Why in the world did the bottle bill not pass?

[snatale1]

Originally Posted by pennyone

You are not suppose to "make money" through trash, unless you are desperate. I guess you and I have very different vision for the proper role of the state. To you, private will is most important. But for me, private will all too often is selfish and individualistic, at the expense of the public (earth). So I have no problem with the state trying to prevent the harm to earth by throwing a tax on these polluting objects. This is why I have no problem putting a $10 tax on each and every plastic bottle. We need to stop using these things...not just recycle, actually STOP using them because we do not need to do this. A nice reusable water bottle cost only $15 at most at Target, and it lasts forever, unless you misplace it.

Who said your not supposed to make money on trash? Better yet, who determines what "trash" is? Waste management made 3.5 BILLION last year and employees over 40,000 people! , that's ONE company! So on top of a LOT of people having jobs and making money, the states and government are getting tax revenue AND the end product is over 10 million TONS of recycling was done. Then lets think about all the energy created from the gases from those landfills...NATURAL "green" energy!

So let's recap.

Making money on trash:
42,000 people have a job to feed their family
Millions of tons of trash being recycled
Huge amounts of green energy being created
3.5 BILLION dollars flowing through our financial system

So you really want to NOT make money on trash?

42,000 people without work
Trash everywhere OR piled sky high in landfills, creating smells, diesease etc,
More petroleum based fuels being burned to make up for the lack of the free green energy by-product of properly set up landfills.
Couple billion mission from the stock market / financial system?

Not trying to be a douche but that's what ONE company deciding not to make money on trash would do, Seems to me EVERYBODY should be happy there's so much money to be made in trash!

[snatale1]

Originally Posted by pennyone

Dont be absurd. Communal responsibility is the only way to resolve social issues. Owners and renters should all be responsible. Everyone is either an owner, or a renter, or someone who is related to one of them. Why do you think Singapore is so successful? Their citizens do not get to cane people who litter. It's the government who does.

First, don't give a crap about Singapore. Second, you believe that people won't take care of their home / neighborhood unless the government threatens them?

You know what we should do, have "Speed Limits" then of you went to fast you would be "fined" then nobody would do that! We could also make it illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol, that would make DUI's a thing of the past. All we have to do is threaten somebody with a fine and they would NEVER think of doing it..... oh wait that's not how real life works

[snatale1]

Originally Posted by pennyone

You want to be a homeowner, you have to keep your front area clean, trash free and well shovelled, or hire someone to do it. If not, pay a $100 fine each day. Problem solved.

Originally Posted by pennyone

You are not suppose to "make money" through trash, unless you are desperate.

So your against people making money from trash, but your FOR the State making money from it.

Interesting.

[pennyone]

Originally Posted by snatale1

So your against people making money from trash, but your FOR the State making money from it.

Interesting.

I could care less what you do with your free time. If you want to rummage through my trash, go right ahead. Just clean up after yourself. I wouldn't do it, and I don't need to do it.

The state has to make money because the state provides vital services that must be paid for. Policemen and fire fighters do not work for free, nor should they.

[pennyone]

Originally Posted by snatale1

First, don't give a crap about Singapore. Second, you believe that people won't take care of their home / neighborhood unless the government threatens them?

You know what we should do, have "Speed Limits" then of you went to fast you would be "fined" then nobody would do that! We could also make it illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol, that would make DUI's a thing of the past. All we have to do is threaten somebody with a fine and they would NEVER think of doing it..... oh wait that's not how real life works

Yup, call the police and fine the crap out of them. If they don't pay, then cane them until they can't walk for a week. They will think twice about driving drunk, or litter. I am all for caning drunk drivers on their first offense until they cannot walk for a week. No problem with that.

[btownboss4]

Because it was very Boston/Cambridge centric
Most of the towns around Boston don't have as much trouble with litter.
Same reason the Gas Tax indexing got repealed people in Boston/Cambridge/Brookline thought it was a great idea, but the suburbanites who would actually are paying the tax voted heavily against it ( if it indexed T fares too it would have failed epically)
Q 4 passed because sick time isn't a local issue, it's a statewide issue.
Q 3 failed because people in Namtucket had no reason to care if there was a Casino in Springfield, the knowledge of where the Casinos would be localized the issue so not enough people cared.

[CaseyB]

Originally Posted by btownboss4

Because it was very Boston/Cambridge centric
Most of the towns around Boston don't have as much trouble with litter.
Same reason the Gas Tax indexing got repealed people in Boston/Cambridge/Brookline thought it was a great idea, but the suburbanites who would actually are paying the tax voted heavily against it ( if it indexed T fares too it would have failed epically)
Q 4 passed because sick time isn't a local issue, it's a statewide issue.
Q 3 failed because people in Namtucket had no reason to care if there was a Casino in Springfield, the knowledge of where the Casinos would be localized the issue so not enough people cared.

You summed it up very well.

[massnative71]

Originally Posted by snatale1

Actually, there's not. I used to work in a grocery store and having the registers not add the $.05 would be as simple as changing an item price for a sale. The labeling would be done at the mfg but would only need to remove MA. Even in non deposit states people have the same label as in MA with the same bottle dep states listed. Even if it took a while nobody would care as long as they weren't paying it, and that could be immediate.

And disposal of all that new plastic...?

[bohemka]

Originally Posted by snatale1

So let's recap.

Making money on trash:
42,000 people have a job to feed their family
Millions of tons of trash being recycled
Huge amounts of green energy being created
3.5 BILLION dollars flowing through our financial system

So you really want to NOT make money on trash?

42,000 people without work
Trash everywhere OR piled sky high in landfills, creating smells, diesease etc,
More petroleum based fuels being burned to make up for the lack of the free green energy by-product of properly set up landfills.
Couple billion mission from the stock market / financial system?

Thank you for this incredibly clear and factually accurate synopsis of the situation. We can thank our lucky stars that the initiative didn't go through.