Posted on 11/08/2010 12:18:08 PM PST by Libloather
Link only - 'Tea partyers' oppose trash-collection changes
“Peter Bardow, an opponent, said the issue isn’t about politics, but about taking away his and other residents’ right to choose their own trash hauler. “I feel like you’re forcing homeowners-association regulation and homeowners-association enforcement on me,” he said.”
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2010/11/07/20101107tea-party-trash-fountain-hills.html#ixzz14ivKJIO7
Everyone knows the Homeowner Assosciations are nothing more than Commie-lite. Little busibodies trying to tell eveyone else how to live. That “protect the property value” thingy is not working huh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_Hills
Fountain Hills is an odd sort of place. 96% white, they don’t even have a police department, instead relying on the Sheriffs Office. Conveniently, that is where the Sheriff, Joe Arpaio, lives.
As you might guess, they are not big fans of big government.
Trashcare, courtesy commietrash.
Oh, do I know what you are going through! I cannot take down one bag at a time, because of the ‘critters’. I must put it in my car, and take it all down to the bin, within an hour before the pick-up time. It is SUCH a pain - but they don’t come until 10:00am, where the last pick up I used would demand I had it all out before 6am. I would have to set my alarm every Monday for 5:30am - just to haul the trash down. (Glad I found a better trash pick-up company!)
I now take my own recycle materials to the ‘recycle’ location - once a month. Empty there for free.
>>> where the cans are regularly dumped over by critters.
Have you tried this? Before tying up the garbage bag, dust inside it with pepper. Worked here.
This touches on a pet peeve of mine. Whenever a city begins a recycling program, everyone discusses it as if it's to be ASSUMED there will be more costs (more trucks, fuel, sorting, and so on) that residents will have to bear. Yet if people don't discard enough recyclables they come on the city government channel and rag on everyone because we're costing THEM money by not giving them enough of our stuff for free!! So they expect us to absorb all the costs while pocketing the proceeds themselves, which is crooked in the first place, but even worse in another way -- the market can't make decisions when the same party doesn't bear the costs AND reap the benefits.
If recycling makes sense, the proceeds will exceed the costs, and it will end up getting done without any coercion. It may end up making sense for some products and not for others. The same parties getting the costs and benefits is how we'll find this out. Assign the costs to one group and the proceeds to a different group, especially one with the power to punish the first group if they refuse to participate, and guess what, it's a splendid idea!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.