Persuasive Water Problems

Many different types of people could possibly object this solution depending on their views. But mainly only farmers would object to these water cuts. Arguments that might say to oppose my stance is that these water cuts would not allow farmers to adequately grow their crops and might even lose money and crops if they cut back on water. Farmers use tons of extra gallons of water on crops than is actually even needed. In California farmers take almost 70% of all water taken from the colorado river which happens to supply fresh water to all the states in the mid west. Although california does take the most amount water, they do supply most of the fruits and vegetables to the whole united states, almost 50% to be exact. Even though california does supply most of the produce we eat it does not mean they should have automatic

Also water companies who have water rights would also oppose my plan. Corporations would have restrictions on their water rights which would make their sales on water drop because they are not producing and selling as much water as they used to. Corporations solution would be a major failure for everyone else because their solution only benefits their corporation because it gives more rights of the water to the corporations. The oppositions solution only protects and supports their own interest. Opposing solutions believe that their water rights entitle them to unlimited amounts of water for their corporations and products. But that is not the case if corporations continue to draw large amounts of fresh water that really belong to the people they will cause a major drought that will leave millions of people hungry. My solution is superior to those of corporations because they protect the ordinary citizens rights to water and stop the

Estrada 5 greediness of corporations destroying our water system. It will tax and charge more for the water that is being drawn by corporations that make huge sales so that either the state is being