Why in the world did the bottle bill not pass? (Boston: neighborhood, tax)

[bohemka]

Originally Posted by MikePRU

I'd be more than happy to drink out of some kind of biodegradable container. Especially if it meant the end of the bottle deposit law.

Well the tetra-pak cartons and biodegradable packaging options were exempt, so the deposit that they were going to extend to the other plastic bottles was also partly intended to spur the drinks manufacturers to develop and use more responsible packaging.

You can see throughout this thread that people weren't going to vote for it because they have curbside recycling. There's a rather large population, however, that lives on convenient-store diets, and these containers never make it to recycling bins. The deposit program is in no way designed to be a charity for the less fortunate (or lazy, however you view it), and it wasn't intended as a tax for people with curbside recycling, because if the money is important to you you can get it back with one trip to a redemption center (it's not that difficult).

A vote for the expanded program was designed to help manage this type of waste at every level of the community throughout the entire state, help fund improved recycling programs, and of course improve the environment. But people with recycling bins on the end of their driveway were incapable of seeing all of that.

Instead of these containers essentially cleaning themselves up off our streets and sides of roadways, real tax money has to be used to clean this type of stuff up.

[Ninotchka P]

If the idea is to dis-incentive purchasing water bottles and soda in the first place (which it should be) the solution is to tax it. Not a bottle deposit, but an outright tax. No different from cigarettes, etc.

And I agree with larger fines against littering. But does anyone ever get caught?

[wxjay]

I fail to see the correlation between a bottle deposit and the amount of litter in a place.

New York has a bottle deposit law, and parts of NYC look like a complete dump anyways. On the flip side, RI doesn't have a bottle deposit, and there is not a noticeably larger amount of litter in those parks than in those in MA.

In fact, in a 2011 report on litter in each state, Washington state ranked #1 in the nation for being litter-free. And they have no bottle deposit law on the books. NH and RI were also in the top 10 (and ahead of Massachusetts). By contrast, Michigan ranked below average for litter, and they have a bottle deposit law in place.

Again, no clear link to less litter because you impose a bottle deposit.

[pennyone]

Originally Posted by Ninotchka P

If the idea is to dis-incentive purchasing water bottles and soda in the first place (which it should be) the solution is to tax it. Not a bottle deposit, but an outright tax. No different from cigarettes, etc.

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tax the crap out of the self-indulgent knuckle draggers who insist on buying single bottle water because they think it's their God given right to fill the earth with discarded plastic bottles....$10 per plastic bottle sounds about right.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by pennyone

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tax the crap out of the self-indulgent knuckle draggers who insist on buying single bottle water because they think it's their God given right to fill the earth with discarded plastic bottles....$10 per plastic bottle sounds about right.

Bottled water is no worse than bottled soft drinks. I'm a cheapskate so I generally use a reusable water bottle, but you know sometimes I forget and find myself both thirsty and unable to find free tap water. I don't think buying bottled water is a worse choice than a Coke in that situation, not worse for me and not worse for the environment. This usually happens at the airport, where the water bottle is particularly nice because I can then use it in place of my forgotten water bottle for the rest of my trip.

[Bruins_Fan]

Originally Posted by pennyone

Yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tax the crap out of the self-indulgent knuckle draggers who insist on buying single bottle water because they think it's their God given right to fill the earth with discarded plastic bottles....$10 per plastic bottle sounds about right.

[pennyone]

Ok, let me adjust it a bit. Tax the crap out of all bottles, aluminum, plastic and everything in between!

[wolfgang239]

Originally Posted by pennyone

Ok, let me adjust it a bit. Tax the crap out of all bottles, aluminum, plastic and everything in between!

And for all the enlightened ones, we can wade barefoot into spring fed streams in artisan robes to drink free range water and quietly judge everyone else..........

[scratchie]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

I didn't want to pay a tax on a bottle that goes into my curbside recycling bin.

This is why I would have voted against it if I still lived in MA. I don't need to make a separate trip to the grocery store to find out that the bottle redemption machines are full or broken. And I don't find "But poor people will pick up the empties for nickels" to be a particularly compelling argument, especially since we (as a society) still need to pay someone to pick up lottery tickets, McDonalds wrappers and empty Dunkies cups.

[Utopian Slums]

Originally Posted by Bruins_Fan

Yup, nanny statism is alive and well in this thread.

Yeah . . .i'm not really seeing that. I'm seeing people who don't like to live in littered neighborhoods.

-Why pay people to pick up trash if the deposit will make the trash "disappear" by people who have the time and motivation to do so?

-Why increase the paroling to target those who "litter" if there was a cheaper and more effective way to get it done?

- Why be paranoid about "5 cents" that "could" increase even though the highest deposit in the country is country is currently a whopping 15 cents?

- Who cares if someone goes through your recycling to take the redeemable bottles? I swear, some people are like, "if i can't have that 5 cents, no one can!" Some people REALLY feel that is "their" 5 cents!



It is a DEPOSIT not a TAX.

Correct about big business using the magic and inaccurate words to get it to stall. And i wish i DID have a list of those where you need to hault your own recycling and those that do not have recycling. I suspect that since the opposition used vague wording like "most," that the stats support my initial hypothesis: (busy) people whose towns people need to haul their recycling somewhere are probably trashing it. Those without curbside recycling are probably trashing it.

So many people are always complaining about overpaying for other people's "entitlements." Yet the environmentally conscious people rarely complain about cleaning up other people's messes.

This is just another example of "penny wise and pound foolish."