Sunday, January 04, 2009

It's a free lunch

Free electronics recycling starts up in Oregon
Heads up If you're getting rid of junk today: This is the first weekend that you can recycle your old televisions, computers and computer monitors for free in Oregon.

Skip to final paragraph.

Electronics manufacturers are paying for the program.

I'll admit that I am going to use this new law, the difference is that I know it's not "free." I will pay for it the next time I buy a computer monitor, television, etc. Maybe someone who works for an electronics company paid for it by being laid off.

When the end user sees no cost it's not hard to convince them that something is "free." This program, like so many other "free" programs, will result in some people paying less than their share and others picking up the burden.

There may be some excellent reasons for government to force electronics companies to incur the cost of recycling these items but please, don't call it free.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Fuck Oregon!

OregonGuy said...

Already being done.
.

Scottiebill said...

And Ol' Teddy the Useless is right at the forefront of the screwing Oregon is getting.

Robin said...

Yup! in California, shipments of electronic product are subject to an $16.00
Electronic Waste Recycling Fee
known as the "Electronic Waste [money] Recycling Act"

someone always profit from being "GREEN", for example, who get the money from "carbon credits"?

answer: why the government of course!

DAVE01 said...

Oregon voters (and some criminal aliens) voted these jackasses into office. I don't think most citizens should be able to vote. They are too lazy and ignorant.

I think the following should be qualifications to vote:
1.Only people above a certain IQ. 120 or higher.
2.Only people above the age of 20.
3.Only people with real knowledge of current events.
4.Only people with a certain education level. Maybe two years or more of college.
5.ONLY US CITIZENS. NO DUAL CITIZENSHIP BULLSHIT!
6.Nobody on any public assistance.
7.Active duty military personnel and veterans with an honorable discharge.
8.Not currently serving as a politician.

Anyone have any other ideas for allowable voter?

OF COURSE, I QUALIFY FOR ALL EIGHT REQUIREMENTS.
I did not vote for the current idiot government. All of you who voted for them need to be financially responsible for YOUR decision.

Bobkatt said...

Dave 01- didn't you forget white, male, land owners?

Seriously, I don't think a person with dual citizenship should be able to hold any office, elected or appointed.

Anonymous said...

Bobkatt -- does that include children born abroad to American parents? Most of them posses dual citizenship. I am an American citizen born to a mother (who at the time) was a French citizen living in America with her American husband. I have dual citizenship. You and Dave01 DARE to take my vote away? Don't tread on me....

And I bet you call yourselves "conservatives..."

Anonymous said...

9. Nobody with a criminal record. That okay with you, Miglavs?

dchamil said...

Hispanics in tv news -- what's the story there? Have these attractive women married men with Hispanic surnames to enhance their tv careers? Have the tv people decided to get an affirmative action credit by hiring an Anglo woman with a Hispanic surname? Enquiring minds want to know!

Bobkatt said...

Anon 4:15- my comment was about running for office not voting. Yeah if you want to run for office or be appointed then give up your foreign citizenship. Yes I'm a conservative, what does that have to do with who should be allowed to run for office? Bet you call yourself a "progressive".

MAX Redline said...

Oddly, the article doesn't mention the fact that the free program cost $1.5 million to start up.

You know what? I've been paying ten bucks to recycle monitors and other CRT devices for years. That's next to nothing.

Private companies do it better than government; they just don't do it for "free".

Maliengus said...

dchamil --

WTF????? "Hispanics" in the news???? First off, don't assume a thing by a surname. Everyone exept those among us who are exceedingly stupid knows that by now.

Second, it's highly probable these
"hispanics" are also AMERICANS. It's also likely they busted their ass to get through school and deserve gainful employment as much as any other citizen.

It seems that you might be unfamiliar with the modern day job application. There's no check box for "attractive white woman married to a (gasp!) "hispanic." The job application provides four choices as to ethnic orgin and that isn't one of them.

What, exactly, was your point?

DAVE01 said...

ANON 4:15 PM
I am concerned about your loyalty.
If we had to fight a war against France, who would you fight for? Good ole USA or France? One cannot have divided loyalties. You can see evidence in the current illegal alien problems. Many mexican-Americans are doing stuff that is bad for the US and good for mexico. If you need evidence, I can supply at a later date.

Bobkatt, You cannot find any racial qualifications in my list. I don't believe in racism. I believe in letting a person prove themselves. Yes, I'm a white male. I spent time in the US army with a black platoon sergeant and squad leader.

If I ever would use the N word, it would be for my squad leader. He was dumb as a brick. In fact, in the late eighties, we sent troops to Yemen. He started screwing around with a young girl there. They threw out our whole group.
There is trash in every race and religion. I got a lot of the shit jobs because I am white. I have experience racism and I don't whine about it. I proved I was smarter and the better worker.

For all you Obama lovers, how's that with going? Blago selling his seat, Richardson having to bow out because of corruption and is under investigation. Obama tied to the donor for Richardson. What a bunch of crooks.

Thanks for the change. This will be the most corrupt group ever.

Bobkatt said...

Dave- I don't think you are a racist, however your voting criteria needs a bit of reexamination. Do you really want to disenfranchise 90% of the voters who have not been in the military? Also, some of the most intelligent people I know may not meet your IQ test or have been to college. My dad never went to college but I'm sure even he realized that the unique strength of our system of government is that the governed have an equal voice in those who govern. While this supposition seems very strained at this time with every election and candidate appearing to be bought off by the highest bidder, the way to correct this is not by limiting those who can vote but by actually giving the voters the real power that they are rightfully entitled to by guaranteeing fair elections, removing corrupt politicians, and educating the public. But believe me I understand your frustration in the current situation.

Anonymous said...

For all the lip service paid in Miglavia to what the "founding fathers had in mind" Dave01BrainCell sure tossed that ideal under the bus with his idiotic voting credentials list.

Thanks for the all-day laugh Dave.

DAVE01 said...

Bobkatt.
To be able to vote, one must meet only one of the criteria.

One of the big problems today is the corruption. Look at some of the politicians. Let's use Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as an example. Barney Franks under the CRA had Fannie and Freddie GIVING home loans to people who could not afford it or illegal aliens who should not have a loan. Barney Franks was screwing the guy at Fannie (in the fannie, one could make up many jokes about that). This has helped screw up our economy right now. Our grandchildren will be paying off this disaster. Politicians like Obama are taking money from foreigners. This means that they will listen to them instead of us Americans. They will work in their interest,not ours. With Obama taking charge and he being the most corrupt president before taking the oath, we could be doomed. I am still curious about his birth certificate. If he is ineligible, he could be blackmailed by foreign powers. He may be an illegal alien. How can you have fair elections when the corrupt politicians are making the laws? They control the process. It may take some type of revolt to solve this problem. I love this country very much and do not want to see it destroyed. One of the problems currently is the 30 million illegal aliens who are given more benefits and rights than Americans. That is part of the greed and corruption.

This country may be doomed by corruption and greed. Time will tell.

Sorry for the unorganized response. I am typing this quickly at work. Have a nice day.

R. L. said...

Dave01 said: "To be able to vote, one must meet only one of the criteria."

You really didn't think this through, did you? By your standards, #s 1 - 5 would allow non-citizens to vote, because, as you said... "one must meet only one of the criteria."

Your standards are contradictory too. How about if someone is over 20, but is on public assistance? If you both affirmative and negative qualifications for voting. Which one takes precedence?

No one on public assistance? Does that mean that everyone who receives social security is forbidden to vote? Or do we have to keep track. Once they take out more than they put in, they can no longer vote?

I can't believe I'm wasting even this much time on such idiocy, but it's just too funny to pass up.

Perhaps we shouldn't allow YOU to vote.

DAVE01 said...

RL you said:

You really didn't think this through, did you? By your standards, #s 1 - 5 would allow non-citizens to vote, because, as you said... "one must meet only one of the criteria."

That was a rough response. You are corrects, #5 must be followed exactly. I did ask for other input. #5 should actually be #1.


If someone is over 20, but is on public assistance? They are not voting.
Do you want me to put this in some type of math expression. I could do that if you want it. A IF-THEN-ELSE statement might help. I haven't done one in over twenty years, but it can't be too hard.

This could be ironed out.
Social security is not public assistance. It is paid by FICA, allegedly into a fund for us later.

R. L. said...

You're not joking, are you? If not, that is really just too funny.

Actually, at the point where you continue to receive social security beyond what you paid in to it, I think it could be argued that you are on public assistance.

Just too funny.