ElectionsVote

First of all, the moon is history. NASA has already brought man to the moon, remember – if you can remember. In fact, the last time NASA brought man to the moon was in 1972, when it planted Alan Shepard there and with the light gravity around him he went on record for hitting the longest golf drive ever hit.

So the next logical place for NASA to spend all our money that we do not have would be on Mars.  But let’s stop and ponder for a moment.  Where else can we plant people in outer space now?  They would burn alive in on Mercury and Venus.   And on the gaseous Jovian planets of Jupiter, Neptune and Uranus, they could drown into the gas surfaces in a way that would be worse than going into quicksand.

So Mars looks like about like the only place you can put people that you would want as far as possible away from you.

I would like to propose that we send the people who telemarketers to Mars.

Because I understand that NASA is having a little trouble finding people uniquely qualified to make this historic journey. I believe the people who telemarket to me are thus uniquely qualified.  The problem that NASA has today is finding people to go to Mars who will stay determined to return, in spite of a multitude of Apollo 13-like problems they are likely to have in outer space. 

Well, to be sure, the telemarketers who work on me don’t exactly sound like astronaut Jim Lovell over the phone – in fact, they seem to always have heavy accents.  But I do know that in spite of all the bad names I throw at them, my telemarketers have a determination to return again and again.  I am sure they would be just as determined to return to earth when it is time.

I am thinking also that Mars would need telemarketers.  In any case, we know how that we do not need telemarketers around us, so by the logic of default they would be needed more on Mars.  They could  feel more wanted there.  That is for sure.

Basically, I am using the logic here that some people who are calling themselves environmentalists are using to try to call the shots on what to do with the garbage of the Santa Clarita Valley.

It seems that local landfills have lost their appeal for a lot of these people.  So they are picking on local landfills as (a) major pollutants or (b) potential major pollutants.  Actually, for political reasons, (a) and (b) are the same thing.

I am beginning to think I may understand the problem. The problem really is that outside of the mental health wards of our hospitals, there is really no such thing as an anti-environmentalist.  An anti-environmentalist– someone who actively works to destroy our environment for the sake of destroying it – will in realty not be allowed by our justice system to go beyond his first act of destruction.

That means that there are a lot of us who are environmentalists – more than we ever say when we talk about the subject.  By the same token, there are so many environmentalists that naturally there is going to be some diversity among us.  So there are some environmentalists who want to be sure there are some good local landfills that will in the most high tech way put all of our garbage into the most efficient recycling structure. A handy example of this would be the Chiquita Canyon Landfill which has been in the news recently over this issue in the Santa Clarita Valley area.

I know that the phrase “free enterprise” makes one particular faction of environmentalists nervous, but it is precisely the basic premise of free enterprise that best serves the public.  That premise is that the Chiquita Canyon Landfill will cease to exist the year it stops serving the public. But this is true of any enterprise in a free market system.  One obvious example of this obligation to service is the way that the Chiquita Canyon Landfill captures the methane of the waste it collects and uses the captured gas to generate electricity for Santa Clarita Valley homes.

And yet, and yet – there also other environmentalists who feel that any reference to a “good local landfill” is an oxymoron because – they say – no local landfill is good for their community,

So, their solution is to send their garbage to someone else’s community.

As I think about this argument, I am worried my idea about sending all my telemarketers to Mars is not a solid one.

Because really Mars does not deserve my telemarketers, any more than any other community in America would deserve the garbage of Santa Clarita.

Chris Sharp- Commentary

Chris Sharp is an Educator and a prize-winning professional writer. He has recently published a new book titled How to Like a Human Being . Sharp's latest book is an Amazon Kindle collection of his published short stories, Every Kind of Angel . His commentaries represent his own opinions and not necessarily the views of any organization he may be affiliated with or those of The SCV Beacon.