44 Replies to “I Wish I Lived In Seward Neighborhood”

  1. When I hear that they are sorting through my Green Bin leavings, I’ll start wearing diapers myself.
    Just for the fun of it.

  2. “How can you really tell people what to do if you don’t know what’s in there?”
    My favourite phrase. Apparently in the green revolution everyone gets to be the boss.

  4. “I’m all for wasting water tonight,” Buss said, her soiled and gloved arms akimbo. “My shower? I’m thinking about 20 minutes.”
    That reminds me I want to install a garburator.
    I want one of those 5hp models that will grind up a femur if need be.
    Lickmuffin, LOL!

  5. On one hand you have Peel region, which charges a surcharge on water/wastewater bill ‘to combat global warming’, but refuses to pick up electronics at the curb and asks residents to drive electronic garbage to the recycling plant.
    On another hand you have Toronto municipality, which has put ads on the radio telling the residents that ‘Toronto wants your old electronics’.
    No wonder Toronto does – electronics costs 20 cents/lb at the junk yard, even more in container lots. Everyone wants electronic garbage, except the greenies, which is inexplicable. Electronic garbage is free gold which Candian streets are paved with on garbage date. So when Peel region tells you to drive it to the plant, they actually expose themselves as being two fold greedier bastards – they want to make more money easier.
    But how come since Ontario started charging environmental fee on every electronic sale, the region decided to hose the residents? Of course you know where that electronics ends up: in the ditch along the rural roads. So much for ‘green’.

  7. Well nine dogs trumps my two cats but my male Big Guy leaves logs that have a smell that can peel paint.
    30 yards away 🙂
    Quality may be as good as quantity when it comes to entertaining garbage bag nazis

  8. My town hired a guy full time to dig through trash bags, and if he finds something he deems contraband he sticks a big ole red sticker on the trash bag stating REJECTED (like most liberals are by society). Thankfully I have a dog that poops alot, I just dump the poop bags into the trash without tying up the bags. He can enjoy handling Sir Whinealot’s poop.

  9. The trash guys rejected one of my neighbours bags last week.
    It sat there all week with the crows and magpies picking holes in it and the contents spilling out and littering the street.
    The trash guys picked it up today but still there is litter when there wouldn’t have been if they had done a proper job in the first place.
    It’s just a good thing that the coyotes didn’t get at it.
    I was up at 3:00am 7-8 days ago looking out my window and a middling large coyote was ambling along at the top of the street looking like he owned the world.

  10. “…the program also places high priority on training and educating its members, many of whom are transitioning into new, environmentally oriented careers. They work for next to nothing: $11,400 for 1,700 service hours. But they are driven by the conviction that their efforts will someday represent meaningful change.
    Ick, Crusading Green Zombies. Perhaps theses people need to rethink the transitioning to “work for next to nothing” careers.
    You people joke about poo but you just know that the Greenies will legislate weekly stool samples to police the no more than one serving per week red meat quota. After all,
    “How can you really tell people what to do if you don’t know what’s in there?” said Pam McCurdy, a strategic marketing specialist for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, which runs the Green Corps program. “You have to get in there,” she said”

  12. For what it is worth,
    All the paper collected in the Montreal region is sold to California so THEY can save their trees while we keep cutting ours.
    They sell our recycled paper to the USA for a profit NOT to save our trees.
    If they want more people doing more recycling they should BUY our recycling from us, not charge us for it.
    They should pay me for my old newspaper if they intend on making a profit on it just like the corner store pays me to buy back my emty beer bottles ( even if I did not buy them at that particular store ).
    My recycling is mine.
    You want it, pay for it.

  13. “They work for next to nothing: $11,400 for 1,700 service hours.”
    That’s $6.70 an hour. If they’re so dedicated,why don’t they do it for nothing.
    Oh,and are the public service unions aware of these scabs that are taking jobs away from good union brethren?
    (Just trying to foment a bit of hard feeling among Lefty groups.)

  14. Once recycling everything becomes ironclad law all the workers will be unionized.
    Count on it.
    The unions are just biding their time and rubbing their hands with glee.

  15. Settle down, it’s just a waste audit. It’s used to see exactly what’s being thrown out, figure out what alternative could be presented for what type of item/material, etc. That’s it, that’s all.
    There is no threat to your personal freedoms here whatsoever.

  16. Kate,
    Be glad you do not live there. The people’s demokratick republik of minneapolis (MN-DFL) would outlaw your nine dogs in a heart beat. Especially since you breed them.
    Thugs and drugs on the north side, most of the kids do not graduate from hugh school, police getting laid off, Somali teens running off to the jihad, but the nanny state liberals have more than enough time to control people’s personal lives through their garbage.

  17. BTJ
    “””There is no threat to your personal freedoms here whatsoever”””
    slippery slope!!!!!

  18. You’re right, BTJ, they’ll just helpfully suggest that we get with the program….No Pressure.

  19. -Minnesota Green Corps — a new statewide program that’s training a fresh crop of environmentalists-
    There is no threat to your personal freedoms here whatsoever.
    Hahaha, what an idiot you are BTJ.
    They’re training a new CORPS(does the word Corps sound military to you and what do you suppose this Corps will fight for?) of environmentalists and they are not going to have any effect on my freedoms and choices in the “Global Village” that they all believe in why?
    Because the old crop of environmentalists haven’t had any effect whatsoever so far?
    BTJ, how is your green brother James Lee doing?
    Would he have identified with a militant name like Minnesota Green Corps?

  20. Friend of USA, I have a two-pronged strategy when people start mewling at me about recycling:
    1) If it’s economically superior to raw resource extraction, why isn’t anyone paying me for my garbage?
    2) If it’s better for the environment, why do we have fossil fuel-belching recycling trucks and processing plants in addition to the garbage trucks and landfills?

  21. “slippery slope!!!!!”
    That’s an informal fallacy, but regardless, there is no slope to slide on!
    No individual is identified in these audits…they are general and only serve to inform guidelines, suggestions, plans, etc.

  22. When I worked in Third World countries, one aspect of local custom that used to really get to me was the sight of indigant people (usually old women) rummaging through everyone’s domestic garbage for saleable items in the survival economy.
    In the modern world, if a community really wants to “go green” with its garbage, there is pretty decent technology to do it at no more than the cost of running a thoroughly regulated landfill.
    The noble First World goofs who do this voluntarily must puke quite a bit, and just reading about them almost makes me puke. Environmentalism has morphed into mental illness!

  23. Leftism is a mental disease, Zog.
    The strategy is to keep these crazies on the fringe where they belong.
    No position of influence or authority of any kind, especially over children, should be given to them.

  24. Repeated for the sake of BTJ, who apparently has a reading comprehension problem: “How can you really tell people what to do if you don’t know what’s in there?”
    They aren’t simply doing a trash audit; they are on a fishing expedition, looking for a reason to force people to modify their behavior. And they admit it.

  25. Like garbage bag quotas, having the garbage nazis snoop through your trash will only make people drop their bags in their neighbour’s pile or the nearest apartment dumpster.

  26. BJ says: “No individual is identified in these audits…they are general and only serve to inform guidelines, suggestions, plans, etc.”
    Sure BJ. Because nobody would ever put anything with their name on it in the garbage, right?
    And City of Minneapolis would never put a unique identifier RFID chip on their garbage bins, would they?
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100823/05104010738.shtml
    I pay to have the garbage hauled away, and I pay the county a LOT for that service. Once they take it away its theirs. If they want the plastic and whatnot out of it, -they- can sort it.
    Truth is around here, all of it goes to the same land fill anyway. They don’t sell the stuff you sort, they take it straight to the dump.

  27. Wow – I’m thinking this group is too far gone for help. How could they possibly muster the psychological fortitude necessary to admit the truth to themselves: their digging through garbage was wholly an exercise in futility.
    I would venture that despite the mountain of evidence, roughly equivalent to the mountain of garbage they sort through, that proves that the existence of global warming is a fallacy and that anthrprogenic global warming was simply a useful value added premise, they would still cling to these beliefs – how could something that feels so good or right be wrong?

  28. Makes you consider picking up that roadkill skunk, just for the joy of throwing it in the trash….

  29. According to David Miller Toronto has a great diversion rate, but when I look around on garbage night, there is not a green bin to be found.
    He must be referring to all of the sandle wearing a$$holes that are diverted to Toronto..

  31. While garbage apparently belongs to the municipality
    or waste disposal company, the act of sorting through garbage is not distinguishable from the acts of an identity thief.
    At very least these moonbats should be bonded.

  32. And I`ve got six cats. Two of them are like Fred`s Big Guy. I can assure you all that there is no one sorting through my garbage. I`m just pleased as heck that they are hauling it away.

  33. “Truth is around here, all of it goes to the same land fill anyway. They don’t sell the stuff you sort, they take it straight to the dump”
    Yeah, I’m a refugee from Mpls/St.P where finding someplace to take your large unmentionables is a real chore, e.g., solvents, and expensive.
    Glad I don’t have the scourge of civil disobedience hanging over my evil toxic-refuse-disguising head anymore.
    The positive side is Minnesota is going to be too poor to keep up this insanity for much longer. Schools next biennium will be funded just enough to employ administrators. Kids have to pay for everything out-of-pocket already.

  34. What are you people on? Paranoid delusions a plenty.
    Answer me this…how would you go about managing waste and recycling? How do you manage something if you don’t know what it is? Auditing what enters the trash is how you figure out exactly what you’re dealing with.
    “They aren’t simply doing a trash audit; they are on a fishing expedition, looking for a reason to force people to modify their behavior. And they admit it.”
    What are you talking about?! Where did anyone say they are interested in ‘forcing people’ to do ANYTHING!? How would you determine just how much recyclables are in the trash stream? How would you determine the recycling potential of a municipals solid waste? How would you determine what materials could be managed differently?
    No one is forcing ANYTHING upon people!
    “Sure BJ. Because nobody would ever put anything with their name on it in the garbage, right?”
    Paranoid delusions. They are sorting materials, not looking for personal papers and information. They want to know what MATERIALS are in the trash, they don’t care, nor do they have the time or funds, to identify individuals. Anyone who’s seriously worried about their private information should probably shred it before they throw it out period.
    I can see why people start thinking up these big brother conspiracy theories, but it’s really just to help manage waste…you know, make decisions regarding operations, infrastructure, strategies, etc. You wouldn’t manage a store without knowing it’s contents, you wouldn’t manage a mine without knowing what, and how much is in it, you wouldn’t manage ANY resource without auditing it.
    “I pay to have the garbage hauled away, and I pay the county a LOT for that service. Once they take it away its theirs. If they want the plastic and whatnot out of it, -they- can sort it.”
    Cause you’re too ignorant to think: ‘hmmm, maybe if I sort out the recyclable, my waste hauling fees will decrease’.
    “that proves that the existence of global warming is a fallacy and that anthrprogenic global warming was simply a useful value added premise”
    Wow, a mountain of evidence? Where’s it hiding? Should be pretty easy to find…mind pointing ANYTHING out?
    “the act of sorting through garbage is not distinguishable from the acts of an identity thief. ”
    Completely illogical and ridiculous.
    To those that argue ‘if recycling is so much more economically viable than mining raw materials, why don’t they pay me for my garbage’…Why do you assume that recycling is so much more economically viable that it pays for the process of picking it up from you and disposing it for you, plus extra to pay you for it?? You are also ignoring the fact that YOU pay for raw resource extraction through government subsidies, which artificially lowers the cost of raw extraction.
    If any one is suffering from a mental disease it’s the group in here with their paranoid delusions.

  35. “Answer me this…how would you go about managing waste and recycling?”
    I wouldn’t recycle at all because it is unnecessary and my waste would go to the landfill like it always has(and where pretty much all of the stuff that is seperated for “recycling” goes after much ado too) or an incinerator if the tax subsidies for recycling/windmills/solar farms were to be diverted to building some.
    Give me a financial inducement and I’ll do just about anything for it, give me a punitive tax or fine and I’ll spend twice-10x as much money resisting in the name of liberty.
    Do anything at all in the name of environmentalism and it’s going to be a fight.
    environmentalism=communist totalitarianism

  36. “I wouldn’t recycle at all because it is unnecessary”
    What do you mean ‘unnecessary’? Lots of things aren’t necessary but it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be done!
    “Give me a financial inducement and I’ll do just about anything for it”
    Ok, if you put more into your recycling bin, and less into your trash…it will cost you less. Simple as that.
    “environmentalism=communist totalitarianism”
    Paranoid delusions. Comparing environmentalism to regimes that killed millions is absolutely ridiculous. Only the simple minded would make such a connection.

  37. Recycling is unnecessary.
    No good case has been made to justify recycling.
    I don’t have a recycling bin, but if there wasn’t any recycling at all it would indeed cost me less taxes.
    If I am forced to have a recycling bin then what is supposed to go into the recyling bin is going to cost the environment plenty and that bin is going to be empty.
    Environmentalism has already killed millions.
    The banning of DDT killed 10s of millions, just a single example.
    You’ve been told this before yet in your own deluded state you ignore it.
    environmentalism=communist totalitarinism

  38. “No good case has been made to justify recycling.”
    You haven’t been thinking very hard, that’s the problem. Here’s the case: it saves time, money, and energy. Think of any ‘product’ as a series of steps. Traditionally you start at raw materials, which must be extracted, processed, and transported. Then there are a series of steps of refinement each with a new/refined material, and in the end a final product is created, finally that product gets thrown in the ground and buried or incinerated. It’s a straight line, except for the minute bit of energy from incineration if that’s the final stage, which gets pumped back into the system. Recycling serves to take that final product and instead of destroying to for a loss (or small recovery in incineration), ‘cycling’ it back into the production chain. Wherever it enters that chain, all steps prior to that point are negated, and thus all energy, work, time spent in those negated steps are saved.
    Our traditional way of production is based on the military-industrial complex. Our ‘straight-line’ method of production was born in the age of World Wars, when the goal was to produce as much as possible with no consideration of the ending point (people had bigger concerns, and often there was not ending point (as in bombs, bullets, uniforms, etc)). That’s not how nature works, nature works cyclically. If we want to maximize efficiency and production we would take advantage and work with the natural way of the world..in cycles.
    “The banning of DDT killed 10s of millions, just a single example.”
    You are misinformed my friend. I don’t ignore it, I find the truth…and that ain’t it.

  39. “You are misinformed my friend. I don’t ignore it, I find the truth…and that ain’t it.”
    Sure BJ. What you -actually- do is disagree with whatever anyone says on here, no matter the subject, every single time.
    Has it occurred to you that if the value of the material recovered is less than the cost of recovery, the program is a full-on waste of time and money? That’s all anyone is saying.
    So if a government is pursuing a program that’s known to be a waste of time and money, what is the -real- reason they are doing it? That’s rhetorical, we all know the answer. They are buying greenie votes with our money.
    I don’t think that’s a proper use for tax dollars, myself. Since it all goes to the same landfill, my cost for disposal would be a lot less if they ceased the charade with the blue boxes. Probably half.
    But please, disagree with me again. You make a fine punching bag.

  41. “What you -actually- do is disagree with whatever anyone says on here, no matter the subject, every single time.”
    Ironically, I’ll have to disagree with that. What I don’t do is contribute to the echo chamber, which seems loud enough on it’s own. I’d like to think I invite a real discussion.
    “Has it occurred to you that if the value of the material recovered is less than the cost of recovery, the program is a full-on waste of time and money? That’s all anyone is saying.”
    Cost is artificial. What you ignore is the fact that YOU and every other tax payer is paying for raw material extraction through subsidies.
    Recovery programs are in their infancy and will only get cheaper and more effective.
    If the time, energy, cost of recovery and processing to inject materials back into the production cycle are less than the time, energy, cost of producing that same stage of material from raw materials + the cost of disposal of the end product in a landfill or incinerator…then recycling is worthy, if not, then not.
    That’s what I’m arguing. I hope you can understand why I do not accept the notion that recycling period has no value.

  42. “Ironically, I’ll have to disagree with that.”
    Wow. I’m shocked.
    “Cost is artificial.”
    Truly, you are a liberal. I suppose property is theft as well?

  43. “Truly, you are a liberal. I suppose property is theft as well?”
    How does that statement make me a liberal? I didn’t say that cost doesn’t matter, I said, as it stands, cost is artificial (in that it is artificially determined). We do not live in a free market economy, we live in a mixed economy. When you talk of the ‘cost of recycling’ compared to the ‘cost of raw materials’ you tend to ignore the fact that the cost of raw materials has been artificially lowered by government subsidies, you tend to ignore the fact that those subsidies cost WE the tax payer. Yet you are careful to stress the costs of recycling that we the tax payer are responsible for.
    You’re comparing apples and oranges. You’re comparing the cost to the tax payer of recycling to the cost of raw materials ignoring all associated financial support from the tax payer.

  44. I invite any of the opponents of recycling to explain how efforts to reduce trash thus EXTENDING THE LIFESPAN of existing landfills and thus delaying the multiple millions spent opening new ones is a bad thing?
    anyone?

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation