built their success all by themselves?
No one contributed to the people being able to get there and the supply lines for merchandise?
That's all private capitalism?
No redistributing of money?
You really think that if we didn't share responsibilities and share the rewards together that any of this would ever take place?

Think really hard before you answer that one.

100% of the money the government has, comes from the government stealing it from capitalists. Without capitalism, the government has no money. The government does not produce wealth, it simply takes it. Sometimes it uses it for useful things, but most of the time it doesn't.

"And y'all wonder why this country is in the shape it's in?"


Perfect example just posted by Mike of using infrastructure to provide a profit for some investor.

http://www.truckersforum.net/forum/f98/federal-program-subsidizes-toll-roads-70061/

I didn't read that article. Instead what I did was click the "source" link and then click the "find" function and typed "Indiana" and got no results. As far as I know, the Kangaroo Toll Hike is the only toll road owned/leased by private investors. The same Australian billionaires were interested in bribing the politicians into leasing the Ohio and PA turnpikes to them, but as far as I know it never happened. Toll roads operated by the state governments are no different than public highways, except they have a different method of paying for them. They're not operated "for profit" like the Kangaroo Toll Hike, except in cases where corrupt officials divert funds for their pet projects.
 
I didn't read that article. Instead what I did was click the "source" link and then click the "find" function and typed "Indiana" and got no results. As far as I know, the Kangaroo Toll Hike is the only toll road owned/leased by private investors. The same Australian billionaires were interested in bribing the politicians into leasing the Ohio and PA turnpikes to them, but as far as I know it never happened. Toll roads operated by the state governments are no different than public highways, except they have a different method of paying for them. They're not operated "for profit" like the Kangaroo Toll Hike, except in cases where corrupt officials divert funds for their pet projects.

FYI the Chicago Skyway Toll road is "leased" by the same group that leased the Indiana Pothole road.

The city of Chicago's Department of Streets and Sanitation formerly maintained the Chicago Skyway Toll Bridge System. A transaction that gave the city of Chicago a $1.83 billion dollar cash infusion leased the Skyway to the Skyway Concession Company (SCC), a joint-venture between the Australian Macquarie Infrastructure Group and Spanish Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte S.A., which assumed operations on the Skyway on a 99–year operating lease. SCC will be responsible for all operating and maintenance costs of the Skyway but has the right to all toll and concession revenue. The Triple-A bond insurer Financial Security Assurance Inc. (FSA) has guaranteed $1.4 billion of senior bonds to provide long-term funding for the privately operated Chicago Skyway. On June 30, 2006, this same joint-venture assumed responsibility for operating and maintaining the adjacent Indiana East–West Toll Road for $3.8 billion. The agreement between SCC and the city of Chicago marked the first time an existing toll road was moved from public to private operation in the United States

Chicago Skyway - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I believe I said almost exclusively. Arnie squeaked in because of the abysmal performance of Davis before him, his name recognition and his supposedly Centrist positions that were strongly influenced by his Kennedy ex wife. I'm not exactly sure I could begin to call Arnie a Conservative regardless of his chosen political party.

....and look at the region specific politicians who are elected from that area.
 

Back
Top