gunther wellenstein can kiss my unrecycled ass
once again in my local paper i see the grinning visage of the city's waste recycling czar atop an admonition to recycle something--this time old phone books.
gunther, once again, i'll ask you to consider that:
first of all, i don't have access to city recycling services, even though i pay my property taxes just like the people who do.
second of all, anticipating the usual and extremely tired excuse that people who do enjoy city recycling services as part of city-provided waste disposal services are paying additionally for that privilege, i would add that they aren't paying nearly enough, since that budget line item is a loss each and every year, and me and others like me who do not enjoy these services are, in fact, already subsidizing that difference.
third of all, anticipating the usual and even more tired excuse that since it would reportedly (at least according to the BS spewed by people like gunther wellenstein et al.) cost the city more more money to extend waste disposal services and recycling services to downtown residents, it shouldn't be considered, i would add that collection costs at multi-resident properties are far lower than everywhere else, since you only have to send one truck to one place to pick up as much stuff as is currently subsidized to send many trucks to many places for everybody else, and given the current trash fee structure, it's pretty obvious to anyone with a calculator that there'd be a PROFIT from collecting trash downtown, not a loss, and that profit could be used to offset the losses in other parts of the city.
fourth of all, as is so often repeated, the city isn't able to gain the benefit of economies of recycling scale, since we don't yet currently recycle nearly enough stuff, and it seems pretty amazing to me that nobody can put these two and one-through-three together.
fifth of all, and this one isn't pointed at gunther, but at the horse's asses at the yellow pages companies--my building certainly does not need the literal mountain of useless books currently dumped (literally--dumped) in our mail room every few months, and neither do we need the expense of having to dispose of them
which brings us right back around to the top:
gunther, if you'd like to recycle my phone books, i would invite you to come right over here and get them. i'm quite confident that i can speak for everyone else in my building that we'd be glad to pay you to do it.
gunther, once again, i'll ask you to consider that:
first of all, i don't have access to city recycling services, even though i pay my property taxes just like the people who do.
second of all, anticipating the usual and extremely tired excuse that people who do enjoy city recycling services as part of city-provided waste disposal services are paying additionally for that privilege, i would add that they aren't paying nearly enough, since that budget line item is a loss each and every year, and me and others like me who do not enjoy these services are, in fact, already subsidizing that difference.
third of all, anticipating the usual and even more tired excuse that since it would reportedly (at least according to the BS spewed by people like gunther wellenstein et al.) cost the city more more money to extend waste disposal services and recycling services to downtown residents, it shouldn't be considered, i would add that collection costs at multi-resident properties are far lower than everywhere else, since you only have to send one truck to one place to pick up as much stuff as is currently subsidized to send many trucks to many places for everybody else, and given the current trash fee structure, it's pretty obvious to anyone with a calculator that there'd be a PROFIT from collecting trash downtown, not a loss, and that profit could be used to offset the losses in other parts of the city.
fourth of all, as is so often repeated, the city isn't able to gain the benefit of economies of recycling scale, since we don't yet currently recycle nearly enough stuff, and it seems pretty amazing to me that nobody can put these two and one-through-three together.
fifth of all, and this one isn't pointed at gunther, but at the horse's asses at the yellow pages companies--my building certainly does not need the literal mountain of useless books currently dumped (literally--dumped) in our mail room every few months, and neither do we need the expense of having to dispose of them
which brings us right back around to the top:
gunther, if you'd like to recycle my phone books, i would invite you to come right over here and get them. i'm quite confident that i can speak for everyone else in my building that we'd be glad to pay you to do it.
posted by kad barma at 10:35 AM
3 Comments:
I am sensing a certain edge to this post. Are you considering "recycling" it?
Regards — Cliff
Gunther is one of the most arrogant people you'll ever deal with in local government. I can't believe taxpayers are funding this horse's arse salary.
The issue of recycling is a monumental one, and to evaluate how well SW&R is doing we must look at the numbers. Since the last restructuring of recycling collection, the cost to the city of Lowell to dispose of trash has been halved. This amounts to over a million dollars of taxpayer money that can be redistributed to the city budget. Trash disposal is not subsidized by the Government, but recycling is. Therefore, efforts on the part of SW & R have done something to convince Lowell residents to recycle as opposed to simply throwing away recyclable materials. I agree there needs to be a system overhaul that includes expansion of recycling programs to residents such as yourself who are not benefitting from them. And there is an unbelievable amount of work to be done in regards to the trash dilemma. I would encourage you to petition your residents and neighbors and bring this petition to Gunther. Positive pro-action will get you further to your goal of getting recycling in your neighborhood.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home