I'm sure SKFM is happy whether people are attacking him, insulting him, berating him, defending him, telling people to ignore him, whistling at him, greeting him, giving him pie, or calmly debating him. Just so long as it's about him, he's easy. Him him him. I'm sure my comment here makes him feel better slightly.
Lets talk about recycling and not him!
I'm quite lucky in that I am forced to recycle by my government, and it's been an educational experience. Where I used to live I could just do whatever, but now I have to separate my rubbish into Burnable, unburnable, plastics, paper, glass, cans, plastic bottles and a few other minor categories. Plus larger items have to get specially picked up. But we get each type picked up once or twice a week, so it's not particularly different once you get used to it. I've learned a lot, my habits have improved, and I am much more aware of what I do.
How do you feel about compulsory vs voluntary recycling? I'm in favour of compulsory, since it also puts a burden on government to provide facilities for it.
I figure I could take a bear.
+1
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
I'm sure SKFM is happy whether people are attacking him, insulting him, berating him, defending him, telling people to ignore him, whistling at him, greeting him, giving him pie, or calmly debating him. Just so long as it's about him, he's easy. Him him him. I'm sure my comment here makes him feel better slightly.
Lets talk about recycling and not him!
I'm quite lucky in that I am forced to recycle by my government, and it's been an educational experience. Where I used to live I could just do whatever, but now I have to separate my rubbish into Burnable, unburnable, plastics, paper, glass, cans, plastic bottles and a few other minor categories. Plus larger items have to get specially picked up. But we get each type picked up once or twice a week, so it's not particularly different once you get used to it. I've learned a lot, my habits have improved, and I am much more aware of what I do.
How do you feel about compulsory vs voluntary recycling? I'm in favour of compulsory, since it also puts a burden on government to provide facilities for it.
I think anything that gets people to recycle more is a good thing (to a reasonable extent, obviously I don't want a gestapo going around and breaking into people's homes).
At my student housing in Edinburgh we had a really useless bucket in which to chuck all our recycling into, but in the spring they gave us different buckets for the different types and I found that way better.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Or just realize that he's not going to get mugged at a freaking Target.
Noone said a thing about being mugged at Target. This all started when I said that my local big box grocery store has its bottle drop in a separate, isolated area that has a separate entrance, and the only people u ever see when I pass it are the ones with shopping carts full of bottles and cans, a behavior I associate with the homeless. Being concerned about being in an isolated area like that with the likely homeless is a far cry from being scared of a mugging inside a target. . .
How many people get attacked there a year? Your local law enforcement agency should have the relevant statistics.
I'll wait.
It's not the likelihood of being attacked. It's not wanting to be in close quarters with someone who may be unbalanced and probably doesn't bathe regularly. When a homeless guy is laying down on the subway, everyone else crams into the other side of the car to stay away. And I'm supposed to be psyched about being alone with someone like that in a small, isolated enclosed space? Obviously not everyone who uses the drop off is homeless, and of those who are, not all will be unbalanced or smell, but having to devote time and effort and to take on a higher than normal risk of being subjected to this just to do so watching that should be handled by curbside pick up? Is it really so unreasonable to not be pleased with the situation?
SKFM, what's stopping you and a few dozen of your neighbors from finding your own contractor? I understand there was an all or nothing vote for one particular plan that was not passed, but would the home owner's association actively prevent it? Is there only one vendor in the area? Like, there are contractors that visit all the time for lawn service, no?
No clue how huge the community might be, and a certain number of participants obviously would be required. 100 accounts for one subdivision around here wouldn't necessarily account for a particularly large percentage of the community/under a given HOA. It would cost more of course, but have you looked into what is actually standing between you and recycling pick-up?
You could get your neighbor to recycle, and make your own life easier. Hell you'd probably even be doing something with a measurable net good, if it were to become popular.
Unfortunately, they would never let a truck through the gate, since our trash collection company has an exclusive contract.
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Or just realize that he's not going to get mugged at a freaking Target.
Noone said a thing about being mugged at Target. This all started when I said that my local big box grocery store has its bottle drop in a separate, isolated area that has a separate entrance, and the only people u ever see when I pass it are the ones with shopping carts full of bottles and cans, a behavior I associate with the homeless. Being concerned about being in an isolated area like that with the likely homeless is a far cry from being scared of a mugging inside a target. . .
How many people get attacked there a year? Your local law enforcement agency should have the relevant statistics.
I'll wait.
It's not the likelihood of being attacked. It's not wanting to be in close quarters with someone who may be unbalanced and probably doesn't bathe regularly. When a homeless guy is laying down on the subway, everyone else crams into the other side of the car to stay away. And I'm supposed to be psyched about being alone with someone like that in a small, isolated enclosed space? Obviously not everyone who uses the drop off is homeless, and of those who are, not all will be unbalanced or smell, but having to devote time and effort and to take on a higher than normal risk of being subjected to this just to do so watching that should be handled by curbside pick up? Is it really so unreasonable to not be pleased with the situation?
Yes.
Because unless you have reason to believe that you have "higher than usual risk" you're being irrational and silly and quite possibly a goose.
Guess what? Those scary gross homeless subhumans will probably peace the fuck out and wait for you to leave so that you won't bother them.
this thread made me wonder why my neighborhood didn't have recycling. So I called my county's curbside recycling program and asked them. They were under the impression that we had curbside and were shocked to discover we didn't.
bam. 400 homes will have blue bins in the next two weeks.
this thread made me wonder why my neighborhood didn't have recycling. So I called my county's curbside recycling program and asked them. They were under the impression that we had curbside and were shocked to discover we didn't.
bam. 400 homes will have blue bins in the next two weeks.
this thread made me wonder why my neighborhood didn't have recycling. So I called my county's curbside recycling program and asked them. They were under the impression that we had curbside and were shocked to discover we didn't.
bam. 400 homes will have blue bins in the next two weeks.
edit: good deed for the day = done
That's double-awesome!
I'm pretty happy about it. All I recycle currently is aluminum cans because the nearest recycle center is almost an hour away and I just can't afford the gas for that kind of round trip.
this thread made me wonder why my neighborhood didn't have recycling. So I called my county's curbside recycling program and asked them. They were under the impression that we had curbside and were shocked to discover we didn't.
bam. 400 homes will have blue bins in the next two weeks.
edit: good deed for the day = done
That's double-awesome!
I'm pretty happy about it. All I recycle currently is aluminum cans because the nearest recycle center is almost an hour away and I just can't afford the gas for that kind of round trip.
Great, now that someone is doing even more SKFM will have even more reason's to do less. I mean, his actions are a drop in the bucket compared to yours so he might as well not even try.
0
Options
spacekungfumanPoor and minority-filledRegistered User, __BANNED USERSregular
this thread made me wonder why my neighborhood didn't have recycling. So I called my county's curbside recycling program and asked them. They were under the impression that we had curbside and were shocked to discover we didn't.
bam. 400 homes will have blue bins in the next two weeks.
this thread made me wonder why my neighborhood didn't have recycling. So I called my county's curbside recycling program and asked them. They were under the impression that we had curbside and were shocked to discover we didn't.
bam. 400 homes will have blue bins in the next two weeks.
edit: good deed for the day = done
That's double-awesome!
I'm pretty happy about it. All I recycle currently is aluminum cans because the nearest recycle center is almost an hour away and I just can't afford the gas for that kind of round trip.
Great, now that someone is doing even more SKFM will have even more reason's to do less. I mean, his actions are a drop in the bucket compared to yours so he might as well not even try.
I'll throw two more cents into the bottle return bin and mention that I work in a grocery store and see obviously not-homeless people with a full cart or two of bottles and cans to get the deposits. Some people just build up giant stashes and redeem them once in a while instead of doing it every few weeks or every month. Or maybe they just had a big party.
this is probably a dumb question, but do you literally walk into the store with your empties (in such states that allow it), drop them off, and walk away with money?
edit: cause that's pretty boss if it's what happens
I'll throw two more cents into the bottle return bin and mention that I work in a grocery store and see obviously not-homeless people with a full cart or two of bottles and cans to get the deposits. Some people just build up giant stashes and redeem them once in a while instead of doing it every few weeks or every month. Or maybe they just had a big party.
We don't get paid for that, sadly, but we just don't have any other place to throw them away except special bins. When I was young and single and dumb I used to let them pile up on my balcony and then get them together to throw away. Now I am more organized.
this is probably a dumb question, but do you literally walk into the store with your empties (in such states that allow it), drop them off, and walk away with money?
edit: cause that's pretty boss if it's what happens
Well, if it's an automated system you have to insert them into the machine one at a time and take a ticket to customer service for the deposits to get back. If it's not automated then you have to get your individual bottles/cans out (most of the time people put as many as they can back into the original pop/beer boxes for easy counting) and then the cashier tallies them up and gives you the deposits back. It takes a minute or two but it's worth it because A) recycling rules and you are without exaggeration throwing money away if you have to pay deposits and don't get them back.
this is probably a dumb question, but do you literally walk into the store with your empties (in such states that allow it), drop them off, and walk away with money?
edit: cause that's pretty boss if it's what happens
Well, if it's an automated system you have to insert them into the machine one at a time and take a ticket to customer service for the deposits to get back. If it's not automated then you have to get your individual bottles/cans out (most of the time people put as many as they can back into the original pop/beer boxes for easy counting) and then the cashier tallies them up and gives you the deposits back. It takes a minute or two but it's worth it because A) recycling rules and you are without exaggeration throwing money away if you have to pay deposits and don't get them back.
I'm donating my money to the grocery store!
we recycle all our glass and cans but I should probably start taking them back...
this is probably a dumb question, but do you literally walk into the store with your empties (in such states that allow it), drop them off, and walk away with money?
edit: cause that's pretty boss if it's what happens
for a long time you'd walk in with the empties, go to some room in the back/warehouse, and a guy would count them and hand you a roll of quarters or something
now you go to a bank of machines and feed the empties in, and you get a printed receipt that you redeem at the register.
And yeah, people forget or don't realize that the deposit is charged at purchase; stores occasionally get complaints because they don't maintain their machines well enough because they're looking for a way to pocket the deposit
ed: when I lived in a big house in undergrad we used to have a 'recycling party' every semester. We'd take a couple (huge) bins of collected beer cans and other recyclables to the store, then take the fifty bucks or whatever and buy more beers. Decent way to kill an afternoon.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
this is probably a dumb question, but do you literally walk into the store with your empties (in such states that allow it), drop them off, and walk away with money?
edit: cause that's pretty boss if it's what happens
If you've ever done Coinstar, it's very similar to that. Generally, grocery stores have machines set up in front of the stoor in kind of a laundromat setup.
You go in with your bottles and cans and push them through a hole in a machine that:
1. Reads the bar code on the can or bottle to know if it is eligible for the deposit
2. Smashes or crushes it accordingly, to save space
3. Keeps a running tally of what you've deposited
4. Prints out a receipt at the end, that you take inside the store and exchange for cash or just deduct from your grocery bill
It's highly automated and more states should do it. There are obvious environmental benefits, and grocery stores love it because the cost of the machines is often subsidized, and it gets people inside their store.
stores actually hate it because it adds to the sticker price of a bunch of the stuff they sell and they now have to pay staff to maintain the machines (even if it's just some high school student who does an terrible job of it.) That's in oregon at least, where supermarkets and such have to maintain recycling facilities at the store.
I think some of the states with deposit just have privately owned recycling facilities which seems weird to me (not sure how they make money), but what do I know
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
stores actually hate it because it adds to the sticker price of a bunch of the stuff they sell
Yeah this isn't true at all, since the cost of deposit items is higher statewide for every store that sells them.
edit: Bottlebill.org tends to be the central repository for information about the bottle bills, broken down by state. They had this to say about the popular misconceptions that it is a tax or that it automatically raises the cost of beverages beyond the deposit amount:
Now add in the fact that distributors in some bottle bill states like Iowa get to pocket any deposits that aren't redeemed. Even with a high redemption rate of about 86% in Iowa, it still means that there is an added 5 cent profit for each of the 14% of all bottles and cans sold in the state. That is huge. Redemption centers are also reimbursed by the distributor a handling fee, typically about 1-3.5 cents for every redeemed item, that outstrips the center's actual cost of handling the items. Again, profit. There is literally no reason for anyone to not be supportive of this aside from lazy consumers who find the whole redemption system more cumbersome than curbside recycling.
I'm not the one who takes the empties back to the store, but one day I went with the missus and saw it first hand. It's just a bunch of bins that you throw the bottles into, then she goes up to customer service and tells them how many she put it. There's no mechanics of any kind, just a giant container with a hole in it.
Naturally my first question upon seeing this was "...Well what the hell is stopping you from lying about the number of bottles and profiting?!". The answer I got was "Who would do that?!". And then I shrugged, because it was a pretty darn good answer.
Gotta love Canadian values. Shit, she even recounted one tale where she miscounted the number of bottles in one trip. Next trip, she told them to keep 10 cents because of the mistake.
As far as regular recycling goes, I live in a condo building, and we have a bunch of bins in the parking garage where the garbage dumpster is. I don't know exactly how the city does it, but the other day I saw men putting out brand new bins outside all the houses, all marked "Property of the City of Victoria". They were even electronically tagging them, which I though kind of odd/funny. But I guess as far as standard houses are concerned, it's completely handled by the city.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
stores actually hate it because it adds to the sticker price of a bunch of the stuff they sell
Yeah this isn't true at all, since the cost of deposit items is higher statewide for every store that sells them.
I don't oppose bottle bills, I'm just saying the grocery companies tend to oppose it. My knowledge of nationwide lobbying strategy isn't extensive, but every time something bottle bill related is up in oregon the grocery associations fight it. They're listed right on the bottle bill site as frequent opponents.
consider, for example, bottled soda. It's not just competing with other soda, it's competing with everything people drink. Grocers don't like that it's more expensive in the store because most consumers don't actually consider the fact that they're getting the 5c back when they just want something to drink in the car. Lots of vendors also don't like it because they sell from vending machines and they need to sell in relatively round dollar amounts; they wind up absorbing a substantial amount of the cost because they can't rely on consumers happening to have a spare nickel in their pocket.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I live in a rural area and one of the collection centers basically works on an honor system. If they know you, you can pretty much just give them a ballpark figure for it.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Yeah this isn't true at all, since the cost of deposit items is higher statewide for every store that sells them.
edit: Bottlebill.org tends to be the central repository for information about the bottle bills, broken down by state. They had this to say about the popular misconceptions that it is a tax or that it automatically raises the cost of beverages beyond the deposit amount:
I generally like bottle deposit laws, but that site is mostly horseshit with poor reasoning and cherry picked data backing it. First, there are different costs for dealing with bottles via deposit systems versus just dumping them in the normal waste stream. And of course distributors can add bottle collection back in, but that doesn't make it costless. That is a meaningless argument, there was a reason that bottle collection eventually fell by the wayside. And perhaps the worst point is that distributors can just pass the cost onwards. That is not how pricing behavior works for normal goods, and bottles of Coke are pretty much the definition of a normal good. You can raise the price of pickles in glass bottles statewide, but the consumer behavior and pricing strategies will adjust and some of that cost will be picked up by the producers.
The real reasons to support bottle deposits is because it is a net energy gain if done properly, even accounting for opportunity cost and such. And it probably materially effects litter (though it does so in a sort of icky way). And it generally increases the ability of re-use for the resulting recyclables since input quality is enhanced. That doesn't make is some costless utopian vision of environmental stewardship.
Do you honestly believe that people have a moral responsibility to recycle regardless of the inconvenience, and that failure to do so is justification for social shame?
Yes. Littering is quite a fantastic parallel to this discussion.
If the alternative to littering involved packing up your car full of trash and driving it to a recycling center, then I wouldn't fault people for littering either.
No, I still would! I lived in a rather poor part of the South for a while, and for a while we didn't actually have trash pickup. There was enough cultural impetus that people wouldn't, at least, throw their kitchen garbage just any old where- they would throw a few bags in the back of their trucks and drive it to the landfill.
Littering is pretty well enshrined as "hey don't fucking do this, if you do you are a huge douche", and I would love to see not recycling hit that level of cultural momentum.
I don't think Feral is saying that. I think Feral is saying that we shouldn't shame people for not wanting to stuff their car with other people's litter.
But then again, if we want people to use the 3Rs, we should make it accessible. Otherwise reducing and reusing are only partial solutions to the problem of limited resources like with plastics and aluminium.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
stores actually hate it because it adds to the sticker price of a bunch of the stuff they sell
Yeah this isn't true at all, since the cost of deposit items is higher statewide for every store that sells them.
I don't oppose bottle bills, I'm just saying the grocery companies tend to oppose it. My knowledge of nationwide lobbying strategy isn't extensive, but every time something bottle bill related is up in oregon the grocery associations fight it. They're listed right on the bottle bill site as frequent opponents.
consider, for example, bottled soda. It's not just competing with other soda, it's competing with everything people drink. Grocers don't like that it's more expensive in the store because most consumers don't actually consider the fact that they're getting the 5c back when they just want something to drink in the car. Lots of vendors also don't like it because they sell from vending machines and they need to sell in relatively round dollar amounts; they wind up absorbing a substantial amount of the cost because they can't rely on consumers happening to have a spare nickel in their pocket.
Yeah you're just wrong about this, too. I tried to make my response to you broad and informative enough so that you would realize that the deposits can represent an additional revenue stream for the distributors and resellers, and so they're huge fans of it. But you didn't quote that part, so maybe you didn't read it?
You professed confusion over how privately owned collection centers could even be a thing. The obvious answer is that they make money, due to the handling fee that the distributors reimburse them for each redeemed item. Those private companies wouldn't be doing it if there weren't a buck in it.
I don't know what would have given you the idea that there wasn't money to be made from this. You saw a teenager working a grocery store register excuse himself, then sigh and roll his eyes while he unjammed a deposit machine with a broom handle one day, and decided he was bearing an unfair burden without your realizing that the store gets free money out of this? In some ways, they are selling these items to their customers twice. I don't want to alarm you, but businesses are not particularly bashful about passing on costs to consumers, particularly when there is no competitive penalty for doing so, since they are all required to do so by statute to the tune of at least the deposit amount. You may even believe that this changes some purchasing considerations among consumers, but all it does is create initial sticker shock for outsiders new to a bottle bill state ("Why are all these six-packs 8 dollars?!?), whereas the locals have long since come to grips with the idea that beer is $8 across the board literally everywhere they go. You would be pleased to know they aren't particularly concerned with it costing $7.50 in another state thousands of miles away.
Your assessment of the general attitude of groups like the grocer's associations in Oregon towards bottle bill legislation is wrong, too. Oregon is in a unique situation because they were the first state to pass a bottle bill, back in 1971, amid fierce criticism and disapproval. The theory at the time was that it would be too expensive and burdensome. They were delighted to be proven wrong.
Flashing forward to more recent times: What these groups are actually opposed to is new legislation that tinkers with the bottle bill legislation, that potentially ruin a good thing they have going. Bills that make it needlessly expansive, bills that gut curbside recycling programs, bills that cut those sweet handling fees, etc. Basically anything that turns it from a cash cow into an onerous chore and tweaks the numbers, they are understandably against. See for yourself, in this example from the 90s. We've got the "Oregon Small Grocer's Association" and many others opposing "Measure 37." In their own words, they don't want to turn what they call "a good law" (i.e. the bottle bill as-is) into a "bad law." And you have to really read between the lines here and understand the finances of it to understand why they were against it. If you're a reseller, you have a really healthy relationship with your Coke distributor and that fat check they cut you for deposits. Same thing with the big box beer distributors. But then look at what legislators were trying to include in "Measure 37." Things like "health drinks." Things that nobody fucking drinks compared to soda and beer. This is what had them spooked. They said wait a minute, we're making beer deposit and soda deposit money, you don't get to throw your 5 random cans of weird energy drink in there and make us bear the cost because the mathematics of scale don't make it favorable to us. No, you put that shit in your recycling bin. It's a little cynical to pass off reduced profit-taking as increased environmental awareness, as some of the opponents of that measure were clearly doing in their statements of opposition. But to me, doing the right thing for the wrong reasons still counts for something, and if a state has a bottle bill and groups avidly supporting it in some form, far be it from me to get mad because they want to keep getting their beaks wet from it. If only other ways of saving the environment could be monetized so handily.
Flashing forward to more recent times: What these groups are actually opposed to is new legislation that tinkers with the bottle bill legislation, that potentially ruin a good thing they have going. Bills that make it needlessly expansive, bills that gut curbside recycling programs, bills that cut those sweet handling fees, etc. Basically anything that turns it from a cash cow into an onerous chore and tweaks the numbers, they are understandably against. See for yourself, in this example from the 90s. We've got the "Oregon Small Grocer's Association" and many others opposing "Measure 37." In their own words, they don't want to turn what they call "a good law" (i.e. the bottle bill as-is) into a "bad law." And you have to really read between the lines here and understand the finances of it to understand why they were against it. If you're a reseller, you have a really healthy relationship with your Coke distributor and that fat check they cut you for deposits. Same thing with the big box beer distributors. But then look at what legislators were trying to include in "Measure 37." Things like "health drinks." Things that nobody fucking drinks compared to soda and beer. This is what had them spooked. They said wait a minute, we're making beer deposit and soda deposit money, you don't get to throw your 5 random cans of weird energy drink in there and make us bear the cost because the mathematics of scale don't make it favorable to us. No, you put that shit in your recycling bin. It's a little cynical to pass off reduced profit-taking as increased environmental awareness, as some of the opponents of that measure were clearly doing in their statements of opposition. But to me, doing the right thing for the wrong reasons still counts for something, and if a state has a bottle bill and groups avidly supporting it in some form, far be it from me to get mad because they want to keep getting their beaks wet from it. If only other ways of saving the environment could be monetized so handily
they didn't support it initially, and they opposed the expansion of it to new products. I'm not really sure what point you're offering that contradicts what I've said. The only statement on that SoS page from an organization of actual grocers, guess what, opposed the expansion.
the call the bottle bill a 'good law' because they know repealing it isn't on the table, so there's no reason not to try and claim to be good samaritans about it.
now if they oppose it cause it'll hurt their bottom line and they shouldn't necessarily bear the cost of such environmental considerations then that's a fine opinion to have I guess, I'm just saying the idea that grocers are or were ever bottle bill supporters is wrong
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Flashing forward to more recent times: What these groups are actually opposed to is new legislation that tinkers with the bottle bill legislation, that potentially ruin a good thing they have going. Bills that make it needlessly expansive, bills that gut curbside recycling programs, bills that cut those sweet handling fees, etc. Basically anything that turns it from a cash cow into an onerous chore and tweaks the numbers, they are understandably against. See for yourself, in this example from the 90s. We've got the "Oregon Small Grocer's Association" and many others opposing "Measure 37." In their own words, they don't want to turn what they call "a good law" (i.e. the bottle bill as-is) into a "bad law." And you have to really read between the lines here and understand the finances of it to understand why they were against it. If you're a reseller, you have a really healthy relationship with your Coke distributor and that fat check they cut you for deposits. Same thing with the big box beer distributors. But then look at what legislators were trying to include in "Measure 37." Things like "health drinks." Things that nobody fucking drinks compared to soda and beer. This is what had them spooked. They said wait a minute, we're making beer deposit and soda deposit money, you don't get to throw your 5 random cans of weird energy drink in there and make us bear the cost because the mathematics of scale don't make it favorable to us. No, you put that shit in your recycling bin. It's a little cynical to pass off reduced profit-taking as increased environmental awareness, as some of the opponents of that measure were clearly doing in their statements of opposition. But to me, doing the right thing for the wrong reasons still counts for something, and if a state has a bottle bill and groups avidly supporting it in some form, far be it from me to get mad because they want to keep getting their beaks wet from it. If only other ways of saving the environment could be monetized so handily
they didn't support it initially, and they opposed the expansion of it to new products. I'm not really sure what point you're offering that contradicts what I've said. The only statement on that SoS page from an organization of actual grocers, guess what, opposed the expansion.
the call the bottle bill a 'good law' because they know repealing it isn't on the table, so there's no reason not to try and claim to be good samaritans about it.
now if they oppose it cause it'll hurt their bottom line and they shouldn't necessarily bear the cost of such environmental considerations then that's a fine opinion to have I guess, I'm just saying the idea that grocers are or were ever bottle bill supporters is wrong
My god man, I don't even know what to tell you at this point. You didn't know how the money changed hands over these transactions from the start, which is fine, and I'm proud of the effort I've spent illuminating you on that subject. But now you're just going to try to shift the discussion to whether or not one small grocer's association for a state was for or against something when they're saying things like (from the example): "As senior leaders, we want to continue to do our part for recycling and litter control, but we want to do it under a well-written law -- not under 37!" Yeah obviously they hate bottle bill legislation in its entirety, huh, per whatever weird sentiment you've projected onto those statements? And this, bounded by acres of statements by similar groups saying they LIKE the bill and think it's a good legislation as-is? The overriding point, as you try to move us away from it, is that your take on the resellers being against this in general was silly and wrong--turns out you didn't know they got a nice chunk of change from every item redeemed. And they're very protective of the finances behind it! Very protective, as the profits can be fragile in certain states and even a few percentage points in redemption rates can mean the difference between a Scrooge McDuck money bath and just hating the shit out of bottle bills, depending on whether you are a reseller or a distributor. And again, that's fine. You don't have to know a lot about something to have an opinion about it, and refining that opinion when presented with new information is a sign of maturity.
I don't think Feral is saying that. I think Feral is saying that we shouldn't shame people for not wanting to stuff their car with other people's litter.
But then again, if we want people to use the 3Rs, we should make it accessible. Otherwise reducing and reusing are only partial solutions to the problem of limited resources like with plastics and aluminium.
If that is his point, it isn't exactly a fair comparison then.
When I was discussing litter, I meant in generalities. "Don't litter" is a pretty well-enshrined cultural idea, at least in America.
If the comparison is, as Feral said, "I wouldn't shame people who didn't want to fill their car up with other people's trash", well I guess sure, I can see that.
But the thing is, this is a hypothetical that except in really extreme circumstances never happens because garbage cans are near-omnipresent. My example was to illustrate that, even when they aren't, there is still a lot of cultural momentum behind the idea that we shouldn't litter.
No one is saying we shouldn't endeavor to make recycling more accessible- I would never argue that. What I want to do in addition to that is put more social pressure on people to take matters into their own hands. No recycling at your apartment/neighborhood? Sort and drive your recyclables to a facility and pressure whomever is in charge to make it easier. No facility? Get involved and demand one in your area.
If there were no garbage pickup, or no easily accessible landfills, people would be livid (ignoring the problems of obvious sanitation for this analogy), yet when there is no easy-to-access recycling program, people just go "eh, guess I won't recycle then".
To be more in line with what I'm suggesting, though, let's say I bought a drink at the mall, it's a plastic bottle. I finish it, I walk around the mall. Not a single recycling bin is present.
My mall doesn't suck like that, but it wasn't so long ago this was the case.
Is it my social duty to hold onto this for 8+ hours to recycle it properly at home? @arch
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
To be more in line with what I'm suggesting, though, let's say I bought a drink at the mall, it's a plastic bottle. I finish it, I walk around the mall. Not a single recycling bin is present.
My mall doesn't suck like that, but it wasn't so long ago this was the case.
Is it my social duty to hold onto this for 8+ hours to recycle it properly at home? @arch
Ideally? Yes.
Even more ideally? maybe you don't, but it makes you frustrated enough that you can't easily recycle it that you petition the mall to install recycling bins.
Realistically? No one but the most hardcore currently does this.
Again- to contrast this with litter!
You are in said mall, and there are no garbage cans (again, unrealistic, I know). What do you do with said soda bottle in this scenario?
Just toss it on the ground?
No! Most people would hold on to it to at least throw it away (I assume, perhaps erroneously).
No! Most people would hold on to it to at least throw it away (I assume, perhaps erroneously).
I admire your idealism. But no people would just throw their shit on the ground. Maybe not at first, but if it was the norm and there are usually no garbage bins in malls then people are just going to dump it somewhere.
No! Most people would hold on to it to at least throw it away (I assume, perhaps erroneously).
I admire your idealism. But no people would just throw their shit on the ground. Maybe not at first, but if it was the norm and there are usually no garbage bins in malls then people are just going to dump it somewhere.
It all depends on the level of social pressure and, to a certain extent, the society.
If you've ever been to Europe, one of the first things you notice is that there is dog shit everywhere. There are places in France and Spain where you can hardly walk down the street without stepping in or around shit. It's absolutely disgusting.
Why is it that in Paris and Madrid, where there are garbage cans are practically lining the street people can't pick up and throw their dog's shit away, but in my neighborhood people will carry the blue bag of poop half a mile until they get to the trash can? It's nothing more than societal norms and pressure.
You are probably right that if you make things too difficult, people will stop doing it and eventually the trend will change. Kind of the broken window theory, I guess. But if things aren't too difficult, and there is social pressure, most people will do it. They will deal with the discomfort or inconvenience and do what society expects of them.
Well, in a lot of places in America it's actually against the law to let your dog shit on the ground and not pick it up (unless it is your own private property).
Not having a garbage bin means people are going to go into the bathroom and flush their trash down the toilet. Or not even flush, and then someone will not give a shit, or rather, they will. All over the trash.
Realistically. Long enough and they'll just chuck it on the floor.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
I have a Boogie Board for making notes on during the day - it's an impermanent way of taking notes, but most of the time the stuff I'm writing needs to exist for thirty seconds until I can type it into a CRM.
Every few months my boss will get me to research various e-readers and tablet PCs for everybody to use instead of paper call documents. He takes it all in, looks at the price, and the idea is shelved for another few months.
man, that would be absolutely amazing if it would just save the stuff..
I have a Boogie Board for making notes on during the day - it's an impermanent way of taking notes, but most of the time the stuff I'm writing needs to exist for thirty seconds until I can type it into a CRM.
Every few months my boss will get me to research various e-readers and tablet PCs for everybody to use instead of paper call documents. He takes it all in, looks at the price, and the idea is shelved for another few months.
man, that would be absolutely amazing if it would just save the stuff..
Well, in a lot of places in America it's actually against the law to let your dog shit on the ground and not pick it up (unless it is your own private property).
Here in Michigan it's against the law to throw bottles in the garbage. They have to be recycled or returned for a deposit.
Posts
Lets talk about recycling and not him!
I'm quite lucky in that I am forced to recycle by my government, and it's been an educational experience. Where I used to live I could just do whatever, but now I have to separate my rubbish into Burnable, unburnable, plastics, paper, glass, cans, plastic bottles and a few other minor categories. Plus larger items have to get specially picked up. But we get each type picked up once or twice a week, so it's not particularly different once you get used to it. I've learned a lot, my habits have improved, and I am much more aware of what I do.
How do you feel about compulsory vs voluntary recycling? I'm in favour of compulsory, since it also puts a burden on government to provide facilities for it.
I think anything that gets people to recycle more is a good thing (to a reasonable extent, obviously I don't want a gestapo going around and breaking into people's homes).
At my student housing in Edinburgh we had a really useless bucket in which to chuck all our recycling into, but in the spring they gave us different buckets for the different types and I found that way better.
It's not the likelihood of being attacked. It's not wanting to be in close quarters with someone who may be unbalanced and probably doesn't bathe regularly. When a homeless guy is laying down on the subway, everyone else crams into the other side of the car to stay away. And I'm supposed to be psyched about being alone with someone like that in a small, isolated enclosed space? Obviously not everyone who uses the drop off is homeless, and of those who are, not all will be unbalanced or smell, but having to devote time and effort and to take on a higher than normal risk of being subjected to this just to do so watching that should be handled by curbside pick up? Is it really so unreasonable to not be pleased with the situation?
Unfortunately, they would never let a truck through the gate, since our trash collection company has an exclusive contract.
Yes.
Because unless you have reason to believe that you have "higher than usual risk" you're being irrational and silly and quite possibly a goose.
Guess what? Those scary gross homeless subhumans will probably peace the fuck out and wait for you to leave so that you won't bother them.
Imagineer that.
bam. 400 homes will have blue bins in the next two weeks.
edit: good deed for the day = done
That's double-awesome!
I'm pretty happy about it. All I recycle currently is aluminum cans because the nearest recycle center is almost an hour away and I just can't afford the gas for that kind of round trip.
Great, now that someone is doing even more SKFM will have even more reason's to do less. I mean, his actions are a drop in the bucket compared to yours so he might as well not even try.
That is fantastic.
whoops.gif
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
edit: cause that's pretty boss if it's what happens
We don't get paid for that, sadly, but we just don't have any other place to throw them away except special bins. When I was young and single and dumb I used to let them pile up on my balcony and then get them together to throw away. Now I am more organized.
Well, if it's an automated system you have to insert them into the machine one at a time and take a ticket to customer service for the deposits to get back. If it's not automated then you have to get your individual bottles/cans out (most of the time people put as many as they can back into the original pop/beer boxes for easy counting) and then the cashier tallies them up and gives you the deposits back. It takes a minute or two but it's worth it because A) recycling rules and
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I'm donating my money to the grocery store!
we recycle all our glass and cans but I should probably start taking them back...
for a long time you'd walk in with the empties, go to some room in the back/warehouse, and a guy would count them and hand you a roll of quarters or something
now you go to a bank of machines and feed the empties in, and you get a printed receipt that you redeem at the register.
And yeah, people forget or don't realize that the deposit is charged at purchase; stores occasionally get complaints because they don't maintain their machines well enough because they're looking for a way to pocket the deposit
ed: when I lived in a big house in undergrad we used to have a 'recycling party' every semester. We'd take a couple (huge) bins of collected beer cans and other recyclables to the store, then take the fifty bucks or whatever and buy more beers. Decent way to kill an afternoon.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
If you've ever done Coinstar, it's very similar to that. Generally, grocery stores have machines set up in front of the stoor in kind of a laundromat setup.
You go in with your bottles and cans and push them through a hole in a machine that:
1. Reads the bar code on the can or bottle to know if it is eligible for the deposit
2. Smashes or crushes it accordingly, to save space
3. Keeps a running tally of what you've deposited
4. Prints out a receipt at the end, that you take inside the store and exchange for cash or just deduct from your grocery bill
It's highly automated and more states should do it. There are obvious environmental benefits, and grocery stores love it because the cost of the machines is often subsidized, and it gets people inside their store.
I think some of the states with deposit just have privately owned recycling facilities which seems weird to me (not sure how they make money), but what do I know
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Yeah this isn't true at all, since the cost of deposit items is higher statewide for every store that sells them.
edit: Bottlebill.org tends to be the central repository for information about the bottle bills, broken down by state. They had this to say about the popular misconceptions that it is a tax or that it automatically raises the cost of beverages beyond the deposit amount:
Now add in the fact that distributors in some bottle bill states like Iowa get to pocket any deposits that aren't redeemed. Even with a high redemption rate of about 86% in Iowa, it still means that there is an added 5 cent profit for each of the 14% of all bottles and cans sold in the state. That is huge. Redemption centers are also reimbursed by the distributor a handling fee, typically about 1-3.5 cents for every redeemed item, that outstrips the center's actual cost of handling the items. Again, profit. There is literally no reason for anyone to not be supportive of this aside from lazy consumers who find the whole redemption system more cumbersome than curbside recycling.
Naturally my first question upon seeing this was "...Well what the hell is stopping you from lying about the number of bottles and profiting?!". The answer I got was "Who would do that?!". And then I shrugged, because it was a pretty darn good answer.
Gotta love Canadian values.
As far as regular recycling goes, I live in a condo building, and we have a bunch of bins in the parking garage where the garbage dumpster is. I don't know exactly how the city does it, but the other day I saw men putting out brand new bins outside all the houses, all marked "Property of the City of Victoria". They were even electronically tagging them, which I though kind of odd/funny. But I guess as far as standard houses are concerned, it's completely handled by the city.
I don't oppose bottle bills, I'm just saying the grocery companies tend to oppose it. My knowledge of nationwide lobbying strategy isn't extensive, but every time something bottle bill related is up in oregon the grocery associations fight it. They're listed right on the bottle bill site as frequent opponents.
consider, for example, bottled soda. It's not just competing with other soda, it's competing with everything people drink. Grocers don't like that it's more expensive in the store because most consumers don't actually consider the fact that they're getting the 5c back when they just want something to drink in the car. Lots of vendors also don't like it because they sell from vending machines and they need to sell in relatively round dollar amounts; they wind up absorbing a substantial amount of the cost because they can't rely on consumers happening to have a spare nickel in their pocket.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I generally like bottle deposit laws, but that site is mostly horseshit with poor reasoning and cherry picked data backing it. First, there are different costs for dealing with bottles via deposit systems versus just dumping them in the normal waste stream. And of course distributors can add bottle collection back in, but that doesn't make it costless. That is a meaningless argument, there was a reason that bottle collection eventually fell by the wayside. And perhaps the worst point is that distributors can just pass the cost onwards. That is not how pricing behavior works for normal goods, and bottles of Coke are pretty much the definition of a normal good. You can raise the price of pickles in glass bottles statewide, but the consumer behavior and pricing strategies will adjust and some of that cost will be picked up by the producers.
The real reasons to support bottle deposits is because it is a net energy gain if done properly, even accounting for opportunity cost and such. And it probably materially effects litter (though it does so in a sort of icky way). And it generally increases the ability of re-use for the resulting recyclables since input quality is enhanced. That doesn't make is some costless utopian vision of environmental stewardship.
No, I still would! I lived in a rather poor part of the South for a while, and for a while we didn't actually have trash pickup. There was enough cultural impetus that people wouldn't, at least, throw their kitchen garbage just any old where- they would throw a few bags in the back of their trucks and drive it to the landfill.
Littering is pretty well enshrined as "hey don't fucking do this, if you do you are a huge douche", and I would love to see not recycling hit that level of cultural momentum.
But then again, if we want people to use the 3Rs, we should make it accessible. Otherwise reducing and reusing are only partial solutions to the problem of limited resources like with plastics and aluminium.
Yeah you're just wrong about this, too. I tried to make my response to you broad and informative enough so that you would realize that the deposits can represent an additional revenue stream for the distributors and resellers, and so they're huge fans of it. But you didn't quote that part, so maybe you didn't read it?
You professed confusion over how privately owned collection centers could even be a thing. The obvious answer is that they make money, due to the handling fee that the distributors reimburse them for each redeemed item. Those private companies wouldn't be doing it if there weren't a buck in it.
I don't know what would have given you the idea that there wasn't money to be made from this. You saw a teenager working a grocery store register excuse himself, then sigh and roll his eyes while he unjammed a deposit machine with a broom handle one day, and decided he was bearing an unfair burden without your realizing that the store gets free money out of this? In some ways, they are selling these items to their customers twice. I don't want to alarm you, but businesses are not particularly bashful about passing on costs to consumers, particularly when there is no competitive penalty for doing so, since they are all required to do so by statute to the tune of at least the deposit amount. You may even believe that this changes some purchasing considerations among consumers, but all it does is create initial sticker shock for outsiders new to a bottle bill state ("Why are all these six-packs 8 dollars?!?), whereas the locals have long since come to grips with the idea that beer is $8 across the board literally everywhere they go. You would be pleased to know they aren't particularly concerned with it costing $7.50 in another state thousands of miles away.
Your assessment of the general attitude of groups like the grocer's associations in Oregon towards bottle bill legislation is wrong, too. Oregon is in a unique situation because they were the first state to pass a bottle bill, back in 1971, amid fierce criticism and disapproval. The theory at the time was that it would be too expensive and burdensome. They were delighted to be proven wrong.
Flashing forward to more recent times: What these groups are actually opposed to is new legislation that tinkers with the bottle bill legislation, that potentially ruin a good thing they have going. Bills that make it needlessly expansive, bills that gut curbside recycling programs, bills that cut those sweet handling fees, etc. Basically anything that turns it from a cash cow into an onerous chore and tweaks the numbers, they are understandably against. See for yourself, in this example from the 90s. We've got the "Oregon Small Grocer's Association" and many others opposing "Measure 37." In their own words, they don't want to turn what they call "a good law" (i.e. the bottle bill as-is) into a "bad law." And you have to really read between the lines here and understand the finances of it to understand why they were against it. If you're a reseller, you have a really healthy relationship with your Coke distributor and that fat check they cut you for deposits. Same thing with the big box beer distributors. But then look at what legislators were trying to include in "Measure 37." Things like "health drinks." Things that nobody fucking drinks compared to soda and beer. This is what had them spooked. They said wait a minute, we're making beer deposit and soda deposit money, you don't get to throw your 5 random cans of weird energy drink in there and make us bear the cost because the mathematics of scale don't make it favorable to us. No, you put that shit in your recycling bin. It's a little cynical to pass off reduced profit-taking as increased environmental awareness, as some of the opponents of that measure were clearly doing in their statements of opposition. But to me, doing the right thing for the wrong reasons still counts for something, and if a state has a bottle bill and groups avidly supporting it in some form, far be it from me to get mad because they want to keep getting their beaks wet from it. If only other ways of saving the environment could be monetized so handily.
Anyway, I hope this has been informative.
they didn't support it initially, and they opposed the expansion of it to new products. I'm not really sure what point you're offering that contradicts what I've said. The only statement on that SoS page from an organization of actual grocers, guess what, opposed the expansion.
the call the bottle bill a 'good law' because they know repealing it isn't on the table, so there's no reason not to try and claim to be good samaritans about it.
now if they oppose it cause it'll hurt their bottom line and they shouldn't necessarily bear the cost of such environmental considerations then that's a fine opinion to have I guess, I'm just saying the idea that grocers are or were ever bottle bill supporters is wrong
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
My god man, I don't even know what to tell you at this point. You didn't know how the money changed hands over these transactions from the start, which is fine, and I'm proud of the effort I've spent illuminating you on that subject. But now you're just going to try to shift the discussion to whether or not one small grocer's association for a state was for or against something when they're saying things like (from the example): "As senior leaders, we want to continue to do our part for recycling and litter control, but we want to do it under a well-written law -- not under 37!" Yeah obviously they hate bottle bill legislation in its entirety, huh, per whatever weird sentiment you've projected onto those statements? And this, bounded by acres of statements by similar groups saying they LIKE the bill and think it's a good legislation as-is? The overriding point, as you try to move us away from it, is that your take on the resellers being against this in general was silly and wrong--turns out you didn't know they got a nice chunk of change from every item redeemed. And they're very protective of the finances behind it! Very protective, as the profits can be fragile in certain states and even a few percentage points in redemption rates can mean the difference between a Scrooge McDuck money bath and just hating the shit out of bottle bills, depending on whether you are a reseller or a distributor. And again, that's fine. You don't have to know a lot about something to have an opinion about it, and refining that opinion when presented with new information is a sign of maturity.
If that is his point, it isn't exactly a fair comparison then.
When I was discussing litter, I meant in generalities. "Don't litter" is a pretty well-enshrined cultural idea, at least in America.
If the comparison is, as Feral said, "I wouldn't shame people who didn't want to fill their car up with other people's trash", well I guess sure, I can see that.
But the thing is, this is a hypothetical that except in really extreme circumstances never happens because garbage cans are near-omnipresent. My example was to illustrate that, even when they aren't, there is still a lot of cultural momentum behind the idea that we shouldn't litter.
No one is saying we shouldn't endeavor to make recycling more accessible- I would never argue that. What I want to do in addition to that is put more social pressure on people to take matters into their own hands. No recycling at your apartment/neighborhood? Sort and drive your recyclables to a facility and pressure whomever is in charge to make it easier. No facility? Get involved and demand one in your area.
If there were no garbage pickup, or no easily accessible landfills, people would be livid (ignoring the problems of obvious sanitation for this analogy), yet when there is no easy-to-access recycling program, people just go "eh, guess I won't recycle then".
I want that to change.
Litter and recycling are and aren't comparable- if you are filling your car with recycling, it should be cleaned out.
Clean, empty plastic bottles and cans are a completely different beast than a garbage bag full of household trash.
My mall doesn't suck like that, but it wasn't so long ago this was the case.
Is it my social duty to hold onto this for 8+ hours to recycle it properly at home? @arch
Ideally? Yes.
Even more ideally? maybe you don't, but it makes you frustrated enough that you can't easily recycle it that you petition the mall to install recycling bins.
Realistically? No one but the most hardcore currently does this.
Again- to contrast this with litter!
You are in said mall, and there are no garbage cans (again, unrealistic, I know). What do you do with said soda bottle in this scenario?
Just toss it on the ground?
No! Most people would hold on to it to at least throw it away (I assume, perhaps erroneously).
I admire your idealism. But no people would just throw their shit on the ground. Maybe not at first, but if it was the norm and there are usually no garbage bins in malls then people are just going to dump it somewhere.
It all depends on the level of social pressure and, to a certain extent, the society.
If you've ever been to Europe, one of the first things you notice is that there is dog shit everywhere. There are places in France and Spain where you can hardly walk down the street without stepping in or around shit. It's absolutely disgusting.
Why is it that in Paris and Madrid, where there are garbage cans are practically lining the street people can't pick up and throw their dog's shit away, but in my neighborhood people will carry the blue bag of poop half a mile until they get to the trash can? It's nothing more than societal norms and pressure.
You are probably right that if you make things too difficult, people will stop doing it and eventually the trend will change. Kind of the broken window theory, I guess. But if things aren't too difficult, and there is social pressure, most people will do it. They will deal with the discomfort or inconvenience and do what society expects of them.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Realistically. Long enough and they'll just chuck it on the floor.
man, that would be absolutely amazing if it would just save the stuff..
http://www.improvelectronics.com/us/en/boogie-board-LCD-writing-tablet/boogie-board-rip-LCD-writing-tablet.html
Here in Michigan it's against the law to throw bottles in the garbage. They have to be recycled or returned for a deposit.
No surprise that the states without deposit fees have more litter on their highways.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar