Sunday
Jan182009
« New web site to promote socialized garbage »
Sunday, January 18, 2009 at 7:59PM
Gwinnett View is reporting that a new website has been launched to advocate for Gwinnett's socialized garbage plan. According to the post, Supporttheplan.net was "setup by a marketing firm from Jacksonville, Florida." A quick WhoIs search turns up that the site was registered by the Dalton Agency in Jacksonville, FL. The Dalton Agency's website lists services in the area of "Public Relations +." Sounds like backers of the waste plan have come to the right place, because, if any local iniative needed some serious PR, socialized garbage would be it!
I checked out SupportthePlan.net and, as you might expect, it is a litany of the same tired, non-justifications we have been hearing for months. The site has a green color scheme and many of its reasons why socialized garbage is so good for us lean on the environmental boogeyman of "greenhouse gas emissions." Sorry, but I am not sold enough on -cue the scary music - global warming, to voluntarily cede my economic freedom to the government.
Let's take a look at some of the specific arguments of SupporthePlan.net:
With fewer waste trucks on the roads, we'll experience a reduction in fuel and greenhouse gases, resulting in quieter, safer, and less congested neighborhoods - not to mention less wear and tear on the roads.
We hear this one often. It appears to be a central pillar of support for this program, as the county even planted this idea with their water bill stuffers advertising community forums for the new waste ordinance. I have shown the triviality of this point regarding truck traffic in neighborhoods, but I want to address the claim that the program results in fewer truck miles.
I started to prepare an engineering-style analysis of the reduced traffic claim. I opted against this, because, though I can make some broad assumptions, I certainly do not have anywhere near enough data to do a fair review of this claim. (Be glad - your eyes would probably have glazed over!) What I will do instead is simply apply common sense to this claim.
I agree there would be some reduction in truck traffic under the program as designed. Having a single hauler would allow for more efficient truck routing which would increase the effective daily per-truck capacity. What we do not know is the magnitude of any such increase. If you assume that all current haulers are maximizing their current daily per-truck capacit, the efficiency gains may be marginal. Recall, however, that socialized garbage requires that all homes participate in garbage collection. According to SupportthePlan.net, 20,000 homes do not have garbage service. Thus, a nontrivial amount of volume has to be added to the system. Depending on the magnitude of efficiency enhancements, the incerase in number of pickups from the new customers would negate some part of the optimized routing. I would hope an engineering study was done somewhere along the way to quantify the expected gains. Even if so, the point, however, is not the specifics of how much inefficiency can be wrung out of the system.
There are many industries could be made more efficient if competition were eliminated and the industry socialized. So why don't we simply socialize the computer industry? Do we really need Apple and Microsoft, Intel and AMD, and Dell and HP duplicating efforts? Why not just consolidate everything down into ApSoftInAmDeH? Wouldn't that be more efficient, cut costs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Why don't we? Because in America we embrace the free market, we embrace capitalism, we embrace competition. Competition is what drives innovation. Competition benefits the customer. Perhaps garbage collection is not an industry we typical associate with innovation, but the principles of competition remain unchanged. If the government wants to address business inefficiencies, I propose they start with themselves. Why do we need cities across Gwinnett with their own police departments, planning departments, elected officials and human services? Gwinnett County provides all of those at a county level and the cities is are just duplicating the same. Bet we won't see any proposals like this coming soon.
The new plan is the result of three years of preparation and input from over 5,000 residents and hundreds of organizations through public hearings, civic, home owners association meetings, community forums, and surveys. Two-thirds of residents indicated they would trade choice of a collection company for the ability to recycle more.
So, 5000 people can veto my economic freedom of choice? I don't think so. At least, they should not be able to, though governments do their level best to do it all the time. Also, the claim that two-thirds of residents indicated anything is disproven by their own statement. Obviously, two-thirds of the entire county did not indicate anything. Assuming they mean two-thirds of the 5000 people who provided feedback, even that is immaterial. Who appointed those 5000 people to speak for me or anyone else but themselves? The only people who represent me in Gwinnett County is Charles Bannister and Mike Beaudreau; we had an election to make that determination. To identify the group that would provide feedback on the waste ordinance, we had a water bill stuffer.
The plan will more than double recycling, from the current 10 percent to at least 23 percent as residents will be able to recycle 35 items.
This could be achieved without socializing the entire system. In fact, "some haulers have said they would be happy to develop a more expansive recycling program." Another option would be to pursue market-based solutions to the same end.
The current average price for garbage and recycling service in Gwinnett is $21-$24 per month. When the program is fully implemented, residents will have the convenience of paying $17.86 as a monthly service fee.
Some Gwinnettians have already told the commission that socialized garbage would increase their costs.
SupportthePlan.net also prepared an old plan/new plan comparison.
Old Plan: Trash cans at the curb every day of the week; New Plan: Same-day collection of garbage, recycling, bulk waste & white goods = new trash cans at curb only one day a week & cleaner neighborhoods
Some folks don't like seeing garbage cans on the curb. This is justification for stomping on the American ideal of competition and economic freedom of choice? This point should go over well with those homeowners associations that want to put liens on neighbors' properties because they don't like the house color or the grass is an 1/8" too tall or they don't like the landscaping design.
Old Plan: Increased litter & illegal dumping; New Plan: A cleaner Gwinnett County due to significantly less illegal dumping & littering.
So, the morning after socialized garbage starts, I will never see litter in Gwinnett again? Yeah. Ok. Back here in reality, dumping may improve, but people are not littering because they don't have garbage service. People are littering because they are lazy and inconsiderate.
"I really would rather not litter, but I do not have garbage service so I really don't have a choice but to throw this McDonald's bag out my window as I drive down the road."
Old Plan: Hydraulic fluid and garbage leaking onto our streets and roadways from poorly maintained trucks; New Plan: Newer, better-maintained trucks will reduce pollution through lower emissions
I just hate it when I come home and find that a bag of garbage has "leaked" out of a truck in front of my house. Someone was really reaching with this one! Why would socialized garbage haulers automatically have a significantly better maintenance program for their trucks than haulers currently competing in Gwinnett?
Old Plan: There are 20,000 homes without garbage service; New Plan: Fairness = all homeowners will have service & will pay the same rate
A socialistic argument for a socialized plan. Very appropriate. In America, we promote equality of opportunity not equality of outcome. This point should resonate with the Obama voters.
As you can see, there is not much at SupportthePlan.net that we have not heard about socialized garbage. There are certainly no compelling justifications for Gwinnett County to strip away our economic freedom of choice. Despite the loud demands from constituents that the commission not move forward with the plan as-is, the site does nothing but parrot the plan almost exactly as it was enacted.
At least the site gets one thing right: drop the fine for not recycling. Unfortunately, that modification simply does not go far enough.
I checked out SupportthePlan.net and, as you might expect, it is a litany of the same tired, non-justifications we have been hearing for months. The site has a green color scheme and many of its reasons why socialized garbage is so good for us lean on the environmental boogeyman of "greenhouse gas emissions." Sorry, but I am not sold enough on -cue the scary music - global warming, to voluntarily cede my economic freedom to the government.
Let's take a look at some of the specific arguments of SupporthePlan.net:
With fewer waste trucks on the roads, we'll experience a reduction in fuel and greenhouse gases, resulting in quieter, safer, and less congested neighborhoods - not to mention less wear and tear on the roads.
We hear this one often. It appears to be a central pillar of support for this program, as the county even planted this idea with their water bill stuffers advertising community forums for the new waste ordinance. I have shown the triviality of this point regarding truck traffic in neighborhoods, but I want to address the claim that the program results in fewer truck miles.
I started to prepare an engineering-style analysis of the reduced traffic claim. I opted against this, because, though I can make some broad assumptions, I certainly do not have anywhere near enough data to do a fair review of this claim. (Be glad - your eyes would probably have glazed over!) What I will do instead is simply apply common sense to this claim.
I agree there would be some reduction in truck traffic under the program as designed. Having a single hauler would allow for more efficient truck routing which would increase the effective daily per-truck capacity. What we do not know is the magnitude of any such increase. If you assume that all current haulers are maximizing their current daily per-truck capacit, the efficiency gains may be marginal. Recall, however, that socialized garbage requires that all homes participate in garbage collection. According to SupportthePlan.net, 20,000 homes do not have garbage service. Thus, a nontrivial amount of volume has to be added to the system. Depending on the magnitude of efficiency enhancements, the incerase in number of pickups from the new customers would negate some part of the optimized routing. I would hope an engineering study was done somewhere along the way to quantify the expected gains. Even if so, the point, however, is not the specifics of how much inefficiency can be wrung out of the system.
There are many industries could be made more efficient if competition were eliminated and the industry socialized. So why don't we simply socialize the computer industry? Do we really need Apple and Microsoft, Intel and AMD, and Dell and HP duplicating efforts? Why not just consolidate everything down into ApSoftInAmDeH? Wouldn't that be more efficient, cut costs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Why don't we? Because in America we embrace the free market, we embrace capitalism, we embrace competition. Competition is what drives innovation. Competition benefits the customer. Perhaps garbage collection is not an industry we typical associate with innovation, but the principles of competition remain unchanged. If the government wants to address business inefficiencies, I propose they start with themselves. Why do we need cities across Gwinnett with their own police departments, planning departments, elected officials and human services? Gwinnett County provides all of those at a county level and the cities is are just duplicating the same. Bet we won't see any proposals like this coming soon.
The new plan is the result of three years of preparation and input from over 5,000 residents and hundreds of organizations through public hearings, civic, home owners association meetings, community forums, and surveys. Two-thirds of residents indicated they would trade choice of a collection company for the ability to recycle more.
So, 5000 people can veto my economic freedom of choice? I don't think so. At least, they should not be able to, though governments do their level best to do it all the time. Also, the claim that two-thirds of residents indicated anything is disproven by their own statement. Obviously, two-thirds of the entire county did not indicate anything. Assuming they mean two-thirds of the 5000 people who provided feedback, even that is immaterial. Who appointed those 5000 people to speak for me or anyone else but themselves? The only people who represent me in Gwinnett County is Charles Bannister and Mike Beaudreau; we had an election to make that determination. To identify the group that would provide feedback on the waste ordinance, we had a water bill stuffer.
The plan will more than double recycling, from the current 10 percent to at least 23 percent as residents will be able to recycle 35 items.
This could be achieved without socializing the entire system. In fact, "some haulers have said they would be happy to develop a more expansive recycling program." Another option would be to pursue market-based solutions to the same end.
The current average price for garbage and recycling service in Gwinnett is $21-$24 per month. When the program is fully implemented, residents will have the convenience of paying $17.86 as a monthly service fee.
Some Gwinnettians have already told the commission that socialized garbage would increase their costs.
SupportthePlan.net also prepared an old plan/new plan comparison.
Old Plan: Trash cans at the curb every day of the week; New Plan: Same-day collection of garbage, recycling, bulk waste & white goods = new trash cans at curb only one day a week & cleaner neighborhoods
Some folks don't like seeing garbage cans on the curb. This is justification for stomping on the American ideal of competition and economic freedom of choice? This point should go over well with those homeowners associations that want to put liens on neighbors' properties because they don't like the house color or the grass is an 1/8" too tall or they don't like the landscaping design.
Old Plan: Increased litter & illegal dumping; New Plan: A cleaner Gwinnett County due to significantly less illegal dumping & littering.
So, the morning after socialized garbage starts, I will never see litter in Gwinnett again? Yeah. Ok. Back here in reality, dumping may improve, but people are not littering because they don't have garbage service. People are littering because they are lazy and inconsiderate.
"I really would rather not litter, but I do not have garbage service so I really don't have a choice but to throw this McDonald's bag out my window as I drive down the road."
Old Plan: Hydraulic fluid and garbage leaking onto our streets and roadways from poorly maintained trucks; New Plan: Newer, better-maintained trucks will reduce pollution through lower emissions
I just hate it when I come home and find that a bag of garbage has "leaked" out of a truck in front of my house. Someone was really reaching with this one! Why would socialized garbage haulers automatically have a significantly better maintenance program for their trucks than haulers currently competing in Gwinnett?
Old Plan: There are 20,000 homes without garbage service; New Plan: Fairness = all homeowners will have service & will pay the same rate
A socialistic argument for a socialized plan. Very appropriate. In America, we promote equality of opportunity not equality of outcome. This point should resonate with the Obama voters.
As you can see, there is not much at SupportthePlan.net that we have not heard about socialized garbage. There are certainly no compelling justifications for Gwinnett County to strip away our economic freedom of choice. Despite the loud demands from constituents that the commission not move forward with the plan as-is, the site does nothing but parrot the plan almost exactly as it was enacted.
At least the site gets one thing right: drop the fine for not recycling. Unfortunately, that modification simply does not go far enough.
Categories: Gwinnett Business, Gwinnett County Commission Tags: Barack Obama, Charles Bannister, Dalton Agency, Gwinnett County Commission, GwinnettView.com, Mike Beaudreau, SupportthePlan.net, blog, business, capitalism, competition, environment, free market, freedom of choice, garbage, global warming, government, greenhouse gas, homeowners association, public relations, recycling, socialism
Gwinnett Business, Gwinnett County Commission Tags: Barack Obama, Charles Bannister, Dalton Agency, Gwinnett County Commission, GwinnettView.com, Mike Beaudreau, SupportthePlan.net, blog, business, capitalism, competition, environment, free market, freedom of choice, garbage, global warming, government, greenhouse gas, homeowners association, public relations, recycling, socialism
Reader Comments (1)
Most of the claims made by the pro-garbage plan people appear to be true, but the quantifiable significance of the 'improvements' is of considerable doubt.
Plus there is one claim which is not true: that the plan will reduce and stop illegal dumping. I've lived on one of the few dirt roads in Gwinnett for 19 years, so I'm something of an expert on dumping. Day to day household garbage is rarely dumped on my dirt road; what is dumped is the stuff the garbage companies will not pick up. Things like sofas, hot water heaters, tree trimmings and brush, construction debris and tires. You know, things that the new service will either not pick up, or charge extra for.