He literally said "it's delicious" in the post they're referencing.

You can agree to agree, I guess.

You're not even disagreeing, though. The point is that things can be delicious but still merit restraint in their consumption.

I'm not even arguing for restrained consumption! I just think we should charge California producers of these foods market rate for the water they require, even if that means they can't be profitably produced in California anymore, and we have to import them from places that aren't going through a drought.

What does 'the market rate' mean for all the infrastructure (I guess most of the agriculturally interesting surface water has been diverted under existing regulation)?

I don't mean that in a snide way, I just wonder what exactly you mean. Like, would it be okay under this market system for someone to purchase a large amount of the land where the water originates and construct a huge dam+reservoir? Would adjacent property owners have to go to court to redo the resolution of their competing interest in water that happens to flow across the properties?