Rusted Sky

Either the History Channel or the Discovery Channel had a show about a month ago on recycling - that is, on the use made of recycled stuff, and the process of making it reuseable. The financial end of it was not mentioned, but I had no idea of the extent of the commercialization of recycling.

This is one of those things where governmental support initially is probably a good thing, but after a trial period the idea of letting it be solely a commercial venture is probably the way to go. I agree that the marketplace is the best arbiter of viability...

This is feel-good environmentalism and it is what remains of the 1960's chant of "if it feels good, do it."

Consequences don't matter, results don't matter, all that really matters is that you are doing something about a commonly perceived problem that makes you and your friends feel good about yourselves. The idea that what you and all your friends are doing may actually be making the problem worse must never be allowed to be spoken on pain of pain.

otpu

However, some forms of recycling do work and do make good economic sense.

Existing systems for recycling iron and steel, aluminum, and water come immediately to mind. These are all commodities that are either in short supply or are difficult to isolate from natural sources.

Recycling centers, junk yards for the metals and sewage treatment plants for water, for these useful commodities are inevitably large, ugly, smelly operations that suffer greatly from NIMBY opposition. Licensing fees and the cost of hiring lawyers to file the paperwork required to build a new one and to answer court challenges make the cost of new centers economically prohibitive.

It's almost as if trying to recycle something that actually makes economic sense to recycle is prima faciae cause for caring ecologically minded persons to oppose it.

otpu

>>It's almost as if trying to recycle something that actually makes economic sense to recycle is prima faciae cause for caring ecologically minded persons to oppose it.>>

Purity of motive required? Sort of like the idea that the US isn't allowed to do anything "good" if it happens to benefit us - just if we get no benefit. Military action in Kosovo = good...Military action in Iraq = bad.

"the idea that the US isn't allowed to do anything "good" if it happens to benefit us"

And why politicos (I'm thinking here of Hillary, there may be others) rail against profits made by oil companies but never profits by movie studios, or Starbucks, or...anything we don't need to survive.

They want to socialize medicine and oil (either by directly running it or by taxing it into oblivion) but not entertainment or luxuries.

So...you can charge six dollars for fifty cents' worth of coffee and you're a clever businessman, but charge 3.00 for gasoline that cost 2.50 to bring to retail and you're evil incarnate.

Gee, why do leftists think this way? As the saying goes, hold them by the short and curlies, and their hearts and minds will follow.

One thing everyone needs to remember, when talking about record-breaking prices, profits, etc., is inflation. It is almost as if Liberals are unaware of it (not completely, as when the stock market surpassed its previous record from before the Tech stock crash, Liberals said it wasn't "really" a new record, because of inflation). When someone complains about record prices, find a Constant Dollar Calculator and cast all the relevant prices in Year 2000 dollars. If you go by constant dollars, gas was most expensive in 1981. Of COURSE companies are taking in record profits, because of inflation and a weak dollar; but what is it in constant dollars? I am willing to bet that their actual profits are about the same as last year, and the year before, and so on. Always remember; when someone complains that something is the highest price it has ever been, that is almost certainly right, but IS IT IN CONSTANT DOLLARS?

John C. said:

Always remember; when someone complains that something is the highest price it has ever been, that is almost certainly right, but IS IT IN CONSTANT DOLLARS?

I like the economic yardstick Heinlein said he always fell back on to compare the real cost of living in the countries he visited; how many minutes does a local journeyman electrician have to work to earn enough to buy a loaf of the local bread.

If you substitute carpenter for electrician you can use this kind of comparison for economies widely separated in time as well as geographically or ideologically.

My own history goes as follows:

My father took a job as a master diesel mechanic for the City of Columbus Ga's Transit Authority when he got out of the Army after WWII. His salary was significantly higher than a journeyman carpenter would have been but I’ll use him as my baseline.

My dad’s base salary for his first post WWII job was never more than $2.00 an hour. It wasn't until 1959 when his father died and he took a job as lead mechanic for a paper mill that was being built near his home town in Alabama that he made more than $2.50 an hour.

In 1959 gas ranged from about 25 to 30 cents a gallon and a new Ford Fairlane could be bought for less than $2,500, a Chevrolet Impalla was about $2,750, and a top of the line Cadillac El Dorado could be had for less than $4,200 dollars.

for Dad those figures worked out to be:

item Price Minutes worked at $2.50 per hour
Loaf of Bread $0.20 less than 5

Gas per gal. $0.25 6

Ford Fairlane $2500 60,000

Chev. Impalla $2750 66,000

Cad. El Dorado $4200 100,800

My first Transistor
Radio bought
for me as a
Xmas present in
1961 $45 1,080

Prices from
http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1959.html
http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/50scars.html

Now a comparison question for Jerry; How much did The remote spy camera car you got for the Little Guy for Xmas cost you in minutes worked?

Otpu

Hmmm. Well, we didn't get it - Carol and Mike did. Mike's pretty high up in the GE food chain, I'd estimate that it was less than 120 minutes for him.

It would have been roughly 300-360 for me.

We will not go into the massive difference in capabilities between electronics then and now... Back in 1961 they (read 'the government') might have been able to field a remote-controlled car with a video camera and transmitter in it - but you can bet it wouldn't have been affordable to civilians.

"Things are getting better all the time..."

J.

I use the BLS CPI calculator and it has proven extremely useful in getting the relative costs figured out. What isn't put into the hours of labor calculation is the advances not only in technology but improved technique. Ergonomics is changing the way manual labor is looked at and offering ways that one's physical life span can be improved while minimizing on the job labor problems. Thus even electricians, plumbers and such see improvements in time and quality of work as those things advance. A truck driver still has many long miles to go and that does take time... but the distribution system has changed enormously from the 1930's, so that time in transit has been minimized due to the use of interstates and a combined rail/road network with port facilities added in. Time in transit of a 747 from NY to Heathrow is almost exactly the same from 1972 to now, but the automation in the cockpit has lowered crew size and actual flying necessary to get from a to b.

My father, to get a degree in electrical engineering, looked at my first semester course load and took out my calculus book... a weighty tome. He took out his two volume set and then went to chapter 3 and marked out where his books *stopped* and realized I was going on to chapter 5 and would be at 11 after two semesters. And me just wanting to be a poor geologist! The time spent in learning a trade is also learning a more *complex* trade now than it was in the 1930's. In talking with my Uncle Joe, I learned all about trucks with nearly no suspensions, transmissions that were cranky at best, limited heating in NY State winters, no interstates and 'truckers thumbs' where they would be broken due to the limited suspension and how one held the steering wheel.

Want to see technical advancement? Watch 'Dirty Jobs' on the Discovery Channel... the jobs are still dirty, but you can easily see that they could be much, much worse than they are. Save for that sewer diver, of course... that wasn't a job 30 years ago....

Yes, things could be much worse. Sewer diver... um. No, I think I'd pass that one up myself...

J.