Did you know California is entering its sixth year of a bad drought . Currently in California we are having a drought , which is why we have to regulate groundwaters . Personally , I believe they should not regulate groundwater for many reasons . For example , limiting groundwater is interfering with people's income and people’s actions in their daily lives .
To begin , about 95% of California is in a drought , which is why the state limits people’s water usage . In source 2 , “ The crippling drought is expected to cost the state $2.2bn in 2014 and put more than 17,000 farm workers out of a job … “ . If that many people were laid off of work , many people became bankrupt due to the loss of their job . Also , in source 2 Mrs.Gallegos implies , “ It's been terrible , really tough ,” … more than 320 in this dusty Californian town to have run out of water during one of the worst droughts in the state’s recorded history . “ . Which brings me to if that many people are at very few amounts of water or even no water at all , how many go around without showers , being unable to flush toilets , and being unable to water their crops ?
To continue , with being unable to use a certain amount of water , this would be interfering with many families lifestyles . In source 2 , it states , “ For …show more content…
I kindly disagree with their side of the argument , for many reasons . Like i stated previously over 95% of California is in a drought , since we at low usage of water how would crops be grown ? How would people afford to pay bills with being laid off of jobs ? Also In source 2 they begin to talk about an elderly male who has to drive almost a hour away to get some water . For the state to limit people so little water is selfish . In source 1 , they state “ We are tied to groundwater 100 percent .
To begin , about 95% of California is in a drought , which is why the state limits people’s water usage . In source 2 , “ The crippling drought is expected to cost the state $2.2bn in 2014 and put more than 17,000 farm workers out of a job … “ . If that many people were laid off of work , many people became bankrupt due to the loss of their job . Also , in source 2 Mrs.Gallegos implies , “ It's been terrible , really tough ,” … more than 320 in this dusty Californian town to have run out of water during one of the worst droughts in the state’s recorded history . “ . Which brings me to if that many people are at very few amounts of water or even no water at all , how many go around without showers , being unable to flush toilets , and being unable to water their crops ?
To continue , with being unable to use a certain amount of water , this would be interfering with many families lifestyles . In source 2 , it states , “ For …show more content…
I kindly disagree with their side of the argument , for many reasons . Like i stated previously over 95% of California is in a drought , since we at low usage of water how would crops be grown ? How would people afford to pay bills with being laid off of jobs ? Also In source 2 they begin to talk about an elderly male who has to drive almost a hour away to get some water . For the state to limit people so little water is selfish . In source 1 , they state “ We are tied to groundwater 100 percent .