brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard Brower) (01/01/70)
In article <1087@uscvax.UUCP> kurtzman@uscvax.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >Why must this little "rivalry" between No. and So. California get so >nasty. This water rights in question are owned by So. California sources. >It seems to me that they can do what they want with it. Do you really >think that LA should become a desert again? That is a very unproductive >attitude. Try helping by finding alternatives - not fault. The water in the rivers of Northern California is owned by Southern California? Seems odd, but Stephen thinks it is right. Do I think that LA should return to the desert from which it sprang? No! Do I think that LA has the right to turn Northern California into a desert so that they can water the lawns in Beverly Hills? Also No! If there must be a choice made, leave the water where it belongs, in the river.
chu@lasspvax.UUCP (Clare Chu) (09/10/85)
In article <502@cepu.UUCP> dowdy@cepu.UUCP (Dowdy Jackson) writes: > >Wait!!!! I only used Delaware because it is small. I could have also used >Maine or Rhode Island as an example of a small state. Any way you get my >point, Don't you ? California is the greatest place in the world to live but >I guess Delaware has its good (gulp!) points as well... > >Dowdy Jackson >UCLA Dept of Neurology > Yay, yay, yay California's the total mondo mucho greatest place in the world. I didn't realize it until I went to Cornell to experience the East. I bet the Soviets wish they could live there too...uh oh!!! (had to put something political in here since it's net.politics ;-) ha, ha, ha). Southern California is it!!! Wheeeee...... I sure miss our photochemical high! Clare (loca)
ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) (09/12/85)
> > Yay, yay, yay California's the total mondo mucho greatest place in the world. > I didn't realize it until I went to Cornell to experience the East. I bet > the Soviets wish they could live there too...uh oh!!! (had to put something > political in here since it's net.politics ;-) ha, ha, ha). Southern > California is it!!! Wheeeee...... I sure miss our photochemical high! > > Clare (loca) Photochemical highs? Is that what you get when you breath in Southern Cali- fornia's 'orange' skys?
jpd@kepler.UUCP (John Donovan) (09/13/85)
In article <514@lasspvax.UUCP>, chu@lasspvax.UUCP (Clare Chu) writes: >Southern > California is it!!! Wheeeee...... I sure miss our photochemical high! Uh, excuse me, Clare, but in the interests of local chauvinism, I must point out that NORTHERN California is where people live by CHOICE. A serious tradeoff of money for redwoods, but so what? I prefer air that I can see through... -- ---- ... John Donovan, MicroPro Technical Communications {dual,ptsfa,hplabs}!well!micropro!kepler!jpd
phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (09/14/85)
In article <234@kepler.UUCP> jpd@kepler.UUCP (John Donovan) writes: >Uh, excuse me, Clare, but in the interests of local chauvinism, I must >point out that NORTHERN California is where people live by CHOICE. I would like to point out that Southern California only exists by stealing Northern California's water. LA used to be a desert and should become one again. Save Mono Lake! -- I hate "recreational volleyball". I like to play for blood. Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA
bill@persci.UUCP (09/16/85)
In article <3995@amdcad.UUCP> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) wrote: >>[...] >I would like to point out that Southern California only exists by stealing >Northern California's water. LA used to be a desert and should become one >again. Save Mono Lake! A few years ago I was driving up the east side of the Sierras from Lone Pine and stopped at a little picnic area in some little town *hundreds* of miles from LA. I was *VERY* surprised to see a sign on the creek nearby informing one and all that that puny little creek (heck, my roof sheds more water in a Seattle drizzle!) was *OWNED* by the City of Los Angeles! I don't remember the exact wording, but it was filled with all sorts of dire predictions about what would would happen to you if you so much as filched a drop from that creek, or stepped in it, or whatever... It didn't leave me with much in the way of kind thoughts about Losangeles. -- William Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!persci!bill
kurtzman@uscvax.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) (09/18/85)
> In article <234@kepler.UUCP> jpd@kepler.UUCP (John Donovan) writes: > >Uh, excuse me, Clare, but in the interests of local chauvinism, I must > >point out that NORTHERN California is where people live by CHOICE. > > I would like to point out that Southern California only exists by stealing > Northern California's water. LA used to be a desert and should become one > again. Save Mono Lake! > -- > I hate "recreational volleyball". I like to play for blood. > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 > UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil > ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA Why must this little "rivalry" between No. and So. California get so nasty. This water rights in question are owned by So. California sources. It seems to me that they can do what they want with it. Do you really think that LA should become a desert again? That is a very unproductive attitude. Try helping by finding alternatives - not fault.
phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (09/19/85)
In article <398@persci.UUCP> bill@persci.UUCP (William Swan) writes: >from LA. I was *VERY* surprised to see a sign on the creek nearby informing >one and all that that puny little creek (heck, my roof sheds more water in a >Seattle drizzle!) was *OWNED* by the City of Los Angeles! > >I don't remember the exact wording, but it was filled with all sorts of dire >predictions about what would would happen to you if you so much as filched >a drop from that creek, or stepped in it, or whatever... It didn't leave >me with much in the way of kind thoughts about Losangeles. When Los Angeles first started getting thirsty, they met with some local opposition from the locals whose water they were taking. Of course, the Department of Water and Power offered compensation but some felt it wasn't adequate and some just wanted to keep what they had. But LA couldn't let such problems stand in the way of their right to wash their cars, so they learned how to use force, first to take the water, and then to keep it. At the beginning they had trouble with their pipes being sabotaged. But they learned how to "take care" of those responsible. Signs such as you saw are probably left over from those times. I suspect those "dire predictions" were minor compared with what actually happened to those who opposed the Department. I am sure no one was treated any worse than the American Indians were treated by the US Department of the Interior. -- We changed Coke again. hee hee Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA
graber@srcsip.UUCP (Zot) (09/20/85)
In article <398@persci.UUCP> bill@persci.UUCP writes: >A few years ago I was driving up the east side of the Sierras from Lone Pine >and stopped at a little picnic area in some little town *hundreds* of miles >from LA. I was *VERY* surprised to see a sign on the creek nearby informing >one and all that that puny little creek (heck, my roof sheds more water in a >Seattle drizzle!) was *OWNED* by the City of Los Angeles! > [ more stuff about water rights ] >William Swan {ihnp4,decvax,allegra,...}!uw-beaver!tikal!persci!bill Last I heard the long range plan to keep So. Cal form evaporating was to build a pipeline to the Great Lakes... Great - let 'em do it and charge by the running foot - oughta help make up for all the damn tax money we've been paying to rebuild their houses everytime they fall into the ocean. ("It's a national disaster... what do you mean your crops were ruined by hail, hell that's what insurance is for" ) Besides, we could just put this end of the pipeline in Silver Bay, ...right next to Reserve Mining. rob graber ..!ihnp4!umn-cs!srcsip!graber [ The American Express Card .... DON'T LEAVE HOME ]
jpd@kepler.UUCP (John Donovan) (09/25/85)
You are lumping quotes from different sources together under my signature,
Phil. I was just teasing the young lady who left SoCal for college and
started this thing. She was exuberant, and I couldn't resist teasing her.
The hardball quotes are from two other (and different) sources. Kindly
give credit where credit is due.
--
----
... John Donovan, MicroPro Technical Communications
{dual,ptsfa,hplabs}!well!micropro!kepler!jpdkurtzman@uscvax.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) (09/28/85)
In article <5584@fortune.UUCP> brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard brower) writes: >In article <1087@uscvax.UUCP> kurtzman@uscvax.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >>Why must this little "rivalry" between No. and So. California get so >>nasty. This water rights in question are owned by So. California sources. >>It seems to me that they can do what they want with it. Do you really >>think that LA should become a desert again? That is a very unproductive >>attitude. Try helping by finding alternatives - not fault. > >The water in the rivers of Northern California is owned by Southern California? >Seems odd, but Stephen thinks it is right. > >Do I think that LA should return to the desert from which it sprang? No! >Do I think that LA has the right to turn Northern California into a desert >so that they can water the lawns in Beverly Hills? Also No! If there must >be a choice made, leave the water where it belongs, in the river. So where are your suggestions for alleviating the problem? It sounds to me as if you just want to ignore the problem because you falsely equate all of Southern California with Beverly Hills.
phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (09/29/85)
In article <265@kepler.UUCP> jpd@kepler.UUCP (John Donovan) writes: >You are lumping quotes from different sources together under my signature, >Phil. I was just teasing the young lady who left SoCal for college and >started this thing. > The hardball quotes are from two other (and different) sources. Kindly >give credit where credit is due. What are you talking about? Can you find this article I "misquoted" you in? I may like to start flames but that doesn't mean I intentionally tell lies of commission. Lies of omission are a different story. But I'm sure I'm no worse than say the Television news... -- God made atheists too. Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA
nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (09/30/85)
>Great - let 'em do it and charge by the running foot - oughta help >make up for all the damn tax money we've been paying to rebuild their >houses everytime they fall into the ocean. Actually, California is a net loser in the federal budget. Not as bad as Illinois or New Jersey, but still a loser. You ought to gripe about those states that get more money from the feds than they pay in, like New Mexico (where was it that the Republican National Chairman was from?), Maryland, Virginia, etc. I don't mind helping the poor; it is subsidising the rich areas that bothers me. -- James C. Armstrong, Jnr. {ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa I'll keep an eye on the old man, he seems to have a knack for getting himself into trouble! -who said it, what story?
gersh@dartvax.UUCP (Jeff A. Gershengorn) (10/02/85)
In article <1136@uscvax.UUCP> kurtzman@usc-cse.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >In article <5584@fortune.UUCP> brower@fortune.UUCP (Richard brower) writes: >>In article <1087@uscvax.UUCP> kurtzman@uscvax.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) writes: >>>Why must this little "rivalry" between No. and So. California get so >>>nasty. This water rights in question are owned by So. California sources. >>>It seems to me that they can do what they want with it. Do you really >>>think that LA should become a desert again? That is a very unproductive >>>attitude. Try helping by finding alternatives - not fault. >> >>The water in the rivers of Northern California is owned by Southern California? >>Seems odd, but Stephen thinks it is right. >> >>Do I think that LA should return to the desert from which it sprang? No! >>Do I think that LA has the right to turn Northern California into a desert >>so that they can water the lawns in Beverly Hills? Also No! If there must >>be a choice made, leave the water where it belongs, in the river. > >So where are your suggestions for alleviating the problem? It sounds to me >as if you just want to ignore the problem because you falsely equate all of >Southern California with Beverly Hills. Perhaps they were giving you the benefit of the doubt? :-) -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The sun is the same in a relative way, but you're older Shorter of breath and one day closer to death" -P. Floyd Jeff Gershengorn '88 ihnp4!dartvax!gersh Hinman Box 1772 Dartmouth College Hanover, New Hampshire 03755 Real World: 5 Fairway Drive San Rafael, CA 94901 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------