California has become the first state in the nation to pass a controversial new law that places tough limits on home water usage, KOVR-TV reported.
That means the state will have “more focus on flushes and scrutiny over showers,” according to the report.
Starting in 2022, California will limit water to 55 gallons per-person, per-day. By 2030, the amount falls to 50 gallons.
To put this into perspective, just taking one eight-minute shower (17 gallons of water) and doing one load of laundry (up to 40 gallons) is enough to exceed the 55-gallon limit. Taking a bath can use 80 to 100 gallons of water.
Why is the state doing this?
“So that everyone in California is at least integrating efficiency into our preparations for climate change,” said Felicia Marcus, chair of the State Water Resources Control Board.
Desert areas should, of course, limit water usage, and the number of people moving in. Not all CA is a desert, either. But blaming low water levels on “climate change” is nonsense. And then we wonder if the rumors are true. They say California inspectors will give citations to citizens who smell too good, as if they’d had more than their weekly bath.
Britain should “welcome and applaud” the collapse of the nuclear family, the most senior family judge in England and Wales has said.
In a speech Sir James Munby, the president of the High Court’s family division, said the modern British family was “complex” and “takes an almost infinite variety of forms”.
He said that “whether through choice or circumstance”, many people “live in families more or less removed from what, until comparatively recently, would have been recognised as the typical nuclear family.
“This, I stress, is not merely the reality; it is, I believe, a reality which we should welcome and applaud.”
Of course, when everything is a “family”, then nothing is. To be considerate of, let us call them, extended families does not having to applaud the end of actual families. What madman would say such a thing? In this judge was serious, which is not likely, he should be locked away for the safety of others. Instead he was probably virtue signaling, not considering the consequences of his words beyond the progressive audience whose adulation he sought. Speaking of virtue signaling—
The LIRR rider caught on camera spewing a bigoted rant was charged with a hate crime that could land him behind bars, officials said Wednesday.
The Queens DA charged 58-year-old Long Beach resident Edward Ruggiero with third-degree menacing as a hate crime and second-degree aggravated harassment — crimes punishable by up to a year in jail and $1,000 fine.
“The bigotry and hatred that the defendant is accused of manifesting and acting upon have no place in a civilized society — especially in Queens County, the most culturally diverse county in the nation,” Queens DA Richard Brown said in a statement.
“No one should be subjected to the vile words and intimidating actions the defendant is accused of tormenting the victim with. Crimes of hate will never be tolerated here and when they do, regrettably occur, those responsible will be brought to justice.”
The concept of a hate crime is the epitome of effeminacy. No sane society would ever allow such idiotic notions of crime.
Now I have ridden on every kind of train in New York City, and people offering opinions of other passengers in loud voices is not unusual. To say each of these altercations are “hate crimes” is not only idiotic, but would end with the entire populace behind bars. For one year.
The lout Brown obviously doesn’t care about a conviction. It’s a good bet he’d settle for even a suspended sentence. What he did want was his name in the public’s mind as a defender of social justice. Despicable. Or maybe the real problem is whites. For example, we haven’t heard this woman will be prosecuted for a “hate” crime.
But modern times didn’t emerge in a vacuum. The legacies of our past are still intertwined in society, whether they are written quietly in the redlined neighborhoods of Milwaukee, or in the names of men that adorn our statues, university halls and monuments.
When these legacies are questioned, often by those most harmed by them, white students and administrators across the country have a poor track record in responding appropriately. Microaggressions are dismissed as “PC culture,” depictions of lynchings and blackface are labeled as “free speech,” only to be walked back, painfully slow, upon public outcry…
In 2017 “The Problem of Whiteness” debuted as an African Cultural Studies course, aiming to address constructions of whiteness and their contributions to white supremacy.
If there is any problem of whiteness, it is mealy minded whites whose track record of accepting blame and guilt for crimes which they did not commit exacerbates racial tensions.