Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't think it was OPs point. OP's point is that agricultural exporters in Utah profits on externalizations (aquifer depletion), which impoverishes everybody depending on that aquifer.

When you come to the realization that you can't drink money, this comes as good news.



So... you think Utahns are simply going to stop farming and end up destitute? I'm not following. No, they'll keep turning the spigot on because they have kids to feed, they'll just be poorer.

If you want better water regulation in the Utah desert, the solution is better water regulation in the Utah desert and not a huge tax on trade.


Of course they'll continue farming. Just not alfalfa!


Yeah, because passing water regulation under any administration, let alone this one, is a common occurrence. /s

OP was just trying to make lemonade from the lemons we are served.


And I'm just saying that there are no lemons here. Empoverishing Utah farmers does nothing to fix their aquifer, period. They'll just be forced into less lucrative crops, and potentially into techniques that are more short-term and less protective of long term resources like water. Look at aquifer management elsewhere in the world. Are the poor countries doing a better job? Exactly.


Sure, but it's also entirely the wrong policy solution for the problem as it has been laid out.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: