Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Solar cycle: normal
Jim Kelley wrote in
: Michael Coslo wrote: In our area, we had a world class trout fishing stream. when I say that, I mean that people from all over the world came here and spent a lot of money to fish, and stay in hotels, eat in restaraunts. We also had a chemical production company that wanted to do a lot of things that some of the populous didn't want them to do. It got to the point of township meetings. Some folks said that the companies practices were going to destroy the local watershed. The company and a lot of people accused them of being anti-business, anti job, anti growth, and worse. The chemical company got it's way. Fast forward to today.... The watershed has been destroyed by two chemicals that leaked from poorly constructed holding areas. The world class trout stream is no more. No more visitors spending all that money - it was millions in the 60's, who knows what it would be now. The chemicals have reached a lake about 30 miles away now, and people aren't supposed to eat fish from either the lake or stream. And the chemical company? They aren't in business any more. They were bought out by a european company who then closed down the competition, took a write off, and left. That isn't all they left. The bill for the cleanup is with us. The end result: Jobs are gone. World class fishing stream gone. A nice lake downstream gone as an added benefit. No one can say they didn't know. They didn't listen. What a disaster - and a huge tragedy. Clearly the world would be a better place....if it was uninhabited. I guess a better message would have been that holding areas should not be poorly constructed, rather than just shouting the tired old eco-mantra 'corporations are evil' - which nobody listens to. But eco groups aren't exactly the best listeners either. 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 - |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
New solar cycle? | Dx | |||
New solar cycle? | Info | |||
Solar Cycle Definitely Improving | Shortwave | |||
SOLAR CYCLE | Shortwave | |||
Solar Cycle 24 | Shortwave |