[fweespeech]

> If the state is artificially keeping the price low

Hint: The State doesn't have control over the price. Its mostly be extracted via privately owned water rights.

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2014/09/18/ca-laws-restr...

> “With the stroke of his pen, the Governor changed over 100 years of water laws – without the people’s input. This is not the democracy Californians deserve.” – State Senator Jim Nielsen

> In the midst of drought and heightened overdrafting problems, California passed legislation allowing the state to control and regulate the use of groundwater on privately-owned land. Citizens, previously free to use whatever water was underneath their own land, are now preparing to challenge this governmental undermining of their property rights in court.

Private property owners were engaging in unsustainable behavior for their economic benefit is basically why this is a problem. Proper planning and not burning through reserves to grow almonds/alfalfa/etc for export would have prevented the issue from getting this bad.

[dchichkov]

Normally I would support libertarian attitude, but in that case it seems like a pretty reasonable Governor was elected by people, precisely because these people wanted these particular strokes of the pen, instating reasonable control over access to common resource. Democracy at work.

Attitude "...If I’m an overlying landowner, I have the right to pump as much water as I can..." leads only to the tragedy of the commons and ensuing disaster...

[fweespeech]

I wasn't supporting the libertarian view. ;)

I'm just explaining why this came about. This is very much a tragedy of the commons where one sector of the economy was able to profit from this privilege and socialize the costs now that it is a problem for them.