Shovel Ready in San Fran: $205,075 to ‘Translocate’ One Shrub from Path of Stimulus Project

Originally posted by links234
ABC news broke this story when it happened...where was your outrage then?

Protected plant may delay Doyle Drive project - November 18, 2009

Well for some reason ABC News failed to mention that moving it cost approx $200,000 in that article. Go figure. I wonder why they'd do that?

Its not that they moved a shrub. Its that they spent $200,000 to do it. Which the ABC article makes no mention of.

reply to post by neo96


Oh the company raked in a massive profit no doubt, but I'm positive they used Mexicans that only made a few bucks off the deal.

reply to post by Rockpuck


I was expecting to get flame for how racist that post was but after all illegals have a "right to work" here.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Rockpuck

 

I was expecting to get flame for how racist that post was but after all illegals have a "right to work" here.

I think if you get flamed, they will tell you that they have a 'right to work' and are 'exploited'.... Probably in the same sentence.

reply to post by Frogs


It's amazing how things cost money, even more amazing when things done right cost a lot of money. Sure, you all gladly volunteer to take half that amount and do the same job...but you probably can't. You don't have the equipment, you might not have the training, you don't know where to send it, you don't know how to take care of it.

Things cost money. $3.1 trillion was spent in 2009, this cost was 0.000007% of that. God forbid this money was already allocated to the department of transportation...or if this was funded by the state of California, oh, but the stimulus contributed some amount to it so it's all Obama's fault.

Nevermind they planned on some environmental concerns by setting aside $25.6 million for environmental support

The money was already spent, but who cares? It was spent, that's the problem, right?

Find something a little more worthwhile to complain about, please.

reply to post by links234

The money was already spent, but who cares? It was spent, that's the problem, right?

That's right.

Take a look at deficit spending and the national debt. Many believe that the way the government spends money is a problem.

ETA: The way that this was done was not right. What makes it wrong is spending $200,000 plus to move a shrub.

reply to post by xuenchen


Blame it on the Bush!

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by Frogs

 

It's amazing how things cost money, even more amazing when things done right cost a lot of money. Sure, you all gladly volunteer to take half that amount and do the same job...but you probably can't. You don't have the equipment, you might not have the training, you don't know where to send it, you don't know how to take care of it.

Things cost money. $3.1 trillion was spent in 2009, this cost was 0.000007% of that. God forbid this money was already allocated to the department of transportation...or if this was funded by the state of California, oh, but the stimulus contributed some amount to it so it's all Obama's fault.

Nevermind they planned on some environmental concerns by setting aside $25.6 million for environmental support

The money was already spent, but who cares? It was spent, that's the problem, right?

Find something a little more worthwhile to complain about, please.

I am quite certain that if you were about to do some gardening in your backyard, and some tree-hugger came along and told you that you could not till until a rare dandelion from your patch was relocated - at a cost to you- of $200,000 you would suddenly change your tune.

The problem is that the public purse is so large, and we are so conditioned to wasteful spending....that we forget it is actually our money they are spending (or borrowing, to spend).

Originally posted by Rockpuck
This is a perfect example of why I despise Progressive Liberals.

Hey, don't blame the liberals for the massive corruption spread throughout your government.

If anyone thinks this is not covering massive corruption you are deluded.

You need to find the person who signed off on this payment, and find out where every $ of that money went. I'm betting you'd uncover someone lining their own pockets, and probably on more than one occasion too.

This is not some "liberal" thing, this is a corruption thing, and both sides of the political coin have been guilty of it for decades.

I don't know what the line was from a great movie, but it was something like "you don't think they really spend $3000 on a toilet seat, $6000 on a hammer, do you?"

After going through some of the replies it occurred to me that this cost may not have even been from the tax-payers, as a quarter of this billion dollar project was funded from private sources. It was a government job so a lot of people still got riled up about the cost of this one action, even if the taxpayers didn't fund the full cost of relocation.

Originally posted by mobiusmale

I am quite certain that if you were about to do some gardening in your backyard, and some tree-hugger came along and told you that you could not till until a rare dandelion from your patch was relocated - at a cost to you- of $200,000 you would suddenly change your tune.

The problem is that the public purse is so large, and we are so conditioned to wasteful spending....that we forget it is actually our money they are spending (or borrowing, to spend).

They weren't tree huggers, they were ecologists.

The whole story is misleading, it isn't a plant you can just buy anywhere.

The alternative to what they did would have been far more costly in order to comply with the law. It would have delayed the project, resulted in a re-design, or stopped the project altogether. So who/what is really to blame? Our economic system, and the ridiculous cost of resources due to the need to make profit. Yes capitalism again is the root of all of our economic problems, large and small.

You folks are too obsessed about money. Money is an illusion, and if we really wanted to we could dispose of money altogether and create a needs based economy, as apposed to a greed based economy.

You folks would destroy everything to save "money". Money IS something that can be replaced. Once nature is destroyed, we cannot print a new one. We cannot survive without nature and we are slowly destroying it all as we spread our concrete around the planet, and wipe out ecosystems simply for someone to make profit.

Well,

Let's prove that private companies paid for the "bush debacle" .....

please fill in some info:

it could be possible I suppose.

reply to post by xuenchen


Whether it is 'private' or 'public' money, it all comes from the same place, exploitation of labour.

Profits and taxes, both paid by the wage earner, to someone else.

Reply to post by ANOK

We're too obsessed with money?

There's only one group out there that sends armed paramilitary troops to kick in doors and drag you out of your bed in the middle of the night kicking and screaming for money and it isnt any of us.

It's the fools who dropped $200K to move a bush.

It's not the money that bothers me. I understand it's all imaginary. It's the violent coercion used to collect the money that bothers me. There's nothing imaginary about being kicked out of your home, having your possessions confiscated and being locked in a cell for 10 to 20.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by xuenchen

 

Whether it is 'private' or 'public' money, it all comes from the same place, exploitation of labour.

Profits and taxes, both paid by the wage earner, to someone else.

edit on 4/15/2012 by ANOK because: it's a commie takeover Harry

You stumped me again.

I will ponder the idea.

While I dwell on that however,

maybe you could explain how that would have happened in the case of the bush.

Assume there was no corruption or graft involved.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Reply to post by ANOK

 

We're too obsessed with money?

Yes people bitching about the cost of this are obsessed with the concept of money and it's illusionary importance.

There's only one group out there that sends armed paramilitary troops to kick in doors and drag you out of your bed in the middle of the night kicking and screaming for money and it isnt any of us.

It's the fools who dropped $200K to move a bush.

It's not the money that bothers me. I understand it's all imaginary. It's the violent coercion used to collect the money that bothers me. There's nothing imaginary about being kicked out of your home, having your possessions confiscated and being locked in a cell for 10 to 20.

But what has that got to do with my post? I agree, money is a tool of control, an IOU used to violently control. An IOU used to keep those at the top at the top, and those at the bottom at the bottom. No, the acts carried out on its behalf are not an illusion, the concept of the need for money is an illusion. We don't have it because we need it, we have it because a minority want to control the majority, in order for them to monopolize the means of production to make profit for themselves by exploiting the rest of us, and they want to maintain that position.

Poverty is a lack of resources, not a lack of money. They have us trapped in this concept of money and profit, an illusion simply for control.

Here's what you do.

Kill the bush!

Then since all that money won't need to be used, demand it's given back to the taxpayers.

It would just take a lil RoundUp.