There is a time for everything, a time for peace and a time for war, and a time when politics takes command and civilization marches backward, when people feel the eternal verities no longer apply.
Bill I do appreciate your willingness to look with fully open eyes at what is before us. Far too few do. This makes the insights of your team and you invaluable. Regrettably, far to few see your wisdom.
Reality often bites but it comes for us eventually whether we like it or not. It is ironic that people have clamored for more and more government for 80 years and now it is the huge overpowering government itself and its unholy alliances with big finance, big tech, big business generally (fascism if you will) that assures that the private economy (the only real vehicle for growth) is condemned to decline until that underlying unsustainable condition is resolved.
I couldn't help but notice that the fire devastation in LA is a sad yet perfect example of reality coming home. Cut the fire department budget, destroy the private insurance market, let the undergrowth thrive and ignore the health of critical public infrastructure, and boom... reality bites. I suspect the same is coming in relation to the countries inability to spend within its means. Deep sigh...
Just wait for the Federal Government bail out of the LA fire insurance companies once they file for bankruptcy, surly too big to fail and the LA fire victims and hollywood celebrities will be made whole for over $500 billion on the backs of the American people. It's coming just wait.... keep piling on the debt. And No one gives a shit.
The financial implications for the insurance companies in California will be huge. Am I correct in believing that insurance companies keep their reserves in the market? What impact might there be of those companies liquidating financial assets (in the tens, if not hundreds, of billions) to cover claims?
Dig into the logistics of fighting a "once in a lifetime" fire.
Massive winds. Reaching over 100mph in places.
17% Humidity. My wool sweater in my 35% humidity winter home can create enough sparks to start a bonfire. What could a place with 17% do?
Drought since the summer.
Infrastructure that couldn't support the drain. Over 3,000,000 gallons depleted in less than 24 hrs in the Palisades, with replenishment not happening quick enough.
Adding $14M to the fire fighters budget could have helped. But with no water to disperse, it would only have meant the water would have disappeared quicker. And had more people standing around feeling utterly helpless.
Unless you'd built a 50 ft wall between houses, with every home made out of metal, it was a setting for the perfect firestorm.
Hmmmm - I wonder where all the water goes when it flows naturally down from the north?
Better not look too hard for it - you'll just find more leftarded ignorant bullshit marinated in a outhouse of arrogant (and clueless) "environmentalism" - resulting in the "government" of California diverting literally BILLIONS of gallons of fresh water into the Pacific Ocean annually. All in the name of some nebulous social "cause", "marginalized" group or irrelevant insect/fish. Meanwhile, thousands of acres of the best farmland in the world lay fallow for lack of Irrigation and cities burn to the ground for lack of fire hydrant pressure and empty reservoirs.
Another shining success sponsored by team marxist "progressives" and today's dimocrat party...
Not the problem. At least not for the fires these past few days.
The tanks that the fire hydrants are connected to (a group of 3 of them at 1 million gallons each), ran out of water. All 3 of them, 3M gallons in total, was tapped in 15 hrs according to the fire chief.
Mainly from the Stone Canyon reservoir, which consists of two reservoirs - upper and lower.
The lower reservoir has a capacity of 3.38 billion US gallons (12,800,000 m3) of water while the upper reservoir has capacity to store 138 million US gallons (520,000 m3) of water. The lower reservoir (a small lake) has been decommissioned for use as potable drinking water, but is on standby duty for emergencies, like the one that is currently underway.
It is the replenishment rate of the tanks - water coming from the upper reservoir to the 1,000,000 gallon tanks - that was the choke point. There is still a lot of water left in both reservoirs.
What isn't certain at the moment, is the replenishment rate from reservoir to local community holding tanks. Or the number of hoses that were pouring water onto fires. It was obviously less than the output rate which, if the base numbers are correct (3M gallons, 15 hrs, 13 hoses@300 GPM + a base replenishment rate of 500 gallons per minute), was in the order of 3,833 GPM out. For a replenishment rate of 500 GPM.
The water was being drained 6x faster, than it was being replenished.
Now the number of hoses would go up, if the replenishment rate was higher, or vice versa - the number of hoses would go down, if the replenishment rate was lower.
In either case, the entire system was never engineered for one of these historic, once in a lifetime fires.
Thank you for the facts, Lucas - enlighteningly specific.
PS - my post was addressing the "different topic altogether" for the most part. Personally, I'm much more bothered by fallow, continental farmland and food prices/availability/struggling farmers than I am about a bunch of rich liberals who, truly sadly, have lost their homes and everything that goes with that tragedy...
Why is this a once in a lifetime fire? Will happen again in another place managed by incompetent people. Just like the fire in Hawaii was a once in a lifetime fire. Coincidentally both governed by left wing democratic state and local governments, with no freaking idea of best practices management. The climate is changing and we humans need to adapt to and change our behaviors to manage for it. Unless your on the left and don't do anything, just cry and wine when shit turns bad
You’re not wrong—fires like this aren’t really "once in a lifetime" anymore. With the way things are going, they’re becoming part of the new normal. But laying the blame entirely on left-leaning governments or "incompetence" misses the bigger picture.
Wildfires don’t give a damn who’s in charge.
They’re the result of a mix of natural conditions—drought, wind, and heat—and human decisions, like letting infrastructure rot, ignoring smarter land management, and failing to prepare for what’s clearly becoming a pattern. California, Hawaii, wherever—it’s the same story. Years of shortsighted decisions catch up with you, and then you’re standing in front of a firestorm.
Could the private sector step in and do it better? Probably. Free markets thrive on solving big problems—if they’re given the chance. Fire-resistant materials, smarter land-use planning, even better water infrastructure—all of that could benefit from some private-sector innovation. But right now, we’re stuck in this loop of patchwork solutions and political finger-pointing.
We need to adapt. Fast.
And honestly? It’s going to take both markets and governments stepping up to fix this mess. Fires like these don’t care about politics, but the damage sure as hell affects everyone, no matter what side you’re on.
Gavin certainly doesn’t have an unenviable task ahead of him. That said, I wouldn’t place the blame entirely on his shoulders. The entire fire suppression system wasn’t designed to handle a 1-in-100+ year wind event, compounded by the tail end of a six-month drought, 17% humidity creating a super-dry landscape, and the sheer number of hoses draining water tanks faster than they could be replenished.
The entire system needs an overhaul if there’s to be adequate protection against future events like the one Mother Nature unleashed on that community. One potential solution is the ability to fight fires with the abundant saltwater nearby. While this comes with challenges due to salt’s corrosive properties, it could provide a critical resource in emergencies. Desalinization initiatives could also play a role in supporting broader water resource management in the region.
Infrastructure improvements are essential, including increasing the capacity of holding tanks, upgrading pumping equipment, and widening the lines connecting tanks to reservoirs to ensure faster replenishment during crises. Changes to building codes could also help mitigate future damage by requiring fire-resistant materials such as metal or clay roofs, cement walls, and non-flammable fencing, such as metal or stone, rather than wood. Additionally, better dry land management practices could help reduce fire risk in drought-prone areas—if people choose to rebuild and remain in the region.
It’s a monumental task, but addressing these issues could make all the difference in preventing a repeat of this devastating event.
Meh. OR, they could remove the imposed roadblocks and get the hell out of the way - letting the water flow from North to South as Nature (Precipitation & Snow Melt) and the Geography dictate. Let the recharge areas and reservoirs fill up with minimal intervention.
We are doing that now here in Florida in an effort to reclaim the Everglades and all of its wonders. It is working BTW. We finally seemed to have learned (after hundreds of fish die-offs and Red Tide events) that redirecting and discharging fresh water into the ocean isn't the best method. A HUGE help has been that we have decided to ignore bought-and-paid-for "environmental experts" who only seek to impede and/or halt any progress or improvement to Civilization on the peninsula...
PS - 100% with you on the building code changes as a method of (some) mitigation. We did the same thing here after Andrew ('92?) and now we have a lot less structure destruction than we used to when I was a kid. NOTHING stops the ocean when it decides to surge bigly - but for the lesser Hurricanes and myriad Tropical Storms, the sturdier construction codes have definitely helped. Particularly with regard to upgraded roofing, windows and exterior doors...
You make a compelling point. Letting water follow its natural course has worked wonders in Florida with the Everglades. Restoring the flow there has improved water quality and helped undo decades of damage. But California is a whole different story, and it’s not as straightforward as just "getting out of the way."
For starters, California's water infrastructure isn’t just about moving water from north to south. It’s about making sure 40 million people and the state’s massive agricultural economy have enough water to function. It’s also about flood control and managing water during droughts. You can't just dismantle that without serious consequences for millions of people who depend on it.
And then there’s the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This is where two of the state’s biggest rivers meet before flowing into the Pacific. The Delta is a tidal estuary, meaning it’s where freshwater and saltwater mix. If too much water flows out unchecked, saltwater from the ocean pushes further in, contaminating drinking water supplies and ruining farmland irrigation for much of the state. It’s not just a matter of letting nature take its course—California’s geography makes that approach risky.
What’s clear is that the current system isn’t working as well as it could. Water is overallocated, and too much of it gets diverted inefficiently. But the idea of stepping back entirely doesn’t account for the realities of California’s population, economy, or geography. Florida’s approach is inspiring, but it’s not something you can copy and paste into a state like this.
At the end of the day, the solution probably lies somewhere in the middle. Less micromanaging and better use of natural flows, sure, but also smarter infrastructure and long-term planning to adapt to a changing climate. One thing we can agree on: the way things are being handled now doesn’t serve anyone—north, south, or anywhere in between.
You had me in full agreement until the climate change part - but maybe we can agree that the climate IS changing, just not for the BS reasons the globalists are trying to sell us.
Back in the late 60's/70's, they used to do science based on hypothesis, experimenting, results and interpolating, versus doing science based on who is funding the grant. The real deal Science resulted in numerous stories, including TIME magazine's cover (twice) about the "Coming Ice Age".
If you look at the weather, the rapidly rising amount of both Artic and Antartic Sea Ice, as well as average temps over the last 30 years or so - it appears those REAL scientists got it correct. We are getting cooler, not hotter. Hence the recent change from Global Warming to Climate Change. It is ALL a SCAM to increase taxes and reduce Freedoms...
You sound like Ayn Rand. We let the diesel trains go to pot. Let's put those steam engines in the long tunnels. Oops would it know that the collect of our locomotives would kill people and tunnels. Or something as simple as brush management
Ah, I see what you’re getting at—adapt or die, right?
Fair enough.
Neglect and mismanagement always come back to bite, whether it’s letting brush pile up, ignoring outdated infrastructure, or failing to prepare for the inevitable. Fires, floods, blackouts—doesn’t matter. If you don’t manage resources wisely, things fall apart fast.
But here’s the kicker: it’s not just about adaptation—it’s about accountability. Who’s responsible for making sure the trains—or in this case, the infrastructure and fire preparation—don’t go to pot? Is it government? Private enterprise? Both?
Honestly, it doesn’t matter who’s at the helm, as long as they’re headed in the right direction. Sitting back and letting things rot clearly isn’t working.
Rand’s whole philosophy was about competence and the power of individuals to step up and solve problems. We could use a bit of that here. Maybe then we’d spend less time dealing with firestorms and more time making sure they don’t happen in the first place.
California needs someone with a vested interest in the state, its people, and its incredible environment. Balancing those priorities will be a challenge, sure, but there’s undoubtedly someone out there ready to take it on.
Regardless of who’s in charge, someone on the ground—perhaps a corporate leader or an ordinary citizen—is going to have to champion this one. It’s not going to fix itself, and as we’ve seen, an endless parade of politicians isn’t going to make it go away either.
From My point of view, not fact , just a point. Man has to work with Nature. If You work against Nature You will be the loser. We have knowledge , use it for the best abilities that will work in harmony. I think some one said on one of the posts today Fire does not care.
You don't need a 25 page monologue from Rand to tell you that if your brakes have failed and you're heading for a wall, stop pressing the brake pedal, put on your seat belt and fund the softest part to hit.
Went on a "course" through work recently to "work together to solve the megacrises" and that view on climate literally drew gasps in the room. When followed up with "if we really cared about decarbonisation we'd be building hundreds of nuclear plants rather than subsidising wind and solar" I thought I was going to get lynched.
To be truthful, it is a very silly way to boil water.
Does it work? Yep.
Is it a crazy dangerous way to create steam, to turn turbines, to generate electricity, with waste that is a generational problem?
Absolutely.
That being said, we are finding ways of making it safer. With the new auto-shutdown reactors, molten salt reactor research, your "friends" might just put their pitchforks away.
Or of course, the people in power might just release the "secrets" to zero point energy.
Google (or use your favorite AI) to tell you about Dr. Bearden (Energy from the Vacuum, a 40 DVD set full of head shaking revelations and mainstream suppression), Dr. Stephen Greer (the disclosure project), John Bedini (School Girl Circuit), Stanley Meyer (Water fuel cell), Nikola Tesla (Wardenclyffe Tower), etc.
This may be the most exciting time to be alive, if any of these technologies make it mainstream.
LK: Thanks for the link. Answered a question I have held - where did Musk come up with the $2T savings number? Now we are reminded. It was from Bonner’s December 2022 essay!
For those who think Bill only whines This is an apt reminder that this is not so Maybe this piece should be published weekly on those weekend days when BPR is silent
As Walter Bagehot said ‘ there are many things that John Bull can stand but he just cannot stand 2%’ meaning 2% interest rates causing him to do no end of daft things. We are finding out in real time exactly how many daft things that can come about with ultra low interest rates >100% Gov debt to GDP being the biggest and most egregious.
Bill, please write an article that explains what happens IF the Feds were to default on their debt. They would still have tax receipts to rely on which currently is about $4 trillion per year. In my opinion, if the U.S. defaulted on bond repayments it would in effect force the government to limit spending to current tax receipts. Would very much like to know what you think about possibility of U.S. bond default.
Mr. Bonner has stated over and over that the reactions set off by such a direct default are intolerable; therefore, he says to expect an indirect default through inflation/debasement. The advantage to that modality is allowing for variation in response on the part of those upon whom the calamity is visited. Better the devil you know than the one you don't, I guess. Mr. Bonner's Big Loss (and avoidance of same) theory is predicated on knowing, or at least, anticipating, which kind of default we will experience: direct or indirect. Mr. Bonner is betting on the latter. Best always. PM
When the federal government issues bonds, it’s essentially borrowing money (from whomever is buying the bond – China, Japan, a neighbor down the street, etc.) with a promise to repay the principal along with periodic interest. A default would occur if the government failed to make these payments. But let’s be clear—this doesn’t mean the government would cease to function entirely. With $4 trillion in annual tax revenues, the government would still have substantial resources to fund essential operations and obligations, albeit with some very tight constraints.
A U.S. default on paying back the Treasury bond face value plus interest to holders of US bonds, would send immediate shockwaves through the global financial system. U.S. Treasury bonds are considered the safest assets worldwide and the backbone of financial markets. A default would shatter that confidence, forcing the government to pay higher interest rates to entice investors to buy its bonds. These higher borrowing costs would ripple through the economy, driving up rates on everything from mortgages to car loans. Credit rating agencies would almost certainly downgrade the U.S., adding further pressure. In response, the government would have to prioritize essential services and payments while cutting back or outright deferring less critical spending.
If bond repayments were halted, the federal government’s only "other" source of revenue (taxes being the primary source) —selling bonds—would evaporate, as no one would want to buy an investment device that would leave them with NO money at the end of the day. This would force the U.S. to operate solely on tax receipts (not necessarily a bad thing in principle).
The problem?
Annual spending currently far exceeds $4 trillion. Drastic budget cuts would be unavoidable. Defense, social programs, healthcare, and infrastructure investments would all likely face the axe. Programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—which make up a huge chunk of mandatory spending—would eat up most of the available tax revenue, leaving little for discretionary spending. Departments like Education, Transportation, and Energy might face severe cuts or even temporary shutdowns.
Government spending currently is a key component of GDP. Case in point: last year’s $1.8 trillion deficit accounted for 28% of the total budget. Operating without that cushion would shrink the economy as people would reduce their spending. Now at first this might seem a bad thing, but a lot of those purchases are being made with credit cards, buying things that people don't need, with money they don't necessarily have.
Not to mention challenge the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. That could undermine U.S. influence on the global stage. But BRICS is already doing that. As External Affairs Minister said when asked why India joined BRICS, he replied:
"You have a club called G7, and you will not let anybody else into that club. So we went and formed our own club."
Adding to the financial burden, the U.S. paid approximately $1.2 trillion in interest on its national debt last year. This staggering amount exceeded expenditures on major programs like Medicare and national defense. If the government stopped adding to the deficit every year, it could significantly reduce these interest payments over time, freeing up resources for other priorities. Such a shift would also alleviate the growing strain on the budget caused by rising interest rates.
So, from a pragmatic point of view, a default might not be all bad in the long term. For one, it would force fiscal discipline. With no ability to borrow, the government would have no choice but to match expenditures with tax revenues. This could lead to long-overdue reforms in entitlement programs, discretionary spending, and even the tax system. A default might also reduce reliance on debt over time, lowering the national debt and freeing up future budgets from the burden of servicing that debt.
Moreover, a financial crisis caused by default could push voters to demand greater accountability from their leaders. Policymakers might finally face pressure to create more transparent and sustainable fiscal policies. It could even mark the end of the “kick-the-can” approach to deficit spending, resetting the system toward a more sustainable model. Some also suggest that reduced government spending might leave more resources available for the private sector, potentially stimulating entrepreneurship and innovation.
It wouldn't be easy. But it would definitely be a good thing, in the end.
There are no practical ways to help. It’s like tossing blunt pins at a Leviathan that is out of control. It’s a game of darts with a moving board. If you empty the seas it will morp into a flying creature. It will devour those who attempt to feed it. If it sinks to the bottom, it will become a phoenix. Our assignment is to live with it until we don’t. Let’s just enjoy the drama. That is Bill’s job, providing material for us to chew on. As PM would say, “best always.” 😎
Bill I do appreciate your willingness to look with fully open eyes at what is before us. Far too few do. This makes the insights of your team and you invaluable. Regrettably, far to few see your wisdom.
Reality often bites but it comes for us eventually whether we like it or not. It is ironic that people have clamored for more and more government for 80 years and now it is the huge overpowering government itself and its unholy alliances with big finance, big tech, big business generally (fascism if you will) that assures that the private economy (the only real vehicle for growth) is condemned to decline until that underlying unsustainable condition is resolved.
I couldn't help but notice that the fire devastation in LA is a sad yet perfect example of reality coming home. Cut the fire department budget, destroy the private insurance market, let the undergrowth thrive and ignore the health of critical public infrastructure, and boom... reality bites. I suspect the same is coming in relation to the countries inability to spend within its means. Deep sigh...
Thank you Bill, Dan and Tom for your insights.
Just wait for the Federal Government bail out of the LA fire insurance companies once they file for bankruptcy, surly too big to fail and the LA fire victims and hollywood celebrities will be made whole for over $500 billion on the backs of the American people. It's coming just wait.... keep piling on the debt. And No one gives a shit.
In the meantime the people of Asheville, NC will get a new tent.
The financial implications for the insurance companies in California will be huge. Am I correct in believing that insurance companies keep their reserves in the market? What impact might there be of those companies liquidating financial assets (in the tens, if not hundreds, of billions) to cover claims?
Yeah, not so fast on the LA fires.
Dig into the logistics of fighting a "once in a lifetime" fire.
Massive winds. Reaching over 100mph in places.
17% Humidity. My wool sweater in my 35% humidity winter home can create enough sparks to start a bonfire. What could a place with 17% do?
Drought since the summer.
Infrastructure that couldn't support the drain. Over 3,000,000 gallons depleted in less than 24 hrs in the Palisades, with replenishment not happening quick enough.
Adding $14M to the fire fighters budget could have helped. But with no water to disperse, it would only have meant the water would have disappeared quicker. And had more people standing around feeling utterly helpless.
Unless you'd built a 50 ft wall between houses, with every home made out of metal, it was a setting for the perfect firestorm.
Hmmmm - I wonder where all the water goes when it flows naturally down from the north?
Better not look too hard for it - you'll just find more leftarded ignorant bullshit marinated in a outhouse of arrogant (and clueless) "environmentalism" - resulting in the "government" of California diverting literally BILLIONS of gallons of fresh water into the Pacific Ocean annually. All in the name of some nebulous social "cause", "marginalized" group or irrelevant insect/fish. Meanwhile, thousands of acres of the best farmland in the world lay fallow for lack of Irrigation and cities burn to the ground for lack of fire hydrant pressure and empty reservoirs.
Another shining success sponsored by team marxist "progressives" and today's dimocrat party...
Not the problem. At least not for the fires these past few days.
The tanks that the fire hydrants are connected to (a group of 3 of them at 1 million gallons each), ran out of water. All 3 of them, 3M gallons in total, was tapped in 15 hrs according to the fire chief.
https://people.com/los-angeles-officials-blame-tremendous-demand-for-fire-hydrants-going-dry-8771457?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Where do the tanks get THEIR water from?
Mainly from the Stone Canyon reservoir, which consists of two reservoirs - upper and lower.
The lower reservoir has a capacity of 3.38 billion US gallons (12,800,000 m3) of water while the upper reservoir has capacity to store 138 million US gallons (520,000 m3) of water. The lower reservoir (a small lake) has been decommissioned for use as potable drinking water, but is on standby duty for emergencies, like the one that is currently underway.
It is the replenishment rate of the tanks - water coming from the upper reservoir to the 1,000,000 gallon tanks - that was the choke point. There is still a lot of water left in both reservoirs.
What isn't certain at the moment, is the replenishment rate from reservoir to local community holding tanks. Or the number of hoses that were pouring water onto fires. It was obviously less than the output rate which, if the base numbers are correct (3M gallons, 15 hrs, 13 hoses@300 GPM + a base replenishment rate of 500 gallons per minute), was in the order of 3,833 GPM out. For a replenishment rate of 500 GPM.
The water was being drained 6x faster, than it was being replenished.
Now the number of hoses would go up, if the replenishment rate was higher, or vice versa - the number of hoses would go down, if the replenishment rate was lower.
In either case, the entire system was never engineered for one of these historic, once in a lifetime fires.
And where the reservoirs get their water?
That's a different topic altogether.
Thank you for the facts, Lucas - enlighteningly specific.
PS - my post was addressing the "different topic altogether" for the most part. Personally, I'm much more bothered by fallow, continental farmland and food prices/availability/struggling farmers than I am about a bunch of rich liberals who, truly sadly, have lost their homes and everything that goes with that tragedy...
Why is this a once in a lifetime fire? Will happen again in another place managed by incompetent people. Just like the fire in Hawaii was a once in a lifetime fire. Coincidentally both governed by left wing democratic state and local governments, with no freaking idea of best practices management. The climate is changing and we humans need to adapt to and change our behaviors to manage for it. Unless your on the left and don't do anything, just cry and wine when shit turns bad
You’re not wrong—fires like this aren’t really "once in a lifetime" anymore. With the way things are going, they’re becoming part of the new normal. But laying the blame entirely on left-leaning governments or "incompetence" misses the bigger picture.
Wildfires don’t give a damn who’s in charge.
They’re the result of a mix of natural conditions—drought, wind, and heat—and human decisions, like letting infrastructure rot, ignoring smarter land management, and failing to prepare for what’s clearly becoming a pattern. California, Hawaii, wherever—it’s the same story. Years of shortsighted decisions catch up with you, and then you’re standing in front of a firestorm.
Could the private sector step in and do it better? Probably. Free markets thrive on solving big problems—if they’re given the chance. Fire-resistant materials, smarter land-use planning, even better water infrastructure—all of that could benefit from some private-sector innovation. But right now, we’re stuck in this loop of patchwork solutions and political finger-pointing.
We need to adapt. Fast.
And honestly? It’s going to take both markets and governments stepping up to fix this mess. Fires like these don’t care about politics, but the damage sure as hell affects everyone, no matter what side you’re on.
Just wait till the rains come you ain’t seen nothing yet
Okay Gavin. Time to wake up and smell the smoke.
Gavin certainly doesn’t have an unenviable task ahead of him. That said, I wouldn’t place the blame entirely on his shoulders. The entire fire suppression system wasn’t designed to handle a 1-in-100+ year wind event, compounded by the tail end of a six-month drought, 17% humidity creating a super-dry landscape, and the sheer number of hoses draining water tanks faster than they could be replenished.
The entire system needs an overhaul if there’s to be adequate protection against future events like the one Mother Nature unleashed on that community. One potential solution is the ability to fight fires with the abundant saltwater nearby. While this comes with challenges due to salt’s corrosive properties, it could provide a critical resource in emergencies. Desalinization initiatives could also play a role in supporting broader water resource management in the region.
Infrastructure improvements are essential, including increasing the capacity of holding tanks, upgrading pumping equipment, and widening the lines connecting tanks to reservoirs to ensure faster replenishment during crises. Changes to building codes could also help mitigate future damage by requiring fire-resistant materials such as metal or clay roofs, cement walls, and non-flammable fencing, such as metal or stone, rather than wood. Additionally, better dry land management practices could help reduce fire risk in drought-prone areas—if people choose to rebuild and remain in the region.
It’s a monumental task, but addressing these issues could make all the difference in preventing a repeat of this devastating event.
Meh. OR, they could remove the imposed roadblocks and get the hell out of the way - letting the water flow from North to South as Nature (Precipitation & Snow Melt) and the Geography dictate. Let the recharge areas and reservoirs fill up with minimal intervention.
We are doing that now here in Florida in an effort to reclaim the Everglades and all of its wonders. It is working BTW. We finally seemed to have learned (after hundreds of fish die-offs and Red Tide events) that redirecting and discharging fresh water into the ocean isn't the best method. A HUGE help has been that we have decided to ignore bought-and-paid-for "environmental experts" who only seek to impede and/or halt any progress or improvement to Civilization on the peninsula...
PS - 100% with you on the building code changes as a method of (some) mitigation. We did the same thing here after Andrew ('92?) and now we have a lot less structure destruction than we used to when I was a kid. NOTHING stops the ocean when it decides to surge bigly - but for the lesser Hurricanes and myriad Tropical Storms, the sturdier construction codes have definitely helped. Particularly with regard to upgraded roofing, windows and exterior doors...
You make a compelling point. Letting water follow its natural course has worked wonders in Florida with the Everglades. Restoring the flow there has improved water quality and helped undo decades of damage. But California is a whole different story, and it’s not as straightforward as just "getting out of the way."
For starters, California's water infrastructure isn’t just about moving water from north to south. It’s about making sure 40 million people and the state’s massive agricultural economy have enough water to function. It’s also about flood control and managing water during droughts. You can't just dismantle that without serious consequences for millions of people who depend on it.
And then there’s the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This is where two of the state’s biggest rivers meet before flowing into the Pacific. The Delta is a tidal estuary, meaning it’s where freshwater and saltwater mix. If too much water flows out unchecked, saltwater from the ocean pushes further in, contaminating drinking water supplies and ruining farmland irrigation for much of the state. It’s not just a matter of letting nature take its course—California’s geography makes that approach risky.
What’s clear is that the current system isn’t working as well as it could. Water is overallocated, and too much of it gets diverted inefficiently. But the idea of stepping back entirely doesn’t account for the realities of California’s population, economy, or geography. Florida’s approach is inspiring, but it’s not something you can copy and paste into a state like this.
At the end of the day, the solution probably lies somewhere in the middle. Less micromanaging and better use of natural flows, sure, but also smarter infrastructure and long-term planning to adapt to a changing climate. One thing we can agree on: the way things are being handled now doesn’t serve anyone—north, south, or anywhere in between.
You had me in full agreement until the climate change part - but maybe we can agree that the climate IS changing, just not for the BS reasons the globalists are trying to sell us.
Back in the late 60's/70's, they used to do science based on hypothesis, experimenting, results and interpolating, versus doing science based on who is funding the grant. The real deal Science resulted in numerous stories, including TIME magazine's cover (twice) about the "Coming Ice Age".
If you look at the weather, the rapidly rising amount of both Artic and Antartic Sea Ice, as well as average temps over the last 30 years or so - it appears those REAL scientists got it correct. We are getting cooler, not hotter. Hence the recent change from Global Warming to Climate Change. It is ALL a SCAM to increase taxes and reduce Freedoms...
You sound like Ayn Rand. We let the diesel trains go to pot. Let's put those steam engines in the long tunnels. Oops would it know that the collect of our locomotives would kill people and tunnels. Or something as simple as brush management
could devastate a jewel of a city.
Ah, I see what you’re getting at—adapt or die, right?
Fair enough.
Neglect and mismanagement always come back to bite, whether it’s letting brush pile up, ignoring outdated infrastructure, or failing to prepare for the inevitable. Fires, floods, blackouts—doesn’t matter. If you don’t manage resources wisely, things fall apart fast.
But here’s the kicker: it’s not just about adaptation—it’s about accountability. Who’s responsible for making sure the trains—or in this case, the infrastructure and fire preparation—don’t go to pot? Is it government? Private enterprise? Both?
Honestly, it doesn’t matter who’s at the helm, as long as they’re headed in the right direction. Sitting back and letting things rot clearly isn’t working.
Rand’s whole philosophy was about competence and the power of individuals to step up and solve problems. We could use a bit of that here. Maybe then we’d spend less time dealing with firestorms and more time making sure they don’t happen in the first place.
California needs someone with a vested interest in the state, its people, and its incredible environment. Balancing those priorities will be a challenge, sure, but there’s undoubtedly someone out there ready to take it on.
Regardless of who’s in charge, someone on the ground—perhaps a corporate leader or an ordinary citizen—is going to have to champion this one. It’s not going to fix itself, and as we’ve seen, an endless parade of politicians isn’t going to make it go away either.
From My point of view, not fact , just a point. Man has to work with Nature. If You work against Nature You will be the loser. We have knowledge , use it for the best abilities that will work in harmony. I think some one said on one of the posts today Fire does not care.
You don't need a 25 page monologue from Rand to tell you that if your brakes have failed and you're heading for a wall, stop pressing the brake pedal, put on your seat belt and fund the softest part to hit.
Went on a "course" through work recently to "work together to solve the megacrises" and that view on climate literally drew gasps in the room. When followed up with "if we really cared about decarbonisation we'd be building hundreds of nuclear plants rather than subsidising wind and solar" I thought I was going to get lynched.
To be truthful, it is a very silly way to boil water.
Does it work? Yep.
Is it a crazy dangerous way to create steam, to turn turbines, to generate electricity, with waste that is a generational problem?
Absolutely.
That being said, we are finding ways of making it safer. With the new auto-shutdown reactors, molten salt reactor research, your "friends" might just put their pitchforks away.
Or of course, the people in power might just release the "secrets" to zero point energy.
Google (or use your favorite AI) to tell you about Dr. Bearden (Energy from the Vacuum, a 40 DVD set full of head shaking revelations and mainstream suppression), Dr. Stephen Greer (the disclosure project), John Bedini (School Girl Circuit), Stanley Meyer (Water fuel cell), Nikola Tesla (Wardenclyffe Tower), etc.
This may be the most exciting time to be alive, if any of these technologies make it mainstream.
Or they may be our undoing.
Only time will tell.
LibertyAffair, 36 comments and counting, and you are the only person willing to say, "Oh, Bill was right...already!"
Where does time go?
The boys and girls here had been complaining about Bill's complaining. Asking for a solution, rather than more whining.
So Bill bore down. And gave us this.
https://www.bonnerprivateresearch.com/p/clowns-and-jokers?utm_source=publication-search
When Bill wrote this piece, just over 2 years ago, the US was only $31 Trillion in the hole. Now its at $36 Trillion. With no end in sight.
Much like our universe, the shithole experiment is ever expanding.
LK: Thanks for the link. Answered a question I have held - where did Musk come up with the $2T savings number? Now we are reminded. It was from Bonner’s December 2022 essay!
They need to continue this thread so more people see it. More people are paying attention now. Thanks also for that thread. I enjoyed it.
Yes! Now we know Bill is Musk’s secret Santa. 🧑🎄
For those who think Bill only whines This is an apt reminder that this is not so Maybe this piece should be published weekly on those weekend days when BPR is silent
As Walter Bagehot said ‘ there are many things that John Bull can stand but he just cannot stand 2%’ meaning 2% interest rates causing him to do no end of daft things. We are finding out in real time exactly how many daft things that can come about with ultra low interest rates >100% Gov debt to GDP being the biggest and most egregious.
Bill, please write an article that explains what happens IF the Feds were to default on their debt. They would still have tax receipts to rely on which currently is about $4 trillion per year. In my opinion, if the U.S. defaulted on bond repayments it would in effect force the government to limit spending to current tax receipts. Would very much like to know what you think about possibility of U.S. bond default.
Mr. Bonner has stated over and over that the reactions set off by such a direct default are intolerable; therefore, he says to expect an indirect default through inflation/debasement. The advantage to that modality is allowing for variation in response on the part of those upon whom the calamity is visited. Better the devil you know than the one you don't, I guess. Mr. Bonner's Big Loss (and avoidance of same) theory is predicated on knowing, or at least, anticipating, which kind of default we will experience: direct or indirect. Mr. Bonner is betting on the latter. Best always. PM
When the federal government issues bonds, it’s essentially borrowing money (from whomever is buying the bond – China, Japan, a neighbor down the street, etc.) with a promise to repay the principal along with periodic interest. A default would occur if the government failed to make these payments. But let’s be clear—this doesn’t mean the government would cease to function entirely. With $4 trillion in annual tax revenues, the government would still have substantial resources to fund essential operations and obligations, albeit with some very tight constraints.
A U.S. default on paying back the Treasury bond face value plus interest to holders of US bonds, would send immediate shockwaves through the global financial system. U.S. Treasury bonds are considered the safest assets worldwide and the backbone of financial markets. A default would shatter that confidence, forcing the government to pay higher interest rates to entice investors to buy its bonds. These higher borrowing costs would ripple through the economy, driving up rates on everything from mortgages to car loans. Credit rating agencies would almost certainly downgrade the U.S., adding further pressure. In response, the government would have to prioritize essential services and payments while cutting back or outright deferring less critical spending.
If bond repayments were halted, the federal government’s only "other" source of revenue (taxes being the primary source) —selling bonds—would evaporate, as no one would want to buy an investment device that would leave them with NO money at the end of the day. This would force the U.S. to operate solely on tax receipts (not necessarily a bad thing in principle).
The problem?
Annual spending currently far exceeds $4 trillion. Drastic budget cuts would be unavoidable. Defense, social programs, healthcare, and infrastructure investments would all likely face the axe. Programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—which make up a huge chunk of mandatory spending—would eat up most of the available tax revenue, leaving little for discretionary spending. Departments like Education, Transportation, and Energy might face severe cuts or even temporary shutdowns.
Government spending currently is a key component of GDP. Case in point: last year’s $1.8 trillion deficit accounted for 28% of the total budget. Operating without that cushion would shrink the economy as people would reduce their spending. Now at first this might seem a bad thing, but a lot of those purchases are being made with credit cards, buying things that people don't need, with money they don't necessarily have.
Not to mention challenge the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. That could undermine U.S. influence on the global stage. But BRICS is already doing that. As External Affairs Minister said when asked why India joined BRICS, he replied:
"You have a club called G7, and you will not let anybody else into that club. So we went and formed our own club."
Adding to the financial burden, the U.S. paid approximately $1.2 trillion in interest on its national debt last year. This staggering amount exceeded expenditures on major programs like Medicare and national defense. If the government stopped adding to the deficit every year, it could significantly reduce these interest payments over time, freeing up resources for other priorities. Such a shift would also alleviate the growing strain on the budget caused by rising interest rates.
So, from a pragmatic point of view, a default might not be all bad in the long term. For one, it would force fiscal discipline. With no ability to borrow, the government would have no choice but to match expenditures with tax revenues. This could lead to long-overdue reforms in entitlement programs, discretionary spending, and even the tax system. A default might also reduce reliance on debt over time, lowering the national debt and freeing up future budgets from the burden of servicing that debt.
Moreover, a financial crisis caused by default could push voters to demand greater accountability from their leaders. Policymakers might finally face pressure to create more transparent and sustainable fiscal policies. It could even mark the end of the “kick-the-can” approach to deficit spending, resetting the system toward a more sustainable model. Some also suggest that reduced government spending might leave more resources available for the private sector, potentially stimulating entrepreneurship and innovation.
It wouldn't be easy. But it would definitely be a good thing, in the end.
"Much of the debt is domestic (held by American citizens, pension funds, and institutions)
What percentage of the debt is held by the domestic debt?
Breaking down US debt holdings is complex, but I'll share the approximate percentages based on my last knowledge update:
Of the total US debt:
Roughly 70-75% is held domestically
About 25-30% is held by foreign entities."
https://www.pgpf.org/article/the-federal-government-has-borrowed-trillions-but-who-owns-all-that-debt/
So everyone in the US will lose most of their savings, pensions etc.
This is why a debt jubilee can not happen, there really would be an insurrection!
Are we at the point yet where people whining that they don't get enough freebees from the government matters?
Nope.
If the US were to create a new national oil company, they'll run it just as well as Hugo Chavez ran PDVSA. And we all know how that worked out.
Bill stop whining and suggest ways to help
He did. About 2 years ago.
https://www.bonnerprivateresearch.com/p/clowns-and-jokers?utm_source=publication-search
Quite a few things in that list that Trump and Elon promised. And the big "no-no" that every good ol' US politician abhors like the plague.
"Stop spending more than you make."
They know which side their bread is buttered on. It ain't the food stamps side.
There are no practical ways to help. It’s like tossing blunt pins at a Leviathan that is out of control. It’s a game of darts with a moving board. If you empty the seas it will morp into a flying creature. It will devour those who attempt to feed it. If it sinks to the bottom, it will become a phoenix. Our assignment is to live with it until we don’t. Let’s just enjoy the drama. That is Bill’s job, providing material for us to chew on. As PM would say, “best always.” 😎
Thanks RKF. Enjoyed the post very much, as it had “balance”, a step back into the land of better perspective.
Only idea that I’d add is to watch the congressional votes on bills and vote the offending incumbents out.
All the best!