| I can't help but think that if we give up on logic, that it is slippery slope. Who is every really ever 'correct'. I think there is only missing variables. The logic changes based on adding new/updated premises. Like others in this thread have mentioned, Phoenix actually does have water, that it is the Alfalfa agriculture business that is using 70% of the water (i'm taking their numbers). So, if we add in this new information like "it is really the agriculture business", then the question that logic leads to is more "can we modify that business" or "does Alfalfa really needed to be grown in this area, can it be moved". So the logic for the humans becomes more like 1. A lot of people want to live here because of the sunny weather. 2. The water supply is now over-extended 3. The main users of water is the Alfalfa industry, not the new humans moving to the area. 4. Given the humans are the government (democracy), and they choose to live here, can they work towards changing the industry in such a way to accommodate both? Of course, farmers have rights too. And we get into government authority, who is the 'arbiter' in conflicts. Especially out west where different states might dam up rivers and starve downstream states, then it goes to Federal Gov. But what if we dam up water going to Mexico, then it is inter-Nation conflict, and then what the UN or war. And then we start to get to point about, how really, humans are going to fight over resources and the planet is doomed. |