Snow; to be removed
You’re out for a great meal at your local hamburger joint, and the cook offers up the plate with the aside that the meat is not quite cooked, due to a need to save on fuel costs. You’ve been shopping for an umbrella, and the clerk brings to your attention that one of the panels is not covered, because of the need to save on materials. You’ve just purchased a “bus book” but the publisher has included an insert that says three chapters are missing, to save on printing and paper costs.
Not exactly ready for this world, any of the above scenarios, although the last hamburger I offered myself could have been a bit juicier. That’s why my reaction to this article extracted from my newspaper, where the snow plow operators have asked the goverment to reduce the amount of snow they have to displace struck me. Were they assuming the politicians had some control over the weather (I’m sure some of those who sit in high office believe they do)? Were they offering to leave more snow cover for some deep-seated environmental reason, such as a desire to increase the albedo of our troubled planet? Not likely; the reasoning is that their profit margin is dropping, and they figure by offering less effort for the same contracted dollar value that life will improve. Yes, Mr. Snow Man, it will; but only for you.
I walk those snow covered streets, and when I can’t see the pavement, I’ve either lost my way or I’m doomed to a fall on a patch of (concealed) black ice. My aged bones can’t handle it. If you (the private sector operators) want a significant portion of the snow removal budget (estimated to be as high as 80% in some jurisdictions), then all the snow belongs to you. Take it; store it, sell it, send it to the third world. Your job is to clear the street. Forget the dumb idea that the rest of us owe you more money. Besides, the recording and film industries already have that base covered.
