Yeah, it's sad reflection on the community that actually needs this kind of (by)law.Originally Posted by Enoch the Red
Yeah, it's sad reflection on the community that actually needs this kind of (by)law.
Congratulations America
Right. And then the whole street looks like that and you actually would have to do a 10 mile trip to "walk around" it.
You really want to institute a huge civic service bureaucracy which only works quarter of a year? Instead of simply going out and shovel your own goddamn snow for 10 minutes?
Because I'm seeing the difference where people actually shovel and where they don't give a shit - the latter ones I rather walk in the street because the sidewalks are actually hazardous now. And after a certain point you'll need a pickaxe to get ride of the ice the snow has turned into.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
We do already have a service for 1/4 of the year...it's called plow truck drivers. Why would this need to be a huge bureaucracy? The town could hire a bunch of teenagers to do this dirt cheap...but no, I'm sure they would need to be unionized and paid $25.00 an hour...for some damn reason.
Also, keep dodging the issue of those that do not have the ability to do what you DEMAND must be done on their property.
And if the sidewalk is public property then the city can f-ing clean it if they feel it needs to be cleaned.
What 10-mile walk are you going on in the middle of winter? If you want to be out there, you are at your own risk.
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
"Bunch of teenagers"? Hell, over here the plow truck drivers nearly can't cope with all the snow on the streets sometimes. Obviously you can't use a plow truck for sidewalks. So you have to do that manually. And since every street has 2 sidewalks on each side, you'll need a goddamn lot of teenagers.
Which brings us to the second point: Where exactly do you get those teenagers from? How do you organize them? Then you have to introduce some kind of timetables. Insurance since they're working for the city. You need to watch them whether they actually shovel snow as required. You need to get replacements when someone calls in sick. Or leaves. or doesn't turn up. You'll need some kind of recruitment drive. You'll need a way to communicate with them. You'll need to prioritize by some system, residential areas first? Hospital/medical areas first? You'll need to see where you actually need to shovel snow. and so on and so forth.
THAT, my dear, is the bureaucracy I'm talking about. Did you honestly think you could simply give some guys a couple dollars, point them in a general direction and say:"Have fun!"?
Geeze, man, you're really dense. You said: "Why don't you walk 5 meters around the patch?" Then I pointed out that your "patches" would become the general rule, you moron. Which means that you actually CAN'T walk around your precious "patches" because they'll be everywhere, idiot.Also, keep dodging the issue of those that do not have the ability to do what you DEMAND must be done on their property.
And if the sidewalk is public property then the city can f-ing clean it if they feel it needs to be cleaned.
What 10-mile walk are you going on in the middle of winter? If you want to be out there, you are at your own risk.
When the stars threw down their spears
And watered heaven with their tears:
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the lamb make thee?
I love how you have to slip into personal insults...so I will play as well... fuckhead.
Where do you get teenagers??? Really? We have a freaking 10% Unemployment...you could get anyone dirt cheap. For some reason I'm sure you would want this to be a full union position with pension and other benefits.
No shit you would not use plow truck on the side walk, I was responding to your silly assertion that it would be a balls on nightmare to have a service based upon 1/4 of the year when we plainly already have one.
Why do they need insurance? (Aside from liability?)
Not every street has a sidewalk on both sides, every street for that matter.
Well duh it would be residential only...as we are discussing people being required to clear out the sidewalk in front of their RESIDENCE. Hospitals and businesses already have arrangements..or has there been a rash of snow blocked hospitals that I missed hearing about.
No kidding there would be some logistical challenges, just like there is with the plow truck guys...
It could be a lot eaiser with a smaller # of adults with a handful of bobcats.
Again, only if the city/town/village for some reason NEEDS to have PUBLIC sidewalks cleared.
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
Ok everyone calm down and take this in:
For the plow truck drivers it's going to be more than $25 an hour: night overtime + close to New Year's holiday... maybe $80/hr.
Anyway, I think we can all agree that sometimes the sidewalk needs to be cleared -- for instance, on a busy street next to a school. We have a lot of those situations here because a lot of the houses are on busy streets near schools. (chalk that up to poor city planning)
In a low-population residental area without schools, there is no need to clear the sidewalk, and enforcement of the ordinance in that area would be stupid. But, we know that governments usually don't discriminate between busy and non-busy streets, and under the law they don't have to (and even if that was in the law, then you'd have to leave it up to some "jerk" to define "busy roads"... there will always be complaints and disagreements)
Imo, the first question is not whether the sidewalk needs to be cleared, or ought to be cleared, or whether it's practical to hire teenagers to clear it, but whether it is constitutional to force someone to clear a public sidewalk or pay a penalty.
I love the logic that its such a tremendous job teenagers couldn't be paid to do it, but its such a piddly job that octogenarians can do it. Hypocrisy much?
As for if the patches are everywhere, so what?
Ah yes, the Libertarian credo: "Not my problem, somebody will take care of it out of the goodness of their heart (but not me)."
Isn't that the same reasoning behind the "cut all social services" movement?
If I had an octogenarian on my street who needed his pathway clearing I might do it for him, I don't see why the law should force him to do it though? Do you? Without some lovey-dovey pie-in-the-sky notion that everyone has some fit, healthy, kindly, young neighbours with nothing better to do than plow the whole street out of the goodness of their heart.
I do go out and shovel snow for my neighbors though. Even the younger, fitter ones. I'm already out and I don't hate it, so why wouldn't I? Hell, I do it where I work for our elderly employees, and the business already pays somebody to do it, (they usually come around later in the evening though). I also offer to start their cars so they are warm and pull them up for them.
And yes, it's because I am a libertarian and I view it as a personal responsibility I have, not some government mandate to be followed or legislated to others.
Consequently, I also volunteer at food pantries and a charity that rehabs local homes, and we've done a heckuva lot more for those people than the guv'ment has.
You were saying?
Last edited by Enoch the Red; 01-06-2011 at 12:13 AM.
Volunteering is all good and admirable, but if something has to be done then someone, somewhere, somehow, has to be told that they have to do it. Otherwise, we're leaving these critical tasks down to whether enough people are willing, able, and have enough time to complete them. So, either that means telling people that they have to personally go out and do their share, or that they have to contribute towards the cost of paying other people to go and do it (i.e. taxes).
I was thinking about a system whereby people who do voluntary work get tax breaks on the basis that, having gone out and done something that needs doing, the government does not then have to pay for it to be done. But I think it would be basically unworkable, and would probably cost more to administer & run then they'd save through work done by the public, it would make it difficult to plan for and coordinate government activities (i.e. how many street cleaners do we need to employ? We don't know, because we don't know how many members of the public are going to turn up and pick litter etc), also over abundance of people to do enjoyable jobs and a lack of them to do unpleasant jobs.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
It's funny how utopian ideals coincide with libertarian propoganda. I mean, it'd be nice if everyone voluntarily did what was needed but I'm not going to bank on that.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
The question then becomes, what has to be done?
Aren't you a huge fan of Chavez?
The problem with this system though is telling those who who either are not willing, able or having enough time to do it.
No, but at least he doesn't delude himself with the idea that people will voluntarily do what is needed.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
I think I have a pretty good idea of what good you would do for us, and I'll pass.
So its OK to force people to do it? For the collective good?
When your argument falls flat just rely on personal attacks to cover your tracks.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
You mean like how we force people to pay taxes? Or how we force people to submit to security checks at airports? Or how we force drivers to be insured? Yes that is OK. Don't you force your employees to wash their hands after using the toilet?
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
None of those are comparable to compelling octogenarians to partake in manual labour.
Taxes are a payment not an activity and depend upon your personal situation anyway, security checks and insurance are for security and are optional. My grandfather who lost his licence 11 years ago for medical/age related reasons, has been retired for nearly 2 decades and no longer travels doesn't have to really deal with any of those very much yet you think he should be clearing the streets for you?
People have agreements for living in communities together, and as situations and contexts change so will those agreements. In order to be a part of community one must come to an agreement within that community as to what is acceptable, and unacceptable, and in that where is the line between breaking rules, and something being a deal breaker (aka you can't live here is you operate that way).
Part of these rules can be a certain maintaining of your land, and area. In other parts of the world, other communities, this may not be neccessary. If you owned your own area independent of a community then you could not tend to your land, you don't have to abide by a set of social mores.
My comments were toward the libertarian attitude that people will volutarily do what is needed, I never addressed shoveling snow so let me do that now. As the posts above indicate there are several ways to solve the problem without requiring people to do it if they aren't able. But there is only one way to ensure it gets done and that is to make it law.
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
There have been no thorough responses about how to deal with people who aren't able to if you make it a law that it must be done. The irony is people complaining that its not done voluntarily so should be done by law ... then claiming that all problems will be fixed by neighbours helping out voluntarily.
I'm assuming it would be handled the same way other more general code enforcement laws require properties to be up to par. I'm not an electrician, but that doesn't mean I can get away with a breaker box that can cook eggs. You do it yourself, you pay for someone else to do it, or if you're handicapped in such a manner, you use the resources in that network. We also already have laws that cover deployed citizens in case something comes up while they are away, but again, that doesn't mean they can get away with ignoring their duties as a property owner. They either plan ahead or they pay for it after the fact.
What argument failed? The personal responsibility one?When your argument falls flat just rely on personal attacks to cover your tracks.
Yeah, Being, you really socked it to me.
Socked it to me?
Please girl. That's so 1980. *headwiggle*
I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
Which is what I am
I aim at the stars
But sometimes I hit London
Of course you can, we do that here. It works very well, the cities are responsible for the side walks. We should every private owner get his own solution. To have one or two trucks per district is all that is needed. Centralized logistics also tend to cost less. I mean not every private owner can afford a side walk plough.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Strange how that time argument works, it always only seems to apply to things that people rather not do, never to things they like to do.
Congratulations America
So how does this practically work, if it snows overnight you have to get up early to clean the side walk. But how do you know before you get up?
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
Back when I had sidewalks I had to shovel (took pride in keeping clear, btw) I also had a lawn. City ordinance required the grass be cut and if you didn't do it, they would send a lawn service over to do it for you and send you the bill. There were also also rules requiring dogs to be leashed and their shit on side walks and in parks be cleaned-up by the owner. There were also noise rules and if your dog was too barky or your stereo too loud, you get a warning then a fine. You also had to store your garbage cans out of sight of the side-walk and street and you couldn't have an abandoned car in front of your house.
I see no problem at all requiring minimum standards of property maintenance and conduct in a community. When you buy property within a city, you sign up for the rules the city - ie the voters who live there - have established. If you don't like it, don't live there or campaign to have them changed. Its idiotic to call it slavery or to point to the 1 little-old-lady too infirm to shovel and too poor to pay for a service and say "see, these rules don't work." If that rare case is a real concern, have a health-based waiver that lets the city (ie the voters) pay for any little old lady's snow removal services. Duh. This is very simple stuff here.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote