So what is being proposed?
Do the same thing to HH.
Consider that right now, HH is preserved, like in a deep freeze, or a time capsule. Nothing bad is happening, and it will be essentially the same, whether recovered in 2 year, or 2 thousand.
So why now?
The attitude is:
Because I want what I want! I want it for ME, NOW.
I don't care if it is protected for future generations, if I can get it for myself, now! Especially if I can get someone else to pay for it.
Talk about interesting perspectives. What is being proposed? "To do the same thing to HH?" Where is that being proposed? Nowhere. That is not part of the proposition or any other proposal. The attitude is "For me, now?" Really? Who has expressed that attitude? Again, no one, nowhere: it is a complete fabrication. I find especially interesting the assumption about "get[ting} someone else to pay for it". This is a San Francisco proposal being brought in San Francisco proposing to San Francisco voters that San Francisco pay for a plan. Who is the someone else, exactly?
In fact if HH reverts to the standard that applies to the entire rest of the NP system, the attitude being promoted here is quite the opposite of "Me, now": it is rather "For everyone, always". Sure, I recognize a young ideologue talking: guy by the name of John Muir.
