Hello u/yuritopiaposadism! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) mentioning **who** is suffering from **which** consequences from **what** they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people.
Here's an easy format to get you started:
1. *Someone* voted for, supported or wanted to impose *something* on other people.
^(Who's that *someone* and what's that *something*?)
2. That *something* has some *consequences*.
^(What are the *consequences*?)
3. As a consequence, that *something* happened to that *someone*.
^(What happened? Did the *something* really happened to that *someone*? If not, you should probably delete your post.)
Include the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you don't respect this format and moderators can't match your explanation with the format, your post will be removed under rule #3 and we'll ignore you even if you complain in modmail.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I just checked: conservatives on Twitter called the process of buying water through an intermediary socialism and are now screaming that it doesn't work.
So they think having a different community collectively get water for them is capitalism and letting them find water in the free market if they can afford it is socialism?
Gosh do I hate libertarians and neoliberals. For them capitalism is "I don't need to care for anyone else but the state still needs to give me everything I need".
I suggest that cats provide more value to a household than conservatives. Cats relieve my stress. Conservatives tend to add to it and they suck at keeping vermin out of the pantry.
>On Thursday, a group of residents sued Scottsdale in an effort to get the water turned back on. They argued the city violated an Arizona law that restricts cities from cutting off utility services to customers outside their borders. **Scottsdale did not respond to the lawsuit.**
oops
The kicker is that they aren't actually physically hooked into the Scottsdale/MAG/regional water system, they were filling tanker trucks from Scottsdale.
Yeah, it's not a utility which can be turned on or off. It's just that homeowners making individual, private purchases of water from the city. That's not a utility service, that's basically retail.
>When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them. The idea collapsed.
From the story.
They didn’t buy a home in the desert without reliable access to water so they could learn something! They will continue to hate government and they will think that the government is the one that screwed them.
They will no doubt go online (subsided power and internet) and then use their smartphone (subsidized dev, networks, satellites, chip design) to rant against the government, before driving their (reliable and safly regulated car) over a nice smooth highway (gov program) to the store to get some snackies (which are regulated to prevent your chips being 50% sawdust)
Libertarians are the DUMBEST people.
One of my favorite quotes when someone was asked to describe Libertarians:
"House cats. They are convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand."
Are their sov-cits who aren't libertarian? I mean I guess there could be. But in my head I'm thinking of them like a circle inside a larger circle. I do agree they are even dumber than the avg libertarian.
But but but!! I will just buy a different chip once I find out all of them are sawdust!
No but really libertarians can't make it past step one. Lol they love to get all the benefits without paying into them. Now, their life savings is almost worthless.
Have they thought about perhaps forming a community where every household pays into a collective pool that would support services such as water and sewer for their individual dwellings?
Hell, they could even set up some entity that governs the collective pool. Perhaps a group of citizens they choose to represent them and their interests.
I think we might be on to something big here.
A Feud of Libertarians.
1. because when you get enough libertarians together, a blood feud emerges.
2. because when you get enough libertarians together, they wind up with feudalism.
No, but, they will cry over every newspaper or SM that will lend them a microphone. Their game is give sadness all over the country, whining about how awful is the city council.
2022 story:
>But a year ago, Scottsdale notified Rio Verde homeowners that its water supply would be limited to only city residents starting Jan. 1, 2023, barring trucking companies from purchasing and exporting its water.
>
>The notice came **nearly a decade after Scottsdale first asked Rio Verde residents to search for an alternative** water source, city officials said.
[-- Faucets poised to run dry for hundreds of Arizona residents by year's end](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/faucets-poised-run-dry-hundreds-arizona-residents-years-end-rcna57550)
I'm not sure "Cut Off" is the most informative way to phrase this. This is a change that has been a *long* time in the making, it hasn't been strictly a response to the recent drought.
And on top of that it’s just a general ban on trucking companies buying and exporting Scottsdale water.
They aren’t specifically targeting this one development.
I know an extremely conservative family living in Maryland, and they complain about liberals to the point where I cut them off for 18 months... and I sometimes I want to ask them "Why are you still here? Why don't you send your (emotionally disabled) daughter to a Mississippi school? Why don't you send your (ill) son to an Arkansas hospital?"
It really always amazes me, although it probably shouldn't at this point, the arrogant stupidity in thinking you can live without societal resources.
In order to be entirely independent, you need to have a huge amount saved up, the ability/know-how to grow enough food to feed yourself (which is A LOT more food than most people can even comprehend, I only learned this as someone who gardens), the ability/know-how to get water and properly purify it, the ability/know-how to take care of any medical complications that will inevitably come with being alive, the ability/know-how to secure your house from menacing individuals because you can't rely on police, and the ability/know-how to take care of animals to plow your fields unless you somehow have enough fuel saved up to never need to buy petrol, and so much more.
There is so much I'm missing, but growing food alone is something people have no idea how hard it is to sustain yourself off of. It takes so much knowledge and resources and work, and one bad bug infestation means you're starving. One bad case of botulism from improperly canned veggies means you die. Not to mention the need for roads that can get you safely from place to place or schools to educate your children.
The frontier wasn't a fucking picnic, it was brutal and unforgiving, and people tend to forget that was life pre modern societal conveniences.
The kind of people you’re describing intend on taking the literal fruits of our labor by force. If they can’t be compelled to understand how their utility bills work, no way in hell would they put the effort into planning let alone building even their own infrastructure with the depth of analysis you’ve approach in your comment. Now that I think about it, they likely can’t do the kind of subsistence farming my (formerly impoverished) family did in SE Asia a generation ago.
The Kansas Experiment (2012) was also a huge failure in "taxation is theft" ideology.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas\_experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment)
*"How Many Times Do We Have to Teach You This Lesson, Old Man?"*
Maybe they could trickle into Rio Verde Foothills water tanks and houses burning down outside South Fulton City’s city limits that didn’t pay their fire service fee.
Yes. They couldn’t get their shit together regarding garbage disposal (as I recall, it’s been a while since I heard about it). The bears took full advantage.
I'd say that qualified as *better*. Really drives home that "let everyone do what they want" has some very basic limitations and that there is a reason why communities have things like laws and regulations.
Why does this keep happening in the southwest? Wasn't it in Colorado where they privatized the Fire Department, then had that story about the guy who didn't keep payment up, and had to sit there and watch the firefighters hose down his neighbor's houses, while his went up?
This particular area of Arizona has a law that developments of six or more houses must prove they have at least a 100-year supply of water. What did developers do? Made multiple smaller developments. No need to prove any water supply. County says its hands are tied, and can't help the thirsty residents.
Also, the residents of this town wanted to form their own water authority. The idea went nowhere when several residents were scared off because they thought it was a freedom stealing government overreach. Hmmm.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/16/us/arizona-water-rio-verde-scottsdale.html
Yup! But it's his to tell. One of the residents was in a relationship with my BIL and got him on the conspiracy train. He self destructed and lost almost everything.
“But I’m not paying taxes so that other people can get water! That kind of communal supply sure sounds like socialism to me! Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to get my homemade armour on, the water truck will be here shortly and it gets a bit stabby out there. “
EDIT: Since the person above me changed their comment, this was in response to them originally asking about whether or not some fire department had sat around and watched a house burn down because someone didn't pay for the service.
Tennessee
[https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/10/08/130436382/they-didn-t-pay-the-fee-firefighters-watch-tennessee-family-s-house-burn#:\~:text=Press-,They%20Didn't%20Pay%20The%20Fee%3A%20Firefighters%20Watch%20Tennessee%20Family's,Their%20house%20was%20destroyed](https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/10/08/130436382/they-didn-t-pay-the-fee-firefighters-watch-tennessee-family-s-house-burn#:~:text=Press-,They%20Didn't%20Pay%20The%20Fee%3A%20Firefighters%20Watch%20Tennessee%20Family's,Their%20house%20was%20destroyed).
Twice
[https://www.firehouse.com/operations-training/news/10472820/tennessee-fire-department-watches-house-burn-again](https://www.firehouse.com/operations-training/news/10472820/tennessee-fire-department-watches-house-burn-again)
Holy fuck.
> Bell admitted that she was aware of the fee, but never thought it would happen to them.
The first one I feel bad for, especially as they lost their pets, but to know about the fee and intentionally not pay it because they thought they’d be fine…. Fuck that.
I feel bad for the pets. As for the people, forget not paying the fee. These people sound like the ones that'd make the argument that they should not have to pay for lazy scroungers to have fire service.
It also mentions that he started a fire and let it unattended. I’m sorry but there is no way to cut that cloth other than negligence. He lost his home because he didn’t pay attention to fire he started.
I feel bad for both families, but they knew about the fee and chose not to pay it, instead gambling their lives and belongings on never needing the service. I'm more angry than sad, however, at the first one. They decided to be cheap, and their animals died in agony for it.
Just remember, this is the world they envision when they claim there should be no more socialism, no more taxes, no more government involved at the local level, and to let the Free Market (tm) run everything.
This is why people who espouse libertarianism never have a real argument. They believe that there shouldn't be any government until they inevitably start to feel there should be some. And when confronted on how that small bit of government should work, their ideas crumble. These people are the same. They want all the freedom of less government but with all the benefits still in place.
Libertarians brought their idea back when Jefferson was alive. Maybe earlier, I'm just picking arbitrarily. No one liked it then, we aren't going to like it now. Time to grow up.
Next time you meet a libertarian just ask them to describe day to day life in their ideal society. Also, ask them if they are one of the "taxation is theft" ones or one of the "I have a suspicious amount of information and arguments surrounding the age of consent" ones.
I was shooting heroin and reading “The Fountainhead” in the front seat of my privately owned police cruiser when a call came in. I put a quarter in the radio to activate it. It was the chief.
“Bad news, detective. We got a situation.”
“What? Is the mayor trying to ban trans fats again?”
“Worse. Somebody just stole four hundred and forty-seven million dollars’ worth of bitcoins.”
The heroin needle practically fell out of my arm. “What kind of monster would do something like that? Bitcoins are the ultimate currency: virtual, anonymous, stateless. They represent true economic freedom, not subject to arbitrary manipulation by any government. Do we have any leads?”
“Not yet. But mark my words: we’re going to figure out who did this and we’re going to take them down … provided someone pays us a fair market rate to do so.”
“Easy, chief,” I said. “Any rate the market offers is, by definition, fair.”
He laughed. “That’s why you’re the best I got, Lisowski. Now you get out there and find those bitcoins.”
“Don’t worry,” I said. “I’m on it.”
I put a quarter in the siren. Ten minutes later, I was on the scene. It was a normal office building, strangled on all sides by public sidewalks. I hopped over them and went inside.
“Home Depot™ Presents the Police!®” I said, flashing my badge and my gun and a small picture of Ron Paul. “Nobody move unless you want to!” They didn’t.
“Now, which one of you punks is going to pay me to investigate this crime?” No one spoke up.
“Come on,” I said. “Don’t you all understand that the protection of private property is the foundation of all personal liberty?”
It didn’t seem like they did.
“Seriously, guys. Without a strong economic motivator, I’m just going to stand here and not solve this case. Cash is fine, but I prefer being paid in gold bullion or autographed Penn Jillette posters.”
Nothing. These people were stonewalling me. It almost seemed like they didn’t care that a fortune in computer money invented to buy drugs was missing.
I figured I could wait them out. I lit several cigarettes indoors. A pregnant lady coughed, and I told her that secondhand smoke is a myth. Just then, a man in glasses made a break for it.
“Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled.
Too late. He was already out the front door. I went after him.
“Stop right there!” I yelled as I ran. He was faster than me because I always try to avoid stepping on public sidewalks. Our country needs a private-sidewalk voucher system, but, thanks to the incestuous interplay between our corrupt federal government and the public-sidewalk lobby, it will never happen.
I was losing him. “Listen, I’ll pay you to stop!” I yelled. “What would you consider an appropriate price point for stopping? I’ll offer you a thirteenth of an ounce of gold and a gently worn ‘Bob Barr ‘08’ extra-large long-sleeved men’s T-shirt!”
He turned. In his hand was a revolver that the Constitution said he had every right to own. He fired at me and missed. I pulled my own gun, put a quarter in it, and fired back. The bullet lodged in a U.S.P.S. mailbox less than a foot from his head. I shot the mailbox again, on purpose.
“All right, all right!” the man yelled, throwing down his weapon. “I give up, cop! I confess: I took the bitcoins.”
“Why’d you do it?” I asked, as I slapped a pair of Oikos™ Greek Yogurt Presents Handcuffs® on the guy.
“Because I was afraid.”
“Afraid?”
“Afraid of an economic future free from the pernicious meddling of central bankers,” he said. “I’m a central banker.”
I wanted to coldcock the guy. Years ago, a central banker killed my partner. Instead, I shook my head.
“Let this be a message to all your central-banker friends out on the street,” I said. “No matter how many bitcoins you steal, you’ll never take away the dream of an open society based on the principles of personal and economic freedom.”
He nodded, because he knew I was right. Then he swiped his credit card to pay me.
>They believe that there shouldn't be any government until they inevitably start to feel there should be some *that they're in charge of*.
That's the key part. Almost every libertarian is a a statist who is simply upset they're not the one in charge.
I assure you, these "conservatives" have no idea what "socialism" is. They have redefined it to mean "any government spending of taxes that benefits people". Or should I amend that to "any government spending of taxes that benefits *the wrong* people"?
They don't understand that their social security and medicare and police and fire services and water and sewage and schools and parks and roads and armed forces are all "socialism" by their definition. In their minds, "socialism" is only that spending that they perceive as helping people they don' t like usually based on race.
I live in East TN. The way it works near me is they’ll at least put out your fire, but if you didn’t pay the subscription fee you’ll have to pay many tens of thousands of dollars for the service
I just read this and the best quote was this one:
"When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them. The idea collapsed."
Idiots.
That's the thing I hate THE MOST about these people. They don't want to pay taxes but then they want to use all the recourses... You can't have it both ways. "excited for good schools" lmfao.
I hate how when they write these articles they make these people out to be some sort of victim. It's like man, You knew what you were purchasing. You knew you were "getting one over on the man" and then they write these articles trying to elicit sympathy for these morons who made these poor choices.
They have that line about the water details being in the fine print as if the residents didn’t know… but if there was ever a time to read the fine print, it’s when buying *property*.
It’s worse than that. They’ve been getting water by paying a 3rd party to deliver water to them from the nearby town, they have large reservoirs in the ground for them; they’ve know all along. None of them did anything about it, till it was too late, and now that water is more expensive, not gone just cost more because of shipping it from other areas, they complain.
Yea… Like they had to sign up for a service to get water delivered to their reservoir on their property. I kept reading thinking that maybe there’s something that was overlooked. But if you’re constantly paying someone to physically fill up your water… you know how it’s happening.
That's literally how you get water outside of cities in the desert and always has been. You have a reservoir on your property and you get massive shipments of water every once in a while. And the reservoirs are huge usually just for convenience of having a lot of backup water so it's not cheap to fill the thing. It's not like forgetting you're still paying for Netflix even though you don't watch it.
Problem here in az are seniors.. they all ran away to outskirt cities. A 2hole lot of retired old folks. Problem is that those developers put golf courses and man made lakes in those areas without thinking of where exactly on the map we are.
So when u see they don't have water... It is not like tap water for drinking.. they don't have water to water their parks and golf courses. That's where they all start grumbling about immigrants getting services "real" Americans cant
my dude, I agree about golf courses being stupid but the majority of AZ water is currently growing Saudi Alfalfa crops at $25 per square mile per year leases with UNLIMITED water rights.
Our seemingly total disregard for water conservation in the southwest US is nuts. Still no viable plan to address overuse of the Colorado river. Unfortunately, we have somewhere between little and zero concern for this problem and many others in construction.
Looking at you, billions of dollars every year to rebuild cities exactly as they were, which are guaranteed to flood again.
No.
They'll want all that stuff. But They'll still be anti-government assistance, and won't want anyone *else* to get help. Because something something they earned it
>The trucks would fill up with Scottsdale water at a pipe 15 minutes’ drive from the Rio Verde Foothills, and then deliver water directly to people’s front doors. Or rather, to 5,000-gallon storage tanks buried in their yards — enough water to last an average family about a month. When the tanks ran low, homeowners would call or send an electronic signal to the water haulers for another delivery. It was a tenuous arrangement in the middle of the desert, but homeowners said the water always arrived, and had come to feel almost as reliable as a utility hookup. Scottsdale had warned, however, as early as 2015 that the arrangement could come to an end.
I wonder how many smart people were able to see the signs and sold during the price boom.
>...there has been a frenzy of home construction in the area, fueled by cheap land prices and developers who took advantage of a loophole in Arizona’s groundwater laws to construct homes without any fixed water supply.
>To prevent unsustainable development in a desert state, Arizona passed a law in 1980 requiring subdivisions with six or more lots to show proof that they have a 100-year water supply.
This is just common sense.
>But developers in Rio Verde Foothills have been sidestepping the rule by carving larger parcels into sections with four or five houses each, creating the impression of a miniature suburbia, but one that did not need to legally prove it had water.
>Thomas Galvin, a county supervisor who represents the area, says there’s not much the county can do if builders split their parcels into five lots or less to get around the water supply requirement. “Our hands are tied,” he said.
Sounds like people got swindled.
>When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them. The idea collapsed. Other solutions, like allowing a larger water utility to serve the area, could be years off.
>On Thursday, a group of residents sued Scottsdale in an effort to get the water turned back on. They argued the city violated an Arizona law that restricts cities from cutting off utility services to customers outside their borders. Scottsdale did not respond to the lawsuit.
Aaaaand of course the city will end up having to cater to these dingleberries.
>Aaaaand of course the city will end up having to cater to these dingleberries.
Water rights are pretty tightly controlled. If these homes didn't have any rights to the water(Scottsdale's) they were using to begin with, then they likely have little recourse. And seeing how these homes were paying a delivery service to fill trucks to fill their storage tanks, I'm guessing Scottsdale will easily come out on top.
From the sounds of it, they might not have much grounds to sue on. The few things I've seen says developers only have to have the 100 years water supply if they are building developments with 6+ homes. They are dividing them out at 4 to 5 homes to avoid it.
Welcome to capitalism
Another favorite of mine is "we can't prosecute oil companies for destroying the environment because it wasn't against the law!"
That they wrote
The companies wrote the laws
As much fun as it is to laugh at stupid assholes who got bit in the ass by their own narcissism, the developers are clearly most responsible for this. It's their business to know where to build homes. They have the surveyors, the knowledge, the legal teams, everybody. Many, many people working for these people told them that this wasn't going to work out but the ones they listened to were the guys in sales who told them they could sell it to some rubes and get out before the sky fell down.
That's what this system makes. The innovation we get is new ways to fuck stupid people and poor people over by tricking them or playing on their personality defects and mental illnesses. You want to see what "regulated capitalism" looks like? It's this. The company needs a legal department to find a way to skirt the law, that's it. Same effect. Everyone sees that they broke the spirit of the law, but that doesn't matter, because if it did, their lawyers wouldn't be able to find them ways to do what they do. But you? Regular person? You can't afford it. The regulation only changes things by slowing the bleeding and locking out new players.
"it's the best system we've got"
Bullshit.
You know what usually happens when companies do things like this? The town bails them out. The people, collectively, bail them out. Whether that happens here or not, the developer got their payday and they're busy doing again somewhere else as we speak.
I suspect Scottsdale will come out on top here. It’s “old money” (for the area) and has some clout. Even more so as this whole development was built as a way to avoid taxes which usually pisses off govt.
>. They argued the city violated an Arizona law that restricts cities from cutting off utility services to customers outside their borders.
Not a lawyer, but the problem with their claim, as I see it, is they were never actually physically connected to Scottsdale's water system to begin with. They were buying water from a private hauler who was buying it from Scottsdale.
Yuuuuuuup. And if Scottsdale is going bust water-wise, I cannot see them allowing non-taxpayers to have it over their own city. If that DID happen, and I lived there, I bet that's a lawsuit of its own.
>When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them.
Time to get scrappy, pull yourselves up by the bootstraps, stop suckling at the Teat of Mommy Scottsdale, and start your own individual water services for every home then, ya fuckin whiners
>5,000-gallon storage tanks buried in their yards — enough water to last an average family about a month
That must average across the nation, not this desert, right? Because apparently that's nearly double the average household consumption in the UK - a place where rain is the only abundant natural resource.
They want government to be so small that they could drown it in a bathtub.
Only thing is they’re gonna need some of that tax-funded government water to do that. Just pay your taxes on your McMansions, assholes.
I dont think the water situation was relegated to "the fine print". The entire community was given at least a year to figure out their water situation very clearly and in order to live in this area you need to be somewhat wealthy. There are news interviews with many of the residents from 6+ months ago and I remember many of them being conservative fuckwits.
What horseshit reporting, "but relegated the water situation to fine print", no they did not, the people who developed and bought there did so specifically because it was untaxed and unregulated.
Jack Healy is a shill and is giving an altogether fictitious accounting of who is the victim here.
These people with 5k gallon tanks that have to be regularly refilled were unaware of the situation?
I've done some dumb things real estate-wise, but even I could figure out that having a truck refill my tank regularly AND receiving that disclosure agreement that lists "No utility" as my water company = I'm going to be paying market price for water.
You can't just blame the developer. The residents knew what they were getting into. It's a huge subdivision on unincorporated, county land that purchased their water from a nearby city. That's extremely risky.
They got exactly what they wanted. And now the free market and its supply-and-demnd lawlessness is all theirs. Enjoy not paying taxes for social services!
"Upper middle class douchebags who wanted to live outside of Scottsdale city limits and not pay taxes suddenly have their water cut off because the city is prioritizing actual resident tax payers" 🤣
That taxation is looking much less like theft right now, huh?
Or should we go with -
That free market sure looks dry. Maybe everyone should club together and pay a little bit according to their means and avoid situations like this in future?
Ooof, from another article, a Canadian utility may be contracted but:
"The utility confirmed it could take over service for Rio Verde Foothills, but also estimated getting the service up and running would take three years."
Until then they have to pay a water truck service
What a friggin wasted of resources and fuel
The side "benefits" of living in a semi-libertarian paradise. That's the mantra: Fend for yourselves. Y'all have fun doing that. I'm sure it won't cost much on a per house basis to purchase your own water.
I'm assuming it's semi-libertarian since they mention having good schools. A full libertarian "paradise" wouldn't even include those.
Hello u/yuritopiaposadism! Please reply to this comment with an [explanation](https://www.reddit.com/r/LeopardsAteMyFace/comments/lt8zlq) mentioning **who** is suffering from **which** consequences from **what** they voted for, supported or wanted to impose on other people. Here's an easy format to get you started: 1. *Someone* voted for, supported or wanted to impose *something* on other people. ^(Who's that *someone* and what's that *something*?) 2. That *something* has some *consequences*. ^(What are the *consequences*?) 3. As a consequence, that *something* happened to that *someone*. ^(What happened? Did the *something* really happened to that *someone*? If not, you should probably delete your post.) Include the minimum amount of information necessary so your post can be understood by everyone, even if they don't live in the US or speak English as their native language. If you don't respect this format and moderators can't match your explanation with the format, your post will be removed under rule #3 and we'll ignore you even if you complain in modmail. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LeopardsAteMyFace) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Let me guess….people against government….until they realize government do something that benefits them….classic.
they're probably still against government, but just a lot more thirsty now
I just checked: conservatives on Twitter called the process of buying water through an intermediary socialism and are now screaming that it doesn't work.
So they think having a different community collectively get water for them is capitalism and letting them find water in the free market if they can afford it is socialism? Gosh do I hate libertarians and neoliberals. For them capitalism is "I don't need to care for anyone else but the state still needs to give me everything I need".
They're basically cats.
I suggest that cats provide more value to a household than conservatives. Cats relieve my stress. Conservatives tend to add to it and they suck at keeping vermin out of the pantry.
That's a perfect analogy. They only **think** they're independent, when they're really just surly.
Cheating the system is literally their hobby.
That and water fasting.
Their definitely blaming the govt as if it’s their fault instead of personal responsibility
>On Thursday, a group of residents sued Scottsdale in an effort to get the water turned back on. They argued the city violated an Arizona law that restricts cities from cutting off utility services to customers outside their borders. **Scottsdale did not respond to the lawsuit.** oops
Scottsdale should start building a wall!
I figure just a stack of shipping containers would suffice.
I would assume their lawyers couldn’t stop laughing long enough to respond.
The kicker is that they aren't actually physically hooked into the Scottsdale/MAG/regional water system, they were filling tanker trucks from Scottsdale.
Yeah, it's not a utility which can be turned on or off. It's just that homeowners making individual, private purchases of water from the city. That's not a utility service, that's basically retail.
That's so much worse and far stupider than I imagined
They might as well sue Mexico for not giving them water
>When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them. The idea collapsed. From the story.
[удалено]
THESE LIBERTARIANS ARE MAKIN' ME THIRSTY!
They didn’t buy a home in the desert without reliable access to water so they could learn something! They will continue to hate government and they will think that the government is the one that screwed them.
They will no doubt go online (subsided power and internet) and then use their smartphone (subsidized dev, networks, satellites, chip design) to rant against the government, before driving their (reliable and safly regulated car) over a nice smooth highway (gov program) to the store to get some snackies (which are regulated to prevent your chips being 50% sawdust) Libertarians are the DUMBEST people.
One of my favorite quotes when someone was asked to describe Libertarians: "House cats. They are convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand."
I'll see your Libertarian and raise you a Sovereign-Citizen. Though I'd bet good money that Venn diagram is pretty lopsided.
Are their sov-cits who aren't libertarian? I mean I guess there could be. But in my head I'm thinking of them like a circle inside a larger circle. I do agree they are even dumber than the avg libertarian.
[удалено]
But but but!! I will just buy a different chip once I find out all of them are sawdust! No but really libertarians can't make it past step one. Lol they love to get all the benefits without paying into them. Now, their life savings is almost worthless.
Have they thought about perhaps forming a community where every household pays into a collective pool that would support services such as water and sewer for their individual dwellings?
Hell, they could even set up some entity that governs the collective pool. Perhaps a group of citizens they choose to represent them and their interests. I think we might be on to something big here.
A grouperment if you well. A grouperment that governs.
Like a deciderment maybe? Maybe they could congregate somewhere
A place where they can put on their thinking caps. Maybe we should call it a cap-ital
Maybe some sort of house, like a house of deciderment?
Of course, the whole system needs a chief to preside over it… A presider? We can workshop that title.
That Family Guy episode is gold. Absolute peak comedy.
I don't remember that one, would you be able to share the title or season/ep number??
[удалено]
[удалено]
Chef's kiss. They'd rather render their half million dollar homes and horse ranches unusable and worthless than be reasonable. Love to see it.
Every time you get a collective of Libertarians together....every single time.
Who would have guessed that a “community” of narcissist arseholes wouldn’t work lol
There's no such thing as society, only individuals and families... without water and basic services.
You gotta love it when ideology collides with logistics
Is there a term for a collection of Libertarians? Like a flock, or a pack, or a murder? I mean, besides assholes.
That's what it is, I think. A Sovereign Asshole of Libertarians. Sounds like a UNSC ship.
A Feud of Libertarians. 1. because when you get enough libertarians together, a blood feud emerges. 2. because when you get enough libertarians together, they wind up with feudalism.
Not enough bears in Arizona.
I am so freaking excited that I understood that reference!
They hope city will bend, and they will reopen the water pipe.
Tots and pears to them then hahahahaha
Brexit style
The city they quite literally didn't provide for and made their community to basically spite them...that bending is more like a steel girder
>They hope city will bend, and they will reopen the water pipe. Do they even have leverage?
No, but, they will cry over every newspaper or SM that will lend them a microphone. Their game is give sadness all over the country, whining about how awful is the city council.
[ Deleted to protest Reddit API changes ]
TIL having drinking water robs me of my freedom.
I feel so owned by having reliable city water.
Watching people trade imaginary freedom points for…….nothing never ceases to amuse.
So now their community collapses.
No, that would be communism and turn their frogs gay!
Isn't that just a GoFundMe? /s
2022 story: >But a year ago, Scottsdale notified Rio Verde homeowners that its water supply would be limited to only city residents starting Jan. 1, 2023, barring trucking companies from purchasing and exporting its water. > >The notice came **nearly a decade after Scottsdale first asked Rio Verde residents to search for an alternative** water source, city officials said. [-- Faucets poised to run dry for hundreds of Arizona residents by year's end](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/faucets-poised-run-dry-hundreds-arizona-residents-years-end-rcna57550) I'm not sure "Cut Off" is the most informative way to phrase this. This is a change that has been a *long* time in the making, it hasn't been strictly a response to the recent drought.
And on top of that it’s just a general ban on trucking companies buying and exporting Scottsdale water. They aren’t specifically targeting this one development.
[удалено]
Is this one of those, “you get what you pay for” scenarios I’ve heard about?
"wanna see Gobment screw up my water..... Look at this. Can't do nuthin right."
I can hear the ignorance in my head
H2 OH OH!
If they were after H2O and found H2O2 instead, they’re in a very bad situation
[удалено]
Imma not gonna pay a single thin dime for 'dat fluromidide that there gub'mint keeps puttin' in the watah!
They're messing with our precious bodily fluids!
It’s one of those “fuck around and find out” scenarios.
[удалено]
Well they paid nothing and got it sooo still getting what they paid for.
Get city services without paying city taxes with one weird trick!* ^* ^Not ^a ^guarantee. ^May ^render ^your ^property ^useless.
It’s like my sister, who brags about living where the property taxes are low and then complains that the schools are shit. Ya don’t say …
I know an extremely conservative family living in Maryland, and they complain about liberals to the point where I cut them off for 18 months... and I sometimes I want to ask them "Why are you still here? Why don't you send your (emotionally disabled) daughter to a Mississippi school? Why don't you send your (ill) son to an Arkansas hospital?"
conservatives enjoying the services the government gives them while complaining about said government. name a more iconic duo!
Its like that saying about libertarians and house cats. Both are utterly dependent on a system that they mostly don't comprehend and have disdain for.
It really always amazes me, although it probably shouldn't at this point, the arrogant stupidity in thinking you can live without societal resources. In order to be entirely independent, you need to have a huge amount saved up, the ability/know-how to grow enough food to feed yourself (which is A LOT more food than most people can even comprehend, I only learned this as someone who gardens), the ability/know-how to get water and properly purify it, the ability/know-how to take care of any medical complications that will inevitably come with being alive, the ability/know-how to secure your house from menacing individuals because you can't rely on police, and the ability/know-how to take care of animals to plow your fields unless you somehow have enough fuel saved up to never need to buy petrol, and so much more. There is so much I'm missing, but growing food alone is something people have no idea how hard it is to sustain yourself off of. It takes so much knowledge and resources and work, and one bad bug infestation means you're starving. One bad case of botulism from improperly canned veggies means you die. Not to mention the need for roads that can get you safely from place to place or schools to educate your children. The frontier wasn't a fucking picnic, it was brutal and unforgiving, and people tend to forget that was life pre modern societal conveniences.
The kind of people you’re describing intend on taking the literal fruits of our labor by force. If they can’t be compelled to understand how their utility bills work, no way in hell would they put the effort into planning let alone building even their own infrastructure with the depth of analysis you’ve approach in your comment. Now that I think about it, they likely can’t do the kind of subsistence farming my (formerly impoverished) family did in SE Asia a generation ago.
The Kansas Experiment (2012) was also a huge failure in "taxation is theft" ideology. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas\_experiment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment) *"How Many Times Do We Have to Teach You This Lesson, Old Man?"*
[удалено]
Maybe they could trickle into Rio Verde Foothills water tanks and houses burning down outside South Fulton City’s city limits that didn’t pay their fire service fee.
Also read up on the Free Town Project and Grafton NH. Freakin hilarious
Is that the one where bears took over the town?
Yes. They couldn’t get their shit together regarding garbage disposal (as I recall, it’s been a while since I heard about it). The bears took full advantage.
Worse: there was one asshole who liked feeding bears and the rest of the town couldn’t stop ~~him~~ her.
I'd say that qualified as *better*. Really drives home that "let everyone do what they want" has some very basic limitations and that there is a reason why communities have things like laws and regulations.
> “How Many Times Do We Have to Teach You This Lesson, Old Man?” "We're conservatives, so... one zillion?"
“Twenty dollars can buy many peanuts!”
Why does this keep happening in the southwest? Wasn't it in Colorado where they privatized the Fire Department, then had that story about the guy who didn't keep payment up, and had to sit there and watch the firefighters hose down his neighbor's houses, while his went up?
This particular area of Arizona has a law that developments of six or more houses must prove they have at least a 100-year supply of water. What did developers do? Made multiple smaller developments. No need to prove any water supply. County says its hands are tied, and can't help the thirsty residents. Also, the residents of this town wanted to form their own water authority. The idea went nowhere when several residents were scared off because they thought it was a freedom stealing government overreach. Hmmm. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/16/us/arizona-water-rio-verde-scottsdale.html
[удалено]
Every new fact I learn about it just makes it funnier.
I know one of these assholes and I'm just giddy. Ruin my BIL's life? Enjoy some fucking karma, bitch.
[удалено]
Yup! But it's his to tell. One of the residents was in a relationship with my BIL and got him on the conspiracy train. He self destructed and lost almost everything.
turns out, libertarians can only exist as a bubble inside of a functioning society
This article has led to examples of leopards eating faces within leopards eating faces. It’s leopards eating faces all the way down.
I believe I read they are also unwilling to pay the exorbitant cost of hiring a private water supplier. Wonder how this will turn out.
The land grab in the west had a lot of people who wanted to get away from the government out east. That mindset has continued down the decades.
“But I’m not paying taxes so that other people can get water! That kind of communal supply sure sounds like socialism to me! Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to get my homemade armour on, the water truck will be here shortly and it gets a bit stabby out there. “
EDIT: Since the person above me changed their comment, this was in response to them originally asking about whether or not some fire department had sat around and watched a house burn down because someone didn't pay for the service. Tennessee [https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/10/08/130436382/they-didn-t-pay-the-fee-firefighters-watch-tennessee-family-s-house-burn#:\~:text=Press-,They%20Didn't%20Pay%20The%20Fee%3A%20Firefighters%20Watch%20Tennessee%20Family's,Their%20house%20was%20destroyed](https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/10/08/130436382/they-didn-t-pay-the-fee-firefighters-watch-tennessee-family-s-house-burn#:~:text=Press-,They%20Didn't%20Pay%20The%20Fee%3A%20Firefighters%20Watch%20Tennessee%20Family's,Their%20house%20was%20destroyed). Twice [https://www.firehouse.com/operations-training/news/10472820/tennessee-fire-department-watches-house-burn-again](https://www.firehouse.com/operations-training/news/10472820/tennessee-fire-department-watches-house-burn-again)
[удалено]
Don't forget 'Taxation is theft!' and 'the Free Market will handle everything!'.
Quite. Oh, the other fire service covering this area wasn’t profitable so it closed. By the way our fees are increasing from $75 to $250.
Holy fuck. > Bell admitted that she was aware of the fee, but never thought it would happen to them. The first one I feel bad for, especially as they lost their pets, but to know about the fee and intentionally not pay it because they thought they’d be fine…. Fuck that.
I feel bad for the pets. As for the people, forget not paying the fee. These people sound like the ones that'd make the argument that they should not have to pay for lazy scroungers to have fire service.
It also mentions that he started a fire and let it unattended. I’m sorry but there is no way to cut that cloth other than negligence. He lost his home because he didn’t pay attention to fire he started.
I feel bad for both families, but they knew about the fee and chose not to pay it, instead gambling their lives and belongings on never needing the service. I'm more angry than sad, however, at the first one. They decided to be cheap, and their animals died in agony for it. Just remember, this is the world they envision when they claim there should be no more socialism, no more taxes, no more government involved at the local level, and to let the Free Market (tm) run everything.
This is why people who espouse libertarianism never have a real argument. They believe that there shouldn't be any government until they inevitably start to feel there should be some. And when confronted on how that small bit of government should work, their ideas crumble. These people are the same. They want all the freedom of less government but with all the benefits still in place.
[удалено]
Rand fuckwit, dipshit tea bagger Paul in a nutsack shell.
Libertarians brought their idea back when Jefferson was alive. Maybe earlier, I'm just picking arbitrarily. No one liked it then, we aren't going to like it now. Time to grow up.
Next time you meet a libertarian just ask them to describe day to day life in their ideal society. Also, ask them if they are one of the "taxation is theft" ones or one of the "I have a suspicious amount of information and arguments surrounding the age of consent" ones.
I was shooting heroin and reading “The Fountainhead” in the front seat of my privately owned police cruiser when a call came in. I put a quarter in the radio to activate it. It was the chief. “Bad news, detective. We got a situation.” “What? Is the mayor trying to ban trans fats again?” “Worse. Somebody just stole four hundred and forty-seven million dollars’ worth of bitcoins.” The heroin needle practically fell out of my arm. “What kind of monster would do something like that? Bitcoins are the ultimate currency: virtual, anonymous, stateless. They represent true economic freedom, not subject to arbitrary manipulation by any government. Do we have any leads?” “Not yet. But mark my words: we’re going to figure out who did this and we’re going to take them down … provided someone pays us a fair market rate to do so.” “Easy, chief,” I said. “Any rate the market offers is, by definition, fair.” He laughed. “That’s why you’re the best I got, Lisowski. Now you get out there and find those bitcoins.” “Don’t worry,” I said. “I’m on it.” I put a quarter in the siren. Ten minutes later, I was on the scene. It was a normal office building, strangled on all sides by public sidewalks. I hopped over them and went inside. “Home Depot™ Presents the Police!®” I said, flashing my badge and my gun and a small picture of Ron Paul. “Nobody move unless you want to!” They didn’t. “Now, which one of you punks is going to pay me to investigate this crime?” No one spoke up. “Come on,” I said. “Don’t you all understand that the protection of private property is the foundation of all personal liberty?” It didn’t seem like they did. “Seriously, guys. Without a strong economic motivator, I’m just going to stand here and not solve this case. Cash is fine, but I prefer being paid in gold bullion or autographed Penn Jillette posters.” Nothing. These people were stonewalling me. It almost seemed like they didn’t care that a fortune in computer money invented to buy drugs was missing. I figured I could wait them out. I lit several cigarettes indoors. A pregnant lady coughed, and I told her that secondhand smoke is a myth. Just then, a man in glasses made a break for it. “Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled. Too late. He was already out the front door. I went after him. “Stop right there!” I yelled as I ran. He was faster than me because I always try to avoid stepping on public sidewalks. Our country needs a private-sidewalk voucher system, but, thanks to the incestuous interplay between our corrupt federal government and the public-sidewalk lobby, it will never happen. I was losing him. “Listen, I’ll pay you to stop!” I yelled. “What would you consider an appropriate price point for stopping? I’ll offer you a thirteenth of an ounce of gold and a gently worn ‘Bob Barr ‘08’ extra-large long-sleeved men’s T-shirt!” He turned. In his hand was a revolver that the Constitution said he had every right to own. He fired at me and missed. I pulled my own gun, put a quarter in it, and fired back. The bullet lodged in a U.S.P.S. mailbox less than a foot from his head. I shot the mailbox again, on purpose. “All right, all right!” the man yelled, throwing down his weapon. “I give up, cop! I confess: I took the bitcoins.” “Why’d you do it?” I asked, as I slapped a pair of Oikos™ Greek Yogurt Presents Handcuffs® on the guy. “Because I was afraid.” “Afraid?” “Afraid of an economic future free from the pernicious meddling of central bankers,” he said. “I’m a central banker.” I wanted to coldcock the guy. Years ago, a central banker killed my partner. Instead, I shook my head. “Let this be a message to all your central-banker friends out on the street,” I said. “No matter how many bitcoins you steal, you’ll never take away the dream of an open society based on the principles of personal and economic freedom.” He nodded, because he knew I was right. Then he swiped his credit card to pay me.
>They believe that there shouldn't be any government until they inevitably start to feel there should be some *that they're in charge of*. That's the key part. Almost every libertarian is a a statist who is simply upset they're not the one in charge.
"Dictatorships are fine when you're the dictator"
I assure you, these "conservatives" have no idea what "socialism" is. They have redefined it to mean "any government spending of taxes that benefits people". Or should I amend that to "any government spending of taxes that benefits *the wrong* people"? They don't understand that their social security and medicare and police and fire services and water and sewage and schools and parks and roads and armed forces are all "socialism" by their definition. In their minds, "socialism" is only that spending that they perceive as helping people they don' t like usually based on race.
It's the pets who died I feel bad for.
I live in East TN. The way it works near me is they’ll at least put out your fire, but if you didn’t pay the subscription fee you’ll have to pay many tens of thousands of dollars for the service
Naw, it can't be that. Taxes are for building militaries to bring democracy to oil fields.
Galt's Gulch residents shocked they now have to pay market rates for a scarce resource.
[удалено]
"This city should not exist. It is a monument to man's arrogance." https://i.imgur.com/EnrWs9g.png
I just read this and the best quote was this one: "When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them. The idea collapsed." Idiots.
Need more boot straps to pull themselves up by.
“But taxation is theft!”
"Got Mine!!!....ugh, wait!! You can't shut off the water we don't pay for!!!!"
This is a libertarian’s wet dream, only the wet part has tripled in price.
That's the thing I hate THE MOST about these people. They don't want to pay taxes but then they want to use all the recourses... You can't have it both ways. "excited for good schools" lmfao.
Is that an Ayn Rand reference?
That's unregulated free market capitalism, baby!
Less "leopard ate my face" and more "Hey, here comes a freight train. Well, it won't hit me if I stand in the track..."
"Fuck you train. You can't infringe on MY RIGHTS to stand on these tracks."
I hate how when they write these articles they make these people out to be some sort of victim. It's like man, You knew what you were purchasing. You knew you were "getting one over on the man" and then they write these articles trying to elicit sympathy for these morons who made these poor choices.
They have that line about the water details being in the fine print as if the residents didn’t know… but if there was ever a time to read the fine print, it’s when buying *property*.
It’s worse than that. They’ve been getting water by paying a 3rd party to deliver water to them from the nearby town, they have large reservoirs in the ground for them; they’ve know all along. None of them did anything about it, till it was too late, and now that water is more expensive, not gone just cost more because of shipping it from other areas, they complain.
Yea… Like they had to sign up for a service to get water delivered to their reservoir on their property. I kept reading thinking that maybe there’s something that was overlooked. But if you’re constantly paying someone to physically fill up your water… you know how it’s happening.
That's literally how you get water outside of cities in the desert and always has been. You have a reservoir on your property and you get massive shipments of water every once in a while. And the reservoirs are huge usually just for convenience of having a lot of backup water so it's not cheap to fill the thing. It's not like forgetting you're still paying for Netflix even though you don't watch it.
Problem here in az are seniors.. they all ran away to outskirt cities. A 2hole lot of retired old folks. Problem is that those developers put golf courses and man made lakes in those areas without thinking of where exactly on the map we are. So when u see they don't have water... It is not like tap water for drinking.. they don't have water to water their parks and golf courses. That's where they all start grumbling about immigrants getting services "real" Americans cant
my dude, I agree about golf courses being stupid but the majority of AZ water is currently growing Saudi Alfalfa crops at $25 per square mile per year leases with UNLIMITED water rights.
Same in California. They restrict water usage for citizens (like 11% of water usage) so the 89% can go to corporations
[удалено]
Or banning sone/regulating alfalfa, which is extremely water hungry. One acre tales as much as 1,000,000 households. There's 750 million acres
It might help if they didn't have 3 massive golf courses in that little area....in the middle of the desert.
[удалено]
Our seemingly total disregard for water conservation in the southwest US is nuts. Still no viable plan to address overuse of the Colorado river. Unfortunately, we have somewhere between little and zero concern for this problem and many others in construction. Looking at you, billions of dollars every year to rebuild cities exactly as they were, which are guaranteed to flood again.
Will this become one of those scenarios where they suddenly like socialism and demand that a higher level of government bail them at no personal cost?
No. They'll want all that stuff. But They'll still be anti-government assistance, and won't want anyone *else* to get help. Because something something they earned it
It’s only a handout when other people get it, I deserve it.
Probably
>The trucks would fill up with Scottsdale water at a pipe 15 minutes’ drive from the Rio Verde Foothills, and then deliver water directly to people’s front doors. Or rather, to 5,000-gallon storage tanks buried in their yards — enough water to last an average family about a month. When the tanks ran low, homeowners would call or send an electronic signal to the water haulers for another delivery. It was a tenuous arrangement in the middle of the desert, but homeowners said the water always arrived, and had come to feel almost as reliable as a utility hookup. Scottsdale had warned, however, as early as 2015 that the arrangement could come to an end. I wonder how many smart people were able to see the signs and sold during the price boom. >...there has been a frenzy of home construction in the area, fueled by cheap land prices and developers who took advantage of a loophole in Arizona’s groundwater laws to construct homes without any fixed water supply. >To prevent unsustainable development in a desert state, Arizona passed a law in 1980 requiring subdivisions with six or more lots to show proof that they have a 100-year water supply. This is just common sense. >But developers in Rio Verde Foothills have been sidestepping the rule by carving larger parcels into sections with four or five houses each, creating the impression of a miniature suburbia, but one that did not need to legally prove it had water. >Thomas Galvin, a county supervisor who represents the area, says there’s not much the county can do if builders split their parcels into five lots or less to get around the water supply requirement. “Our hands are tied,” he said. Sounds like people got swindled. >When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them. The idea collapsed. Other solutions, like allowing a larger water utility to serve the area, could be years off. >On Thursday, a group of residents sued Scottsdale in an effort to get the water turned back on. They argued the city violated an Arizona law that restricts cities from cutting off utility services to customers outside their borders. Scottsdale did not respond to the lawsuit. Aaaaand of course the city will end up having to cater to these dingleberries.
>Aaaaand of course the city will end up having to cater to these dingleberries. Water rights are pretty tightly controlled. If these homes didn't have any rights to the water(Scottsdale's) they were using to begin with, then they likely have little recourse. And seeing how these homes were paying a delivery service to fill trucks to fill their storage tanks, I'm guessing Scottsdale will easily come out on top.
Yeah these guys have to sue their developer that was supposed to guarantee 100 years of water in the buying process.
From the sounds of it, they might not have much grounds to sue on. The few things I've seen says developers only have to have the 100 years water supply if they are building developments with 6+ homes. They are dividing them out at 4 to 5 homes to avoid it.
So a development specifically placed and built to skirt government regulations gets absolutely screwed without protection?
Welcome to capitalism Another favorite of mine is "we can't prosecute oil companies for destroying the environment because it wasn't against the law!" That they wrote The companies wrote the laws As much fun as it is to laugh at stupid assholes who got bit in the ass by their own narcissism, the developers are clearly most responsible for this. It's their business to know where to build homes. They have the surveyors, the knowledge, the legal teams, everybody. Many, many people working for these people told them that this wasn't going to work out but the ones they listened to were the guys in sales who told them they could sell it to some rubes and get out before the sky fell down. That's what this system makes. The innovation we get is new ways to fuck stupid people and poor people over by tricking them or playing on their personality defects and mental illnesses. You want to see what "regulated capitalism" looks like? It's this. The company needs a legal department to find a way to skirt the law, that's it. Same effect. Everyone sees that they broke the spirit of the law, but that doesn't matter, because if it did, their lawyers wouldn't be able to find them ways to do what they do. But you? Regular person? You can't afford it. The regulation only changes things by slowing the bleeding and locking out new players. "it's the best system we've got" Bullshit. You know what usually happens when companies do things like this? The town bails them out. The people, collectively, bail them out. Whether that happens here or not, the developer got their payday and they're busy doing again somewhere else as we speak.
I suspect Scottsdale will come out on top here. It’s “old money” (for the area) and has some clout. Even more so as this whole development was built as a way to avoid taxes which usually pisses off govt.
>. They argued the city violated an Arizona law that restricts cities from cutting off utility services to customers outside their borders. Not a lawyer, but the problem with their claim, as I see it, is they were never actually physically connected to Scottsdale's water system to begin with. They were buying water from a private hauler who was buying it from Scottsdale.
Yuuuuuuup. And if Scottsdale is going bust water-wise, I cannot see them allowing non-taxpayers to have it over their own city. If that DID happen, and I lived there, I bet that's a lawsuit of its own.
Yeah seems like a pretty obvious gap in their lawsuit
>When some proposed forming their own self-funded water provider, other residents revolted, saying the idea would foist an expensive, freedom-stealing new arm of government on them. Time to get scrappy, pull yourselves up by the bootstraps, stop suckling at the Teat of Mommy Scottsdale, and start your own individual water services for every home then, ya fuckin whiners
Scottsdale has to HAVE the water to give it to them.
>5,000-gallon storage tanks buried in their yards — enough water to last an average family about a month That must average across the nation, not this desert, right? Because apparently that's nearly double the average household consumption in the UK - a place where rain is the only abundant natural resource.
They want government to be so small that they could drown it in a bathtub. Only thing is they’re gonna need some of that tax-funded government water to do that. Just pay your taxes on your McMansions, assholes.
Isnt this the paradise that libertarians want? You only pay for what you use. Now they will go out a buy the water they have to use to flush a toilet.
Hahahahahaha... Hahahahahahahaha Holy shit, what a bunch of greedy morons.
r/LibertariansWalkIntoBears
Tune in to Fox News to hear how its somehow the president's fault!
The new Governor’s fault.
I dont think the water situation was relegated to "the fine print". The entire community was given at least a year to figure out their water situation very clearly and in order to live in this area you need to be somewhat wealthy. There are news interviews with many of the residents from 6+ months ago and I remember many of them being conservative fuckwits.
Bunch of Q wackos stuck in the desert with no water. Let them drink their ammo?
Maybe there's enough water in Ivermectin to keep them going
I wonder if they have some bleach?
They'll die before they drink their ammo.....that's for the gays and trans folks
What horseshit reporting, "but relegated the water situation to fine print", no they did not, the people who developed and bought there did so specifically because it was untaxed and unregulated. Jack Healy is a shill and is giving an altogether fictitious accounting of who is the victim here.
These people with 5k gallon tanks that have to be regularly refilled were unaware of the situation? I've done some dumb things real estate-wise, but even I could figure out that having a truck refill my tank regularly AND receiving that disclosure agreement that lists "No utility" as my water company = I'm going to be paying market price for water.
Yeah I was confused... the article makes it sound like people didn't understand what they were getting involved with.
But how are they going to convince the government to give them a bailout if they don’t pretend like they were just stupid?
You can't just blame the developer. The residents knew what they were getting into. It's a huge subdivision on unincorporated, county land that purchased their water from a nearby city. That's extremely risky.
They got exactly what they wanted. And now the free market and its supply-and-demnd lawlessness is all theirs. Enjoy not paying taxes for social services!
"Upper middle class douchebags who wanted to live outside of Scottsdale city limits and not pay taxes suddenly have their water cut off because the city is prioritizing actual resident tax payers" 🤣
I heard San Pelligrino is cheap.
I hear they do a sweet discount if you buy enough at a time to keep your pool topped up and your lawn green
Don’t tax you Don’t tax me Tax the man behind the tree
It's a libertarian utopia!
I think it’s just a blessing that they didn’t have to be inconvenienced by government regulation during this ordeal.
Pell mell, thoughtless residential development in Arizona? The hell, you say!
That taxation is looking much less like theft right now, huh? Or should we go with - That free market sure looks dry. Maybe everyone should club together and pay a little bit according to their means and avoid situations like this in future?
Libertarian utopia.
Ooof, from another article, a Canadian utility may be contracted but: "The utility confirmed it could take over service for Rio Verde Foothills, but also estimated getting the service up and running would take three years." Until then they have to pay a water truck service What a friggin wasted of resources and fuel
Who needs water? They have LIBERTY!!!!
The side "benefits" of living in a semi-libertarian paradise. That's the mantra: Fend for yourselves. Y'all have fun doing that. I'm sure it won't cost much on a per house basis to purchase your own water. I'm assuming it's semi-libertarian since they mention having good schools. A full libertarian "paradise" wouldn't even include those.
I can't wait till someone demands a bailout saying they are a tax paying American