18 June—To celebrate Juneteenth, let’s talk trash. Juneteenth? But that’s not until tomorrow, you’re thinking. And you wouldn’t be wrong. Because tomorrow will indeed be June Nineteenth. That makes today June Eighteenth. And it’s absolutely certain that yesterday was June Seventeenth. And so on, all the way back to last Thursday, which was June Thirteenth.

And don’t forget about Junerst (June First and Twenty-First), Junend (June Second and Twenty-Second), Junerd (June Third and Twenty-Third), and Juneth (June Sixth and all the ones that aren’t Juneteenth, Junerst, Junend, or Junerd). Are they all there?

Back to trash, then, we find ourselves in Woodbury, idyllic Litchfield’s bustling neighbor to the south, whose ever-thoughtful Board of Selectmen has mandated a “pay as you throw” garbage program to begin next month. It requires residents to buy 33-gallon so-called contractor bags at $1.67 apiece to dispose of their domestic refuse at the town’s transfer station. If they don’t toss it in vacant lots, that is, or bury it, or dump it in the Town Hall parking lot or on selectmen’s lawns. (If they should choose one of those means of disposal, they’d best make sure there’s no way to identify the source.)

Getting past the totally unnecessary and counterproductive decline of garbage dumps (strategically euphemized as sanitary landfills in most places) and Connecticut’s particularly onerous trash problem (especially in the state Capitol), we must consider the fairness of pay as you throw.

In simple terms, it’s fair. Surprised? When you seriously think about it, it’s the only fair way to deal with garbage disposal. Pay only for the service you use or receive and only in the proportion you use or receive it. What could be fairer?

It’s so fair and such a great idea, in fact, the concept and practice of “pay as you use” should be extended to other—make that all—areas of government. At the municipal level, for instance, why should a property owner have to pay taxes based on the value of his property rather than the services he actually uses or receives? That’s not fair at all. We’re not living in Utopia.

A person who pays $20,000 in property tax, for instance, and doesn’t send his kids (if he even has any) to local public schools is screwed, while a person who pays $3,000 in property tax and sends six kids to the local public schools makes out like a bandit. And that’s leaving special ed out of the equation.

And that’s only the start. Why pay for police or fire departments if you don’t use them? Wouldn’t it be fairer for them to charge customers per call? And before you bring in the security value of fire and police coverage, consider that it’s a kind of insurance and that people can usually choose whether to have it and whom to have it with. On the other hand, cops and firefighters paid on a per-call basis would without doubt make gratuitous calls just to enhance their income.

Fairness is relative and in the eye of the beholder. Things we have no choice about—like taxes and taxes masquerading as fees—may seem fair to some but not to others. But what can we do about it?

Bitch . . .