Gwinnett Buzz

Czar Charles of the Socialist County of Gwinnett would not even allow public comment until after the final nail in the coffin.

I am sure Button Gwinnett (signer of the Declaration of Independance) is rolling in his grave.

Join the Recall on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Gwinnett-Recall-Committee/286736026500?ref=nf

I asked Mike Beaudreau about two years ago how you could tell your government was getting to big. When he asked “How?”, I told him “when it gets in your garbage”.

Matthew, first thanks for reading. This is not a journalistic piece. The Buzz is not a news site. It is commentary. Based on your implied attack n Fox News, I have to wonder if you are of a liberal political mindset. If so, the inability to distinguish between news and commentary is well-established on the left. If you want news, check out AJC.com or GwinnettDailyPost.com. Those are journalistic outlets which will provide you with journalism.

As for explaining what is wrong with this ordinance, there are posts littering the Buzz where I have outlined my positions against that. Some are linked at the bottom of this post. Others can be found with a quick search at the top. It is not a good use of time or space on the blog to completely restate my objections (as well as those of many other Gwinnett residents) to this ordinance. In a nutshell, it comes down to the government taking away my economic freedom of choice, my ability to choose with what company I do business. A government-enforced monopoly, by definition, removes competition which increases the likelihood of poor service to customers and higher costs eventually. Competition is what drives excellence in business and the Gwinnett Commission has removed this from a very legitimate market based on flimsy excuses. I would ask you, since you seem to be more favorable to this ordinance than I (and if you are not, I apologize for the assumption), why it is ok for the government to take away my economic freedom of choice and impose this ordinance on myself and others? What is a justification for it because I have a hard time finding a legitimate one.

It’s funny that you mention the “inability to distinguish between news and commentary” as being a liberal quality while even certain people on Fox News get offended that the white house said their show isn’t a news show, when even the station itself says it’s not a news show… Anyway, that’s a rabbit hole that will get us far off topic.

Actually, I agree with you on the ordinance, I just don’t agree with your tactics to promote your opinion on this article. You rely on Ad Hominem remarks by separating them from other Republicans for disagreeing on this issue, and then the heavy implication that they are “unAmerican” for supporting this ordinance. You then further your case by only citing opinions of people who happen to agree with you without presenting any ideas as to why people might like this ordinance (which would be as simple to find out as asking them). You then jump to conclusions and use another logical fallacy, that either the board is too dumb to understand what they’re doing or they don’t care about the people. Then a call for people to vote them out of office? The end of your argument is not justified by the arguments you made, because your arguments were poorly constructed and poorly supported.

While you may not be journalism, it doesn’t matter. Your commentary and opinion aren’t supported well by the arguments you make in this post. If you have to resort to Ad Hominem attacks and other logical fallacies it’d be better to not even write the post, because it will (and did) discredit you.

I would like to ask, what is it that is “unAmerican” about this policy? Is it the socialist implications? If so, you should really take a good long look at what our government does and the services that we use on a daily basis (fire department, police station, public school systems, public roads, the military, the FDA, etc. etc. etc.).

And when you think about voting the commissioners out, don’t look at the party; look at the individual. There could be good Dems or even Independents who are going to challenge these commissioners who are up for re-election this year. Also, ask yourself if a candidate is a student of the previous commissioner who might have stepped down. Why would you vote for a carbon copy of the commissioner who voted to work with cronies to put up a boondoggle ballpark?

How far should a county government go in providing recreation for its citizens? Should they be the ones responsible for aquatic centers, hockey rinks and even ballparks? Shouldn’t the county commissioners be good representatives of the area and inspire or provide incentives so that private business can come in and do the job as in the case of the trash situation?

Mr. Bannister cites the problems of exploding landfills and illegal dumping as a reason for Socialized Garbage. Sorry, but forcing citizens to buy the trash plan that you set up behind closed doors is not the answer to these problems.

Also, how far should a county government go to expand police powers and even surveillance? When will the expansion of government end if they pass Socialized Garbage?

talesfromcorners, you are right. There are some capable and attractive Democrat candidates running for some offices. Generally, I have found few to my liking and fewer for whom I would vote. There have been exceptions: Cecil Cagle would have been a better choice than Lillian Webb in the late 80s and Zell Miller would have gotten my vote should he have run for reelection back when he opted to retire. However, I do think that the admonition to vote the person rather than the party is a bit naive. This is less the case in local politics than at the state and national levels in my opinion. At those levels, though the individual may have acceptable views on a variety of issues, elected tend to vote with their party in many cases and also count for the opposition in determining who is in the majority. Case in point, while I expect at some point, a Republican such as Scott Brown being from a liberal state such as Massachusetts will vote at times in ways that I strongly disagree. However, there will be times that he will side with the Republicans and he will count toward whether the GOP has a majority in the Senate. Considering the alternative - see the liberal track of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy - the occasional breaks with the party are a practical compromise to taking a hard stance for a strong conservative in a state where such an individual is unlikely to win. In such a case, voting the party is the smarter thing to do in the bigger picture. These type of machinations do not typically come into play on a board of commissioners so voting for a Democrat with agreeable positions is more palatable. However, in considering candidates for a legislature, there would have to be a very strong reason to vote for someone of the opposition party given the realities of party politics.

I now know why Button Gwinnett is buried in Savannah Georgai and not Gwinnett.

So after looking at the ordiance last night right after the vote I noticed that yard waste collection will be negotiated by the service provider of your district and paid directly to them. I see this as the county creating a monoply company as I have no otehr choice for someone to haul it away, why do I feel a pain in my rear?

Interesting lead article in the AJC today about the city of Atlanta having illegal dumpoing occuring on vacant lots. The city has manadatory trash collection and is having dumping problems. I guess that the BOC’s biggest perception that mandatory trash collection eliminates this is busted. All I can say is sometimes perception is not reality!

Nasuti and Kennerly gone in November and in two years Bannisater, Lassiter and Beadreau will be gone unless we can recall them all.

I perfectly understand that this isn’t journalism. I took that in after you made it perfectly clear that it isn’t what you were going for. However, even under an opinion piece, your arguments shouldn’t resort to logical fallacies, which was my main problem with the post in the first place. As I’ve stated, I agree that this sort of ordinance is ridiculous, because as far as socialized institutions go waste management is the least of our concerns. My points about your use of logical fallacies remain. You made an argument, which could have been supported by many of the things you said in reply to me. Instead you relied on ad hominem attacks and a false dilemma while purporting that those reasons are why you should vote against these people. If you feel that incorporating these things into your post is worthwhile, then you know how I feel about your presentation of an argument.

By the way, could you be so kind as to tell me how to stop the comments from this page being forwarded to my e-mail? Help would be appreciated.

Thanks for the help, and even though we can’t find a way to see each other eye to eye on the basis of logic in the argument, best wishes to you.