Water is essential, and I was willing to help, even knowing that the Tragedy of the Commons meant that many people wouldn't cut back. I was not one of those calling for them to be "fined" or otherwise punished.
But, being who I am, I don't trust government. Amounts ("85,000 gallons", "4 feet", etc.) were posted without context. That always tells me someone is trying to deceive. So I took it upon myself to check the water levels myself.
There are 4 water tanks in town, 3 of which have gauges that are easy to see and read. The fourth, a water sphere tower, has no way to be read by the public. Someone suggested a laser thermometer gun, but the ones with the necessary precision to read something at the distance involved would be too expensive, so I'll have to ignore that one.
What I discovered was that the tanks weren't as empty as we were being led to believe.
I wanted to document this, so I have been photographing the water gauges every day and posting the photos online. The funny thing is that as soon as my first photos were online, the story changed a little, and it was admitted that the tanks were "almost full". (That was fast!)
I wish I had been watching in the months leading up to the crisis to see what the "normal" water levels are. I suspect we are close.
But none of that is useful for the agenda to buy the land that the city commissioners want to buy, from a crony- a deal that was roundly condemned as a bad deal two years ago when it was proposed and a petition was circulated against it. The government still wants this deal (no other) and is still pushing this as the only possible solution. They are still trying to scare people into accepting this plan.
But...
The worst restrictions have been lifted. Lawn watering is being discouraged and limited to one day per week per address. It will be interesting to see the effect of this, seeing how much water my parents used on the one day in the last billing cycle when they watered their backyard.
If it makes a big difference, I will be there to see it myself so that the rulers can't gaslight the population with more fearmongering. Combined with my open condemnation of the local Flock spyware, I'm probably putting myself in danger.
My little town- population just over 1400 or so- is in a water emergency. Because its government screwed up.
Now, we residents are ordered to reduce our water usage by at least 20% and stop ALL outdoor use of water, or else.
The "else" includes warnings, increasing tiers of "fines", and having your water shut off until the crisis is over. Will it ever be over when they've been saying for years that the wells are running dry because the aquifer is being drained? Maybe once the water towers are full again they'll remove the penalties. I can hope.
I'm not too worried about water in the short term. I have as much water stored as I can fit in the nooks and crannies of my house, and I have several cases of bottled water for drinking. And several filled canteens.
The bigger issue is making sure my parents are set- and discovering they'd dumped the two 6-gallon cans of water I'd filled for them. They still have an 8-gallon jug, though. I've also helped them arrange to refill the other two at my sister's house in the bigger town across the state line that isn't currently having an immediate water emergency. But, seriously...
Less than two weeks ago, I was chewed out for all the stored water in out-of-the-way spots around the house that weren't as out of the way as someone would have liked. Funny how quickly that tune changed with one notice from the local Rulers. This has been a recurring theme in my life. "Why are you doing this? It's inconvenient and stupid!" to "Yes, we were prepared, so we're OK."
If I only had to watch out for myself, things would be so much smoother.
Anyway...
If it would rain, I would also catch rainwater to use, but that's historically the root of the problem in the region.
I'm doing my best to cut back, even while understanding that "the tragedy of the commons" means many residents won't. I'm using stored water to keep the birdbath filled- I'm sneaking out after dark to fill it. I'm also, at the same time, using stored water to try to keep my struggling sunchokes going. And I'm giving water to the stray cats on my porch. I'm abiding by the rules, but since my Jedi powers aren't strong, there's no point in attracting imperial attention and having to answer questions about where the water came from.
Of course, a couple of years ago, the town added electronic spyware to our water meters, supposedly to make it easier to bill us. Now they are saying they are digitally monitoring our water usage on a daily basis, to see who is complying and who isn't. I warned locals that this would happen. No one cared. You know how it goes.
Anyway, I'll bet I've cut my water usage (through the meter) by much more than 20%. Coincidentally, I fixed my dripping faucet last weekend, just in time, apparently. Later, I'll increase my usage when I'm storing up water again. It's just what I do.
I posted this observation on X a few days ago and upset someone with whom I normally agree. I guess he wants to believe government can be legitimate more than he values liberty.
Anyway, here's how it is:
Socialism is, according to dictionary.com, "a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government." (Although socialists get a little slippery whenever they don't like a specific definition. They don't like being pinned down.)
Statists claim government has the "right" to tax and regulate businesses. The power to tax and/or regulate is the power to control and destroy. The right to destroy or control something is a hallmark of ownership. The "right" to tax and regulate is an expression of government's claim to ownership (even if generally hidden from view). Government heavily taxes and regulates businesses. Government- ALL government- thus seizes the means of production- while pretending this isn't what it's doing.
On X, I was told I was using the wrong definition of socialism, so I asked how he defines it, and he never responded. As I pointed out above, no matter how you define it, someone will complain.
Government is socialism. All governments are socialist.
Statists- those who believe governing others is a legitimate human endeavor- are therefore socialists.
I agree.
You have a right to form a government.
You have a right to own and to carry weapons, including firearms.
You have no right to impose your government on others against their will.
Just like you have no right to start shooting randomly into a crowd of people.
You have a responsibility to govern yourself, but no right to govern others. You have no right to force your government on others, even if they refuse to take that responsibility upon themselves. (In that case, you have the right to defend yourself from them.)
You have a responsibility to stay armed so you can defend yourself and others, but you have no right to start shooting random people just because you have a right to "keep and bear arms". You also have no right to force others to own and carry weapons- even though it is their responsibility to do so.
V*ting, as an expression of your right to form a government, is the same sort of behavior as shooting random people as an expression of your right to own and to carry weapons. It's archation in both cases.
It's a stressful day for me. But I go anyway- I don't always avoid doing things outside my comfort zone. I think it's good exercise.
It was fine. Lots of food, and too many people. But I think I did well.
There's only one relative I can't bring myself to speak to. Years ago, back in the MySpace age, I had reached an agreement with his siblings to rent a house that their parents had lived in (their mom was in a nursing home). Everything was set, and I was happy because the house was far out of town- just like I prefer (or need).
But then this clown found out about the deal and chimed in. He didn't like my MySpace page. He said that because I was anti-government, I would be cooking meth in the home. So, since he was the eldest sibling, the deal was pulled out from under me at the last minute.
Yes, it was partly his property, but we had a deal.
It caused me problems and cost me. But he imagined himself the Good Guy in his white hat.
I'm still angry about it (if I see him). I sometimes wonder if he now realizes he was wrong, or if he even remembers breaking the deal. Either way, he's not worth my time. I never think about him unless I see him, and I only see him at these reunions. He can go in peace- as long as he goes.
This town may be threatening to impose a lot more property rules on the residents. Seeking to punish anything they subjectively don't want to see. Things like "disrepair", "clutter", and so forth.
I overheard two people talking about this, and one of them- from another town- said about her town, "I wish there were more rules". Then went on to complain about a neighbor who uses his property in a way that she doesn't approve of. She is burdened by what she sees when looking in that direction.
The one from here was practically salivating over all the potential violations she can see around town, saying, "They won't be getting away with this anymore".
This attitude disgusts me.
People have a right to use their property as they see fit- as long as doing so doesn't violate someone else's REAL rights to life, liberty, and property. Being offended by seeing something isn't a violation of your rights. It's a character problem.
"But it brings down property values." Good. Then property taxes will be lower.
There's hardly a house in town that wouldn't be targeted for one thing or another, mine included. And since it's subjective, there's really no way to anticipate what's going to get under the mayor's saddle. We've gone through various enforcement obsessions, where the current rulers get tough on one ridiculous thing or another for a year or so, until they pick something else to be up in arms about, and forget about the previous emergency enforcement situation.
I'm already mad at the town rulers for vandalizing two streets this past week by installing "speed bumps". What's next? Flock spyware?
If the town does go through with it, I will be photographing every "violation" at the mayor's property and putting it online. Yes, I will go to war.
No matter how bad it is for the rest of us.
People get tired of fighting, they can't keep watching, and government intends to have its way with us.
I'm not sure what I can do about it, other than change my attitude and accept that this is the way it is at this time, and keep reminding people that there's a better way.
Is the problem internal to me? Or is there a real danger that I need to be aware of? Statists would say- and have- that it's my problem. That this is just how it is, and if I don't get on board, I'm going to be steamrolled.
If someone is violating life, liberty, or property, they are the bad guys. If they are paying you to help them do any of those things, then you're a bad guy, too.
There's really no wiggle room there.
Or Wiggum room, either.
Calling me a "Democrat", a "Leftist", a "liberal", a "commie", a meth addict, a "criminal", or anything else doesn't work. It never will. I'm on the correct side on this issue.
Here's a selection of replies I copied and pasted (all these from one guy) to me (and others) for saying I oppose Flock cameras, and saying they aren't worth the cost:
"Looks ghey. Ill pass""I'm not reading some liberal garbage trying to turn ppl gay" (Both this and the one above were in response to a link to my newspaper column on the subject)"Go get you some meth money we know the truth about you people.""I don't break the law. I'm cool with them""Go play in a road transtifa""You a scrapper? Lol.""Go watch an episode of first 48 and see how handy these are and solving crime from thugs""N!gga you retarded or a crook. Probably democrat"
The problem for them is, I know what I'm standing up for. It has nothing to do with what they want it to be about. I also see what THEY'RE standing up for, and it's hideous and evil.
The scary thing is, you know these people v*te!!
I don't buy the lies that these cameras are an essential tool for solving crime; I'm not afraid of criminals. Even if they were used that way occasionally, it's not worth the loss of privacy and liberty. Not even close.
But some people are not only OK with them; they crave having them watch you and me 24/7.
That's disturbing. And not very smart.
The United States government is much, MUCH worse than the British government was in 1776. Worse than that ambitious government ever dreamed of being. With higher taxes, more meddling, and more presence. Greater evil.
Most “patriots” pretend otherwise.
I get it. People want to celebrate, and they want to ignore unpleasant realities. They resent those who have a realistic understanding of the situation.
And the Declaration of Independence is celebration-worthy. If only they had meant it. The Constitution showed that they didn't. They wanted a State to sit on the world stage more than they valued independence and loved liberty. "Everyone else is doing it!" So that's what they got. That's what they saddled us with. And it has metastasized into this global Empire we see all around us today.
Make a "patriot" comfortable. Forget independence. "Happy Fourth."
You can go here to see how many of those abominations infest your area. And see where they are and where they are aimed. Then use that information as you will.
Someone needs to invent hand-held directed EMP technology that can disable such things from a distance. Or, if they are shielded from EMPs, lasers to burn them out. That's more responsible than using hunting rifles for that sacred task.
Others have said that FOIA requests, public records requests, and/or audits often result in the cameras being removed to prevent disclosure. If you're legally minded, this might be something to try.
On an individual level, I wonder if a small shelf above the slave plate of your vehicle could prevent the numbers from being seen from the height of those spies. Just a thought. Maybe they see it from too far away for this to work. I wonder if there's any spray that would be unnoticeable to the eye, but opaque to the cameras.
Or, if you just want to avoid being tracked by these things, knowing where they are and where they are aimed can help you.
It's important to track the trackers, regardless.
On the other hand, I'm opposed to whatever appears to be happening in Europe (and, to some extent, in some places in America).
It seems (if the reports are true*) that people are being imported (trafficked)-- which is not the same as "immigration"-- and then allowed to archate, almost to the point of being encouraged to do so, while the "native" population (people who have lived there for multiple generations) is forbidden to defend themselves, prohibited from owning or using proper defensive tools, and punished for doing or saying anything about the current situation.
It's no wonder a movie about a man who decides "enough is enough" is making waves around the world.
This is a government-created problem. Entirely government-created. I don't expect government to solve it, or do anything other than make it worse.
Governments seem to be trafficking in people who don't have many prospects at home, then using them to demoralize the "native" population (to gain more control over them).
No one has the right to archate (by definition), and that includes by forbidding self-defense and defense of property. If you then allow archation to happen by protecting the archators and punishing the victims, you deserve whatever fate befalls you when the chickens come home to roost. And they will. It won't matter that you've made it "illegal".
Anyone who tries to stab or behead a random person in public needs to face a universally armed population, and an eternal dirt nap in the company of worms and maggots. The same goes for any political criminal who tries to punish any defender of such victims. They are just as bad.
-
*I tend to believe the reports are true because of how hard the European governments are trying to suppress them.
