Deseret News | Stimulus to help remove Moab tailings

Reader comments
Stimulus to help remove Moab tailings

Oh Please | 2:34 p.m. March 31, 2009

Oh, No! Socialism! They're using my hard-earned tax dollars to do what? Clean up our environment? How dare they use my money for that! I want my money used to blow up camels in the Middle East!!!! It's Socialism, I tell you!

soakblue | 2:34 p.m. March 31, 2009

This should have been done 20 years ago.

THE | 3:09 p.m. March 31, 2009

enviroment takes a back seat.WE MUST MAKE PROFIT,PROFIT,PROFIT AND MORE PROFIT.

Comments continue below

Re: Oh Please | 3:14 p.m. March 31, 2009

You're the man! (or the woman) Nicely spoken.

Anonymous | 3:17 p.m. March 31, 2009

Let us take a moment to see how great business works. The business is mining. Those who took the money aren't paying the real cost of their business. They got the gold, and we taxpayer get the shaft again. Whose has an entitlement worldview? American's wealthy feel entitled to welfare. Under the mining law of 1872 Atlas paid nothing back in royalties.

Notice how Utahans decry government spending while Utah wallows in federal welfare.

What are you talikng about? | 3:24 p.m. March 31, 2009

Hey "oh please," That's not socialism, but there's no way you can argue that the Obama administration isn't moving in that direction, with socialized health care, "spreading the wealth" and making sure big businesses don't make too much money. Can you imagine if the government wanted to tax your bonus regardless of the contract you had with your business because they thought it was "too much?" There's another country that does all of the above. A little place called Cuba.

It's time | 4:22 p.m. March 31, 2009

Regardless of what you all say it is time the tailings were moved. I'm grateful they are now on a faster track to be moved away from the river and Moab. On this topic I really don't care about the politics. I'm just glad things are finally in motion.

Nuclear subsidies | 4:38 p.m. March 31, 2009

Here is more evidence that nuclear power just doesn't work -- why isn't the nuclear power industry cleaning up its own mess here in Moab?

Re: What are you talking about? | 4:45 p.m. March 31, 2009

Have you lived in Cuba? How do you know that life in Cuba for the majority of Cubans isn't better than life in American for the majority of Americans? I don't pretend to know the answer because there is no way either of us can know that, unless we lived in Cuba. But I do know that in America 90% of the wealth is spread out to only 5% of the American population. You shouldn't make culturally ignorant statements.

It's a crock! | 4:46 p.m. March 31, 2009

That stuff isn't hurting a damn thing! All this spending money is to give some loser a job!

Patrick Gibbs | 5:18 p.m. March 31, 2009

To the person who started their heading with "oh, please": I'm sorry if you have a problem with tax dollars being used to help people instead of maintaining illegal and immoral prison facilities where the uncharged detainess are tortured, or pumping billions into a war that beenfits no one aside from the shareholders of Halibutron oil, but personally, I don't subrscribe to the mentality that says "Hitler may have had his problems, but F.D.R - he was a BAD man."

Pet Project? | 5:31 p.m. March 31, 2009

Instead of using this stimulus money to fix the economy. Obama is using it for pet project. That is wrong. It is dishonest. If they are trying to revive the economy, use the stimulus money in the best ways to do that. If you want to clean up tailings go before the people and ask for money to clean up tailings. I am not against cleaning it up, and it does create some jobs, but is it really to best place to put the stimulus money? I may be, but I haven't heard that argument yet. To me it looks like an old bait and switch scheme which in the private sector is illegal.

J DUB | 5:40 p.m. March 31, 2009

You Utah dummies are dense. Can't you read the sarcastic tone from "Oh Please"? Oh my heck, get a fetchin clue, U-tards!

Re: J DUB | 8:46 p.m. March 31, 2009

I worked in the environmental clean-up industry for several years. This is a multi billion dollar industry. If you don't believe it...you need to re-evaluate who's head is in the sand. Companies are paid to cleanup these messes with little to no investiment except to win the contracts. The goverment pays the rest. Easy money. Bonuses for the execs that help win the contract and more money for these multibillion dollar companies to invest in funding environmental activisim to promote more goverment spending and creation of foolish "environmental" laws that do nothing but reward the lawers and strap the rest of us who realy do care about the environment.

uritaata | 8:51 p.m. March 31, 2009

Finally we will get rid of that nasty thing. The aggregate spending to do it should create a sunstantial amount of work and hopefully we can put the place to better productive use.
When profitability is the only vehicle that drives business, environmental issues are always seen as a an unnecessary short term cost adder. Ultimately, the society has to pay for it either in term of increase polution or cleaning or both.
The policy of ultimate productivity and the politics of environmenal laissez faire for our business has to stop.

Move It | 4:40 a.m. April 1, 2009

where. Are you thinking of sending it to another country? I thought Hatch and Matheson didn't want any waste in Utah. As for leaching the stuff into the Colorado River. You people are being duped. Where do you think this stuff comes from. You can take a T-probe, check the radiation count in this pile of dirt, and I can find you a matching count in several locations that are protruding into Lake Powell or the Colorado River. Obama once again will have to find a way to fine Mother Nature or come up with the money for our illustrious congressmen to clean up after her. I and CROCK man above are the only ones seeing through this scam. Granted this thing is an eye sore to our area but get real. This is job creation without production. In order to pay back the trillions we have to have permanent production. Farming for use and demand. Mining for use and demand etc.. There is no demand for this stuff. This is non productive spending. Like the walking trails they plan to build in Albuquerque. Just spend money and when the trails are built lay everyone off.

Business mess | 5:40 a.m. April 1, 2009

This is just another example of an industry creating a mess and leaving it for government to clean up. For all the folks above claiming socialism, this is really corporate welfare -- whose profiting from this? The nuclear power industry! They left the tailings, and then they expect government to clean it up. For anyone who believes nukes are cheap, here's proof that government picks up the tab. That's why we don't want nuke waste in Utah -- when the nuke industry goes bankrupt and Energy Solutions fails, the rural communities and state of Utah will be left paying for the nuke waste security from that point on. Look how long it has taken for some government entity to finally clean up one industry's environmental mess left in Utah!

Nan BW | 6:52 a.m. April 1, 2009

More than ten years ago the Utah Radiation board discussed options for handling the tailings (which haven't been proven to be a signigigant threat). One option would have been for the tailings to be reprocessed at a nearby plant, which would have been a paying option (there is still uranium in them, after all). That didn't happen so now we all get to pay for it, when as others have said, those making the money in the first place should have paid for it. For all to long, all of us have been too lazy to be enough involved to have more impact on decisions be made by our political leaders. It will supply jobs, but I don't like paying the bill for previous negligence. However, I've gotten lazy too, I don't spend large hunks of time being involved in the legislative process so my tax dollars will be used for displeasing things.

Colorado River | 8:48 a.m. April 1, 2009

Considering the river passes through a number of states, seems like the right thing to do with federal funds.

Tom | 8:58 a.m. April 1, 2009

All it took was to kick the Repugs out of office to get things done. It's all about priorities. Repugs are all about giving tax breaks to the very wealthy and big corporations, greed, all about giving big contracts to arms manufacturers, companies like Haliburton, and all about starting wars for profit. Dems are all about cleaning up the Repug mess, creating jobs, giving people a better life in the short time they have.

Hatuletoh | 9:17 a.m. April 1, 2009

I think we should decline the money to maintain consistency. Utahans don't like the federal government messing with our affairs.

re: Hatuletoh | 10:02 a.m. April 1, 2009

I think we should move all of this stuff to Hatuletoh's backyard since he's obviously the type who doesn't have a problem with this type of stuff as long as it's in someone else's backyard.

Mick Dundee | 12:22 p.m. April 1, 2009

All you environmental wackos. These tailin's don't hurt no one. It's all a liberal fear factory.

hey nut heads | 4:47 p.m. April 1, 2009

90% of the wealth is owened by 5% of the population because they usually earned it. If this was not the case then 90% of us would be worse off because we depend on the wealthy for jobs, innovations, entreprenuership, research and development, etc. If you and I could do all of that on our own than we would be part of the 5%. But since you or I don't have any of that to offer we aren't part of the 5%. However, I am greatful for the 5% because they have made me wealthier than 99% of the world. If you socialist can't pull your head out and think common sense at least be grateful for what you have. Or maybe you don't have much because you don't have anything to offer an employer. And that would be your own fault.

Jason | 9:13 a.m. May 8, 2009

Mick, you need to do research before speaking.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.