A house is worth peanuts without water, this should be priority number one when purchasing a house. We should avoid cities and move closer to mountains where the rain will provide enough stream.
Plenty of cities have good access to water. It’s why most of them were built where they were in the first place. And for the most part, it’s the way you have the least impact on the environment.
Plenty of cities have good access to water. It’s why most of them were built where they were in the first place.
That’s the way it used to be.
Take the Rio Grande:
Water restrictions ordered in Rio Grande Valley as drought persists
‘The actual lake is gone,’ Zapata County judge says
McALLEN, Texas (Border Report) — The two largest cities in the Rio Grande Valley have implemented mandatory water restrictions as water levels in two reservoirs hit near-record lows due to an ongoing drought.
Rathmell gave Border Report a tour of diminishing Falcon Lake on Thursday, and at the time advocated that cities downstream in the Rio Grande Valley should be forced to conserve water.
Rathmell said that Falcon Lake is basically no more. It’s just an area where the Rio Grande river runs through.
Cities will become traps. It was convenient before but now it is becoming a death trap, don’t purchase a house there, you become dependent on someone bringing food and water to you. If you are in the business of searching for a house, avoid cities.
You’re cherry picking your examples. Most cities still do have great access to water. And that “dependence” is called civilization. Everyone has their own jobs to do so that we’re not all each our own homestead living off grid. It’s more efficient and resilient that way.
You listed the same example several times, in quotes, not sourced links, and you’re also fear mongering on the level of a conspiracy theorist with no reason for why this would affect cities in the northeast, for instance. Your advice of moving to the mountains, taken en masse, would just result in cities existing there…with the same source of water.
I see that you also downvoted my post about veganism and the cost of breeding cattle in term of water. I see a pattern there.
You listed the same example several times, in quotes
What are you talking about? It’s the same article about the rio grande. It’s not supposed to be multiple examples.
not sourced links
Paste it in any search engine, it’s the first result.
fear mongering on the level of a conspiracy theorist
I see your true colors now.
Your advice of moving to the mountains, taken en masse, would just result in cities existing there…with the same source of water.
Ridiculous, I’m not talking to the masses.
You brought nothing to the table, you saw a post about veganism and then you went full conspiracy theorist mode. Instead of discussing the case you just went for the downvote button. I’m not wasting more time with you.
A house is worth peanuts without water, this should be priority number one when purchasing a house. We should avoid cities and move closer to mountains where the rain will provide enough stream.
Plenty of cities have good access to water. It’s why most of them were built where they were in the first place. And for the most part, it’s the way you have the least impact on the environment.
That’s the way it used to be.
Take the Rio Grande:
Cities will become traps. It was convenient before but now it is becoming a death trap, don’t purchase a house there, you become dependent on someone bringing food and water to you. If you are in the business of searching for a house, avoid cities.
You’re cherry picking your examples. Most cities still do have great access to water. And that “dependence” is called civilization. Everyone has their own jobs to do so that we’re not all each our own homestead living off grid. It’s more efficient and resilient that way.
Thanks for the downvote, that was a pleasure to find examples and sources for you.
You listed the same example several times, in quotes, not sourced links, and you’re also fear mongering on the level of a conspiracy theorist with no reason for why this would affect cities in the northeast, for instance. Your advice of moving to the mountains, taken en masse, would just result in cities existing there…with the same source of water.
I see that you also downvoted my post about veganism and the cost of breeding cattle in term of water. I see a pattern there.
What are you talking about? It’s the same article about the rio grande. It’s not supposed to be multiple examples.
Paste it in any search engine, it’s the first result.
I see your true colors now.
Ridiculous, I’m not talking to the masses.
You brought nothing to the table, you saw a post about veganism and then you went full conspiracy theorist mode. Instead of discussing the case you just went for the downvote button. I’m not wasting more time with you.