Collecting rainwater now illegal in many states as Big Government claims ownership over our water

page: 2
75
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by PrecogPsychicSensitive
Australian farmers who collect rainwater in their dams have to pay every year... its complete BS.. How can the government tax something they dont provide? Whats next? paying for the oxygen we breathe?


It's actually illegal here to fill up a glass of water to drink from a creek or river for the same reason. You're "diverting" it. Fortunately, nobody will actually enforce it (yet).

Funny how they are allowed to "divert" it through their fluoridation systems and sell it back to us.


And although we're not taxed (yet) on the oxygen we breathe, being taxed on the CO2 we exhale is another story.

Kill a camel, claim a carbon credit

Makes you wonder how many carbon credits a politician is worth...




posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   
reply to post by PrecogPsychicSensitive
 


Hi Pre,

Just say No.

What has happened to you Aussies?

Are you gutless?

GO, AUSSIE FARMERS!

Good luck from a kiwi - or are you proving you are gutless, mate?



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:47 AM
link   
Oh, they also tried this on Bolivia. People got on the streets and theyv got the so called "Bolivian war on water" . The people of Bolivia managed to kik out the Betchel corporation , the one "owning" the rain water and the one paying mercenaries to smash the protesters.




posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Hi yes mate, it looks like the boundaries are being pushed to see how far people can be pushed with them. A dangerous game is now underway and people need to say "enough"! There that was easy to say



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Haha, here's an interesting comment on the YouTube video:


If the state claims ownership of the rain falling on my land and fails to collect it within a reasonable period of time, would that not fall under abandoned property law? Can I bill them for storage of said property?


Maybe we can sue the "owners" of water for flood damage too?



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:55 AM
link   
the only thing dumber than that law are the people that obey it.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
the only thing dumber than that law are the people that obey it.


Well, as "Lord of my world", I have declared any Commonwealth, state or local law that presents a direct threat to my right to survive as void.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Come on OZ!

You do not put up with bull#.

Stop this crap right now.

Listen, Oz, everyone is relying on you.

I am, the world is - get it right please.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Big Government had zilch to do with it, other than approving what the wealthy individuals and corporations demanded. It wasn't the government's idea, but rather private individuals, mostly the cattle barons who laid claim to everything they could think of.

Our government has pretty much always been bought and paid for, just go look up some history. Tammany Hall, Mayor Daly ring any bells? In the western states it was even worse. Look up the history of the King Ranch in Texas, hell I'll do it for you:


King Ranch, located in south Texas between Corpus Christi and Brownsville, is one of the world's largest ranches. The 825,000 acres (3,340 km2; 1,289 sq mi) ranch, founded in 1853 by Captain Richard King and Gideon K. Lewis, includes portions of six Texas counties, including most of Kleberg County and much of Kenedy County, with portions extending into Brooks, Jim Wells, Nueces, and Willacy counties.


en.wikipedia.org...

When I was growing up in Texas, it was well known that every politician, cop, and judge in those county's were King's men, and did exactly as they were told. The King family had, probably still have, their own private voting block in the state legislature. The King Ranch might be the biggest, but the pattern was repeated throughout the West up until recent times, at least til the '60s. The cattle barons owned the state governments, literally. When Big Oil came on the scene, they joined the Cattle Baron club, too. It's all there in the history books if you look.

By getting the government to pass a law saying that the rainwater belonged to everyone, i.e., the state, not individuals, it then became the state's prerogative to say who could use it for what, and lease those rights to those individuals who just so happened to be the ones who wrote the law, or them once removed. It also allowed for the administering of the water for fat fees.

Now there are just enough good reasons to allow that indeed, runoff might be considered to belong to all and not any one individual to give the idea of a law concerning it a modicum of logic, especially since the old cattle barons were wont to try to dam the river to spite their downstream competitors. The problem arises when it is viewed as a profit center rather than non-profit resource.

You see when the "government" lays claim to something that belongs to all of us, like the rainwater, they don't stipulate that what falls on our property belongs to us and what runs off belongs to everyone. They claim it all and then sell the right to resell it or use it to themselves (in the old days) or to an experienced corporation (usually business associates who return the favor when they're in office).

Can't think of an easier way to make a buck than to claim what falls for free then resell it, while making it illegal for anyone but you or your approved friends to do so.

Want to bet that sooner or later, at the behest of the energy companies, they will lay claim to the sunshine for solar power, charging you for the sunshine falling on your roof? It's the same logic.

Bechtel claimed Bolivia's water:


Water is a limited natural resource and a public good fundamental for life and health. The human right to water is indispensable for leading a life in human dignity. Water, and water facilities and services, must be affordable for all. --UN Committee On Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, November 2002

The Bechtel Corporation's 2000 takeover of the public water system of Cochabamba, Bolivia and the civic revolt that ended it, in addition to being an inspiring story of local people taking courageous action, is also a cautionary tale of how global economic rules have the power to reduce international human rights law into nothing but pretty words on paper.

A Deliberate Step Backwards in the Right to Affordable Water

International human rights law recognizes that nations, especially the poorest, are not going to bring economic, cultural and social rights to life overnight. Human rights law lays out a path toward the securing of those rights known as "progressive realization". Governments are required to have a clear plan for moving forward on these rights and are expressly prohibited from taking any "deliberate steps backwards".

By any definition imaginable, the privatization of Cochabamba's water was a deliberate step backwards in making water was a deliberate step backwards in making water affordable for the citys poorest people. The Bechtel Corporation, after taking over the water system, increased water prices for the poorest by 40%-50%, and in some cases by more than double. Families were literally forced to choose between feeding their children or paying their water bills.


[url=http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/lessonsfrombolivia.html]http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/water/2003/lessonsfrombolivia.html[/ur l]



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
Their arrogance truly knows no bounds. It really is only a matter of time before they find a way to directly tax us for the air we breathe. Telling us that the water we feel fall on us from the open sky is really the property of the Government will have to do for taking the cake for now. Yikes... Just when I thought I'd heard it all..



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:21 AM
link   
just keep them to the law incase of an flood.......!



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Nothing wrong with this law at all. Some idiot out there took advantage of the rain falling on his land and therefore they had to make a law about it.

Think about it like this. Farmer A builds a massive dam as most of the rain fall on his land and his got the most land at the highest altitude. All the farmers below him now suffer and either go out of business or have to buy rain water from farmer A

That's just one scenario and im sure there are plenty others

Also how would you fell if your neighbor decided to collect barrels and barrels of rain water. Then he does not look after the water and it starts to go stagnant. I bet you would not like the smell or the fact that your kids and animals could get access to it

Dont forget about the lovely mosquitoes that come along with all that stagnant water
edit on 30-12-2011 by bluedrake because: Edited to Say...... Dont forget about the lovely mosquitoes that come along with all that stagnant water

edit on 30-12-2011 by bluedrake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:40 AM
link   
I wonder what it's going to take. The government claiming ownership of something necessary to one's survival and we let it happen with little or no fuss. What an epic load of BS.

People die every day overseas protesting the actions of their Governments. Death occurs. Daily. Yet they protest still. THAT is patriotism.

Maybe that's what the U.S. needs. A "healthy" dose of "my son/dad/sister/mother/neighbor/lover/friend was just killed by the Government." Then again, we already get that when we fight wars that our public servants in congress either approve or don't approve. And we still just sit by and let it happen.

I guess we won't do anything about it until they have the power to decide when we die. Oh wait, they already can:

www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread783267/pg1

The indefinite detention of Americans thing in the NDAA that just passed? We focus so much on that when the Government has no problem killing children. Lets just stand by and do nothing some more. We're so good at it.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluedrake
Nothing wrong with this law at all. Some idiot out there took advantage of the rain falling on his land and therefore they had to make a law about it.

Think about it like this. Farmer A builds a massive dam as most of the rain fall on his land and his got the most land at the highest altitude. All the farmers below him now suffer and either go out of business or have to buy rain water from farmer A

That's just one scenario and im sure there are plenty others

Also how would you fell if your neighbor decided to collect barrels and barrels of rain water. Then he does not look after the water and it starts to go stagnant. I bet you would not like the smell or the fact that your kids and animals could get access to it


For millions of years, rainwater has been coming down on private property.

In all those years, has any land owner had sufficient control of water catchment to cause drought on adjacent property?

Or does the storage of water imply stagnancy of the water?

Neither case is valid. The justifications used by authorities to arbitrate water rights is bureaucracy for bureaucracies sake.

Resist unjust laws.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:46 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


You're right Muzz - they won't enforce it YET!

This isn't the last straw - it's the first - the thin end of the wedge - all preparation for future water control.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:50 AM
link   
reply to post by danj3ris
 


Three Cheers and Well Said -


United we stand divided we fall!



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluedrake
Nothing wrong with this law at all. Some idiot out there took advantage of the rain falling on his land and therefore they had to make a law about it.

Think about it like this. Farmer A builds a massive dam as most of the rain fall on his land and his got the most land at the highest altitude. All the farmers below him now suffer and either go out of business or have to buy rain water from farmer A

That's just one scenario and im sure there are plenty others

Also how would you fell if your neighbor decided to collect barrels and barrels of rain water. Then he does not look after the water and it starts to go stagnant. I bet you would not like the smell or the fact that your kids and animals could get access to it

Dont forget about the lovely mosquitoes that come along with all that stagnant water
edit on 30-12-2011 by bluedrake because: Edited to Say...... Dont forget about the lovely mosquitoes that come along with all that stagnant water

edit on 30-12-2011 by bluedrake because: (no reason given)


You don't need laws for this problem to be sorted - just considerate neighbours - the way it used to be.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:56 AM
link   
I first remember seeing this issue crop up a couple of years ago in a report from - I think - Colorado. The thing is, the water companies are privately owned corporations in many cases and lobbied (surprise surprise) to have legislation like this put in place. They want to charge you to use ALL water, claiming it as theirs and any collection of rainwater which they apparently own is theft.
There was a good documentary on the water privatisation issue a few years back (on UK Ch4 I think) which looked at the situation Bolivia and other places. Again, private corporations were sold the rights to the water supply and immediately the rates went right up. Poor people could not afford it and were cut off, so were constantly having to tap into pipes and "steal" it.
It's shocking that the most basic necessity of life is handed over to private corporations for the sole purpose of profit, and that our politicians are willing, for payment, to not only hand it over to them, but to then prosecute people who use it without consent. I mean, how are people supposed to live without it?
Of course, it goes beyond just the water. Without it, people cannot grow their own food and must rely on the big stores and agri-businesses, who also lavish lots of money on the politicians to protect their cartels as well.

It's simply corruption from top to bottom and government forced reliance on big business to prevent people from becoming self reliant. I mean, that would be anarchy!



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   
This is one of many insane laws on the books.

For laughs check out Dumb Laws

In Pennsylvania...Any motorist driving along a country road at night must stop every mile and send up a rocket signal, wait 10 minutes for the road to be cleared of livestock, and continue.

In Illinois...You must contact the police before entering the city in an automobile. and you gotta love this one in Champaign, IL ...One may not pee in his neighbor’s mouth.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   
I'm feeling rather inebriated and lazy so I'm going to just spout off at the mouth (implying I need an excuse). I live in WA and know a number of people that have rain capture systems at their cabins. I have a feeling this is being blown out of proportion and that the laws are probably rather some word I can' remember... uh not as bad as they seem.




and you gotta love this one in Champaign, IL ...One may not pee in his neighbor’s mouth.


Keep your lawsoff my body!
edit on 30-12-2011 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
75
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join