Pick up our recycle bins
Like good little citizens, the folks of Rhawnhurst put out their trash and recycle bins Friday, June 5, only to discover that the city didn’t pick up the recycle bins. Was there a holiday we didn’t know about? Fleet of trucks broke down? Nope, the city decided that if you have a plastic bag in the bin, they won’t pick it up.
Did they tell anyone about their new plan? Nope. People called to ask why it wasn’t taken and found out about it. Thank you, City Hall, for calling like a telemarketer during this election season, but not being bothered to let the people you work for know that you came up with some new rule.
Maybe we the people of Philly should change some of the rules also. How about we demand that the city get rid of the free cars and gas elected officials get to drive instead of their own cars to and from work? How about if we the people demand no more elected officials allowed on DROP with no sneaking a grandfather clause in there to stay on it since it was meant for actual city workers and not line government official’s pockets before they “retire” for one day and back to work the next at a different city job? The savings there alone would take a big bite from the school deficit. I’m sure you elected folk have even more perks that could be trimmed.
Hezakiah Levinson
Rhawnhurst
Losing Neilson will hurt
Northeast Philadelphia was the big loser on Election Day and we can only look in the mirror and blame ourselves. With the defeat of Councilman Ed Neilson (a Northeast resident), we lose a powerful voice in council.
While Neilson was in council for only a short period of time, his departure will mean only Brian O’Neill, Bob Henon and Dennis O’Brien will remain from the heart of the Northeast.
Also, veteran councilwoman Marian Tasco is retiring.
In November, Northeast resident Al Taubenberger will try to capture a seat with a couple of others.
When we don’t vote, we can only blame ourselves. More Northeast residents means better service.
Myles Gordon
Philadelphia Taxpayers Association
Global warming has grave implications
Albert Einstein, a non-believer in God in the traditional sense, would say that science deals with the “what” and “how” of the universe based on evidence, while religion seeks to explain how to live; the “why” of values, morals and meanings.
Religion and science are complementary. They are not in opposition. Einstein noted in his famous comment, “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”
Pope Francis recently released an encyclical (authoritive letter) warning of the tragic effects caused by environmental damage. He noted, citing “very solid scientific consensus,” that global warming has grave implications. Senator Inhofe (R, Okla.), chairman of the Environmental Committee, said that global warming alarmists would press for policies that would lead to tax increases.
A Pew Research survey found that the percentage of opinions on these matters of all Catholics and the general public were almost identical. While only 24 percent of those who identified as Republicans agreed with the pope’s comments, 64 percent of Democrats did so on global warming.
Our food supply depends on bees pollinating crops but bees are dying off in record numbers as land that supported wildflowers is being used for other purposes. Toxic pesticides are also being blamed.
The Amazon rainforest, which produces about 20 percent of the earth’s oxygen, is being deforested and burned for ranches, logging and mining purposes. Scientists fear that it may disappear within 50 years. We cannot eat money, drink wood or breathe minerals.
Climate change is just the tip of the iceberg. We pollute the air, foul the waters, poison the ground in the name of progress. Native American wisdom tells us that we do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
Mel Flitter
Somerton
