From: Ryan M Gill (rmgill@mindspring.com)
Date: Wed Jun 12 2002 - 15:51:02 PDT
At 5:44 PM -0400 6/12/02, Steve Grammont wrote:
>
>I think we have to thank the NRA for that one more than anything else.
>There are a few interest groups which are, in effect, the equivalent of
>big business. The NRA spreads a LOT of money around. They also have
>"big mouths" and know how to use them to their advantage :-)
Granted, but if all of the people on this list called their congress
men, we might be able to get something passed. If you don't talk to
your congressman/woman, it won't ever happen in the first place will
it? Squeky wheels and all that.
When that Demill bill was part of the DOD fiscal bill, I was calling
around before the NRA had even started moving it's crusty and slow
mechanism.
>
>
>The flaw in your logic is that you are using logic :-) Who ever said
>industrial concerns are logical? I am of the firm opinion that they are
>irrational and therefore illogical. They pretty much poo on anything
>that even holds out a remote possibility of doing something they don't
>like. Why else would they resist things like safetybelts, higher safety
>standards, better fuel efficeincy, etc. etc.? Consumers all want these
>things and therefore it would be logical under the basic foundation of
>Captialism to give these things to us as quickly as possible. But since
>this is not what happens, there must be something else going on.
Not all do this. Some are forwards thinking sometimes. Other companies are not.
> >Not traditionally, however, if you can show that they help their
>>constituents and don't raise flags that hurt them in elections, they
>>can't help to notice.
>
>I agree. Sad thing is that keeping our environment clean should NEVER
>hurt a politician in an election. I was just talking with someone a few
>minutes ago about an expensive water treatment plant that conservatives
>voted down years ago. It finally got pushed through over their screams,
>but now those same people are out in their hip waders 15 years later
>fishing in a river that no longer can be smelled miles away. I find
>something fundamentally wrong with them enjoying something they opposed.
You have to candy coat things sometimes.
Ducks unlimited and the nature conservancy do work together on some
projects. They are very different but can see eye to eye on some
things.
> >35 year old uniforms aren't skin off anyone's nose unless they are
>>really the low bid.
>
>Same as the M35s. Who said they are being rational? It would affect
>businesses if these items were given away to hospitals for example.
> Perhaps only a small bump in one quarter's sales, but they will fight
>and die for those bumps not to happen. The rest of us be damned.
Likly the old medical kit would have been hard to give away. Lots of
that stuff has a finite shelf life. Espeically for medical use. Other
things (band equipment?) don't care if it's 5 years of 40 years old
so long as it works.
>
>
>I don't see them as being any different. Locking them up and throwing
>away the key is the same thing as destroying them. Taxpayer money being
>ill spent and the interests of the taxpayers not being primary.
Some things are kept around due to the chance they may be needed in a
war. Old tents and other military items are an example of this. There
is a reason the brits dumped tons of WWII era webbing. They expected
to have to use them in the 70s or 80s if the soviets ever came over
the wall. Issue the old webbing, 9mm ammo and stens to everything
that moved. It would have been basic, but it's better than waiting on
some plant to turn out modern nylon stuff.
If there is a warehouse somewhere with 10,000 Saratoga suits right
now after the gulf war lessons we learned with chem warfare, then its
good. Last time around, we didn't have that stuff stockpiled and the
companies that made the chem gear had no chance of filling the orders
that were submitted.
>
>This is, of course, logical. But the main reason why it is sitting
>around is because too much of it was purchased in the first place. The
>"future use" tagline is an excuse in many cases to justify the over
>expendature.
It was probably not enough purchased back in the Cold War days.
Remember, the 80s aren't too far back. Some of those items that were
stockpiled were expected to be used if the balloons went up.
>Again... my main point is to not think that some conservative politicians
>will make this problem go away. They are as much responsible, perhaps
>even more responsible, for these kinds of wasteful and counter productive
>(from a taxpayer standpoint) decisions than the moderate and liberals.
> This of course is not good, but that is apparently the way things work.
But things can be changed. Of course, if noone really cares enough to
do so, then it won't be changed.
So, anyone want to actually do something and propose some legislation
to a set of congress critters?
Save money, protect the environment, benefit schools, make crusty
conservatives happy and make some liberal smile. How bad a law can
that be if they do pass it?
-- -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- - Ryan Montieth Gill '01 Honda Insight - - rmgill@SPAmindspring.com '85 CB700S - - ryan.gill@SPAMturner.com '76 Chevy Monte Carlo - - www.mindspring.com/~rmgill '72 Honda CB750 - - '60 Daimler FV701H Mk2/3 - - '42 Daimler Scout Car Mk II - - I speak not for CNN, nor they for me - ---------------------------------------------------------------- - Smart ID cards in the US, Smart ID cards in Hong Kong, - - what is the difference? - ---------------------------------------------------------------- - C&R-FFL / Protect your electronic rights! \ EFF-ACLU - - SAF & NRA/ Join the EFF! http://www.eff.org/ \ DoD #0780 - ----------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Aug 16 2002 - 11:22:56 PDT