On Jul 16, 8:39*pm, Mike Coslo wrote:

Jim, I'll give you a universal truth. It is all about money. Nothing
else. Either through the chemicals or the world class fishing stream.

Take your pick. Have a company that comes in, pays about 20 people a
little above minimum wage, and maybe 5 managers a decent wage for a few
years. Or a setup that keeps returning money as long as it can be kept
up?

Know what the problem with well constructed holding areas is? If you try
to insist on them, it will cost the company more money, and in an effort
to avoid that, you are painted as an eco-nut or a tree hugger. I was
perhaps remiss in that the quality of the holding ponds was part of the
controversy. You might be glad to know that the design settled upon saved
the company a lot of money. Great, huh? Showed the tree huggers a thing
or two. Problem was, it leaked like a seive. Roughty equivalent to just
pouring th echemicals on the ground, which would have saved the company
even more money.

Contrast that to millions that would have come in if the fishing stream
was protected and maintained.

* * * * As a person who stood to make money on one of the two endeavors,
which would you prefer? One that could make you a whole lot of money over
a long long period of time, or the ten year model that puts a lot less
money into the community, eventually leaves you footing a very large
bill. What we did, we lost money on, not made money.

No tree hugging, no Sierra club, no leeeburuls, no "Corporations are
evil", nothing but pure bottom line. Money. Why would you be against
making as mouch money as possible? I like capitalism myself, how about
you?

* * * * - 73 de Mike N3LI -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The primary redeeming quality and prerequisite of any good mantra is
that it must fit nicely on a bumper sticker - inescapable logic in
four words or less. Print enough of them and it becomes a truism.

Never trust anyone over 30, man.

ac6xg