- Home
- Commentary
- California dreamin’ that could turn into a trashy nightmare
California dreamin’ that could turn into a trashy nightmare
- By Richard Burger
- Published 08/14/2008
- Commentary
- Unrated
I think recycling is a great idea. The operative word here is “idea.” As an intellectual construct, it makes perfect sense. Throwing stuff away that has value is pretty much the same as taking money out of your pocket and tossing it in the trash. But there’s another side to that coin, and that’s where the intellectual construct butts up against hard-headed reality. Because what’s being recycled belongs to somebody; somebody who paid for it and who owns it. It’s what is known as personal property.
Encouraging these owners and suggesting that they would do well to avoid wasting their money, or at least avoid needlessly filling up refuse sites is one thing, and, no doubt a good thing. Unfortunately, there always seem to be some folks who think they know better than the owners, and believe, further, that the owners should not have a choice about what they do with their property.
That gives rise to situations like what’s happening now in San Francisco. The mayor there has decided the city should fine people as much as $1,000 if they fail to properly sort their trash, among which are, naturally enough, recyclables. A Frisco newspaper said if it is enacted, the law would be the country’s first mandatory recycling and composting law. It should come as no surprise that this mayor thinks he knows how people should live better than they do. This is the guy who also decided he didn’t like federal immigration laws and chose to ignore them and refused to turn over juvenile illegal alien drug dealers to the INS for deportation.
Instead, these criminals were sent out into the countryside to cushy havens with zero security, and from which the thugs promptly walked away and went back to selling drugs. One might have thought the city’s taxpayers, who naturally picked up the tab for these mini vacations, would have shown up at city hall with torches and pitchforks, but maybe they’re used to that kind of thing.
Or maybe they’re just used to having their so-called mayor think for them. He was reported to have said that the city’s residents are “going to have to try new things,” if they’re going to truly be the world-class, 21st century city they promote themselves to be.
That certainly gave me pause for thought. Is he saying that being a world-class city requires the city’s residents to be subjected to odious, draconian enforcement measures for utterly inconsequential “crimes,” while he and his administration thumb their noses at federal immigration law, and also make citizens pay to put juvenile, illegal-alien, drug peddlers on city streets? Talk about a brave new world!
It makes me wonder what this guy may think of next. Make littering a felony? Spitting on the sidewalk gets you automatic jail time? No whistling after 5 p.m.? If you think that sounds silly, you should know that the city has already outlawed feeding the pigeons in most places. I haven’t heard what the fine is for that.
If they’re not careful Tony Bennett is going to come to the city by the bay and take his heart back and leave it somewhere else. We can only hope that this is one bit of goofy California nonsense that doesn’t catch on.
Encouraging these owners and suggesting that they would do well to avoid wasting their money, or at least avoid needlessly filling up refuse sites is one thing, and, no doubt a good thing. Unfortunately, there always seem to be some folks who think they know better than the owners, and believe, further, that the owners should not have a choice about what they do with their property.
That gives rise to situations like what’s happening now in San Francisco. The mayor there has decided the city should fine people as much as $1,000 if they fail to properly sort their trash, among which are, naturally enough, recyclables. A Frisco newspaper said if it is enacted, the law would be the country’s first mandatory recycling and composting law. It should come as no surprise that this mayor thinks he knows how people should live better than they do. This is the guy who also decided he didn’t like federal immigration laws and chose to ignore them and refused to turn over juvenile illegal alien drug dealers to the INS for deportation.
Instead, these criminals were sent out into the countryside to cushy havens with zero security, and from which the thugs promptly walked away and went back to selling drugs. One might have thought the city’s taxpayers, who naturally picked up the tab for these mini vacations, would have shown up at city hall with torches and pitchforks, but maybe they’re used to that kind of thing.
Or maybe they’re just used to having their so-called mayor think for them. He was reported to have said that the city’s residents are “going to have to try new things,” if they’re going to truly be the world-class, 21st century city they promote themselves to be.
That certainly gave me pause for thought. Is he saying that being a world-class city requires the city’s residents to be subjected to odious, draconian enforcement measures for utterly inconsequential “crimes,” while he and his administration thumb their noses at federal immigration law, and also make citizens pay to put juvenile, illegal-alien, drug peddlers on city streets? Talk about a brave new world!
It makes me wonder what this guy may think of next. Make littering a felony? Spitting on the sidewalk gets you automatic jail time? No whistling after 5 p.m.? If you think that sounds silly, you should know that the city has already outlawed feeding the pigeons in most places. I haven’t heard what the fine is for that.
If they’re not careful Tony Bennett is going to come to the city by the bay and take his heart back and leave it somewhere else. We can only hope that this is one bit of goofy California nonsense that doesn’t catch on.