Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And yes, at each exit I took the past two days, at the red lights at the end, I saw the medians full of sports drinks and water plastic bottles strewn across the grass and bushes. No beer bottles. No soda cans. Both equally recyclable, but one with a deposit. Those bottles would NOT be on those grass medians if they had a deposit.
The dream world you live in is hilarious! Thanks for that laugh. So BOTTLE DEPOSITS will stop littering huh? The huge littering fines don't stop them, but the loss of that Nickel will! Do speed limits stop speeders to? Do Red Hands stop J-Walkers? Hold on, we have laws.... so there must be no criminals right?
Quote:
Eliminate the bottle deposit to increase recycling? That makes no sense, since all the bottles turned in for the deposit are being recycled. As are the ones with deposits that are being tossed out.
Let me make this easier for you, you seem to be having trouble.
Bottle Deposit State: I buy bottle, get overcharged, redem it and get back money I have already lost, so I have made NOTHING, then the bottle gets recycled.
Non Bottle Deposit State: I buy bottle, DON'T pay a deposit fee, then when I redem it I actually MAKE a little bit of money, then the bottle still gets recycled.
People actually GAINING money is much more of an incentive to recycle!
Quote:
I wish people would stop using the term "common sense" when trying to promote ideas that fly counter to sane thinking and what is easily observable.
Counter to sane thinking? You realize there's only a handful of bottle deposit states right? People actually MAKE money by redeeming bottles EVERYWHERE else! Your suggesting that it's somehow better to NOT make money, and instead have money taken ahead of time and just regain money you already lost is what is "counter to sane thinking"
Would you prefer a system where your employer takes money out of your bank account at the beginning of the week, then "allows" you to earn back what they've taken from you? Is that better in your mind than actually EARNING additional money by working? By your logic it would be!
"People actually GAINING money is much more of an incentive to recycle!"..
Actually, most people I know just put their redeemable items in their recycle bin and place it by the street the night before Trash day. Then, a group of poor people usually rummage through and collect them. So, we do give away the money, and it's "donated" to the poor, who recycle for us. It's like a service fee. But if no one collect them from our bins, then the state gets the money. One way or another it's a tax on us for using these containers. If we dont want to pay this "tax", then we should not be using the containers.
Adding water bottles and energy drink bottles simply add to the list of containers that will be taxed if we choose to use it. I dont see any reason why we shouldn't tax people who choose to use things that are detrimental to the earth.
Actually, most people I know just put their redeemable items in their recycle bin and place it by the street the night before Trash day.
Same here, but that's not the point. The point is the state shouldn't be forcing people's hands. People like to play the game in their head that this is about the environment, as I said I'm 100% for recycling but that isn't what bottle deposits are about, it's about the State making money. Recycling and Trash in general is a multi BILLION dollar industry and the state wants a piece! Right now the only people who "earn" money is those bums fishing trash barrels. Not the people who purchased and then recycled.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,989,150 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by snatale1
The dream world you live in is hilarious! Thanks for that laugh. So BOTTLE DEPOSITS will stop littering huh? The huge littering fines don't stop them, but the loss of that Nickel will! Do speed limits stop speeders to? Do Red Hands stop J-Walkers? Hold on, we have laws.... so there must be no criminals right?
It may not stop littering, no. I never said that. It stops the litter from lingering. We see that in the water bottles that lay strewn about, while the ones with deposits we do not see linger. That reduces garbage in the environment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snatale1
Let me make this easier for you, you seem to be having trouble.
Bottle Deposit State: I buy bottle, get overcharged, redem it and get back money I have already lost, so I have made NOTHING, then the bottle gets recycled.
Non Bottle Deposit State: I buy bottle, DON'T pay a deposit fee, then when I redem it I actually MAKE a little bit of money, then the bottle still gets recycled.
People actually GAINING money is much more of an incentive to recycle!
You seem to be only thinking about you. That is why you are having trouble. You lose a nickel, you save a nickel, whatever. You're missing the point. It isn't about you. It isn't about me. It is about what is best for society and the environment.
In the deposit states, the stuff that becomes little (beer cans, etc) does get recycled by the people that can't bother to turn them in. In the non deposit states, they do not.
If what you said was true, why do we see non deposit bottles all over, and deposit bottles not all over?
Quote:
Originally Posted by snatale1
Counter to sane thinking? You realize there's only a handful of bottle deposit states right? People actually MAKE money by redeeming bottles EVERYWHERE else! Your suggesting that it's somehow better to NOT make money, and instead have money taken ahead of time and just regain money you already lost is what is "counter to sane thinking"
Yes, there are only some deposit states. I've lived in non deposit ones. There are a lot more soda and beer cans littered about. That is the point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snatale1
Would you prefer a system where your employer takes money out of your bank account at the beginning of the week, then "allows" you to earn back what they've taken from you? Is that better in your mind than actually EARNING additional money by working? By your logic it would be!
That is not even close to being an accurate analogy. If I'm renting an item, and they want a deposit to assure its return, whether it be a can, a tool, a car, whatever, then they have the right to do so. It would make sense at is would promote returns of the rented items. A bottle deposit is slightly different, but it is still promoting the return of an item that would otherwise likely be thrown out and distributed as pollution across the landscape, like we see with non deposit bottles and cans.
And those will be gone quickly, as someone will pick them up.
If it was gatorade, they would not. That is the entire point.
Just trading anecdotes. Didn't see any plastic bottles at red lights. Having spent a lot of time in Sudbury/Acton etc. recently, I don't notice much litter at all on the sides of the road (deposit or not) so this instance stood out to me. When I'm at home in Somerville I see garbage everywhere (gatorade bottles, butts, lottery, mcdonalds bags). I truly believe it is more a littering problem, living on Rt. 16 I see the worst of it.
And as far as what is best for society, voters decided not to move forward with it. I see both sides of the argument but it obviously needs to be handled some other way.
So if you knew the answer why ask the question? Saying something is too small to be meaningful is a great way to sell useless extended warranties, but it's not actually a valid argument.
People didn't want to pay five cents that they probably wouldn't get back, especially if they don't think there will be a benefit to them or it wasn't clear that there would be a corresponding benefit to society. You thought it would benefit you, but it's not clear you even live in this state. If it's really a concern of yours you can think of a better plan, try harder to justify your position (you've mostly just stated that people who disagree are wrong), or become a dictator.
--I didn't "know the answer." I suspected the answer. My hypothesis was confirmed by the posts.
-- Again, as i stated in my posts, it is difficult to obtain data as to whom collects bottles and where they end-up from state to state. Yet it's very easy to look at trash on sidewalks and see that the redeemable bottles are just not there- they have been picked up.
People in MA who voted are either: 1. not looking at the types of trash they have in their neighborhoods or 2. just don't care. This is not "justification" to ignore the obvious.
To those who don't care about the environment, it is obvious that the whopping 5 cents or paranoid risk of *gasp* "possible MORE THAN 5 cents" is the problem.
Again, lack of trash is my entire justification. I could take pictures of said trash with no current redeemables in it from multiple towns and still get the BS rationalization here (which seems to be a cover up for not wanting to pay 5 cents.) Or even better, people who do not care about the environment i'm sure would accuse me of "planting trash."
--"or become a dictator"
Sure, i'll get right on that.
I drove through South Acton this morning on the way to work and I saw an 18 pack stuffed with empty bud light bottles on the sidewalk.
And i'm sure it would be gone pretty soon. Especially since you saw it "on your way to work" which i'm assuming is in AM hours. As much as i would like it too, the world does not run on an "Open 24/7 schedule." Many homeless shelters make people leave in the AM between 9 and 10 and return at about 3PM to 5PM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgang239
Just trading anecdotes. Didn't see any plastic bottles at red lights. Having spent a lot of time in Sudbury/Acton etc. recently, I don't notice much litter at all on the sides of the road (deposit or not) so this instance stood out to me. When I'm at home in Somerville I see garbage everywhere (gatorade bottles, butts, lottery, mcdonalds bags). I truly believe it is more a littering problem, living on Rt. 16 I see the worst of it.
And as far as what is best for society, voters decided not to move forward with it. I see both sides of the argument but it obviously needs to be handled some other way.
Thank you for acknowledging there is no redeemables in the litter you see. I think one problem is that the majority of active voters in MA do not live in places where they can see the reality of the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by snatale1
Same here, but that's not the point. The point is the state shouldn't be forcing people's hands. People like to play the game in their head that this is about the environment, as I said I'm 100% for recycling but that isn't what bottle deposits are about, it's about the State making money. Recycling and Trash in general is a multi BILLION dollar industry and the state wants a piece! Right now the only people who "earn" money is those bums fishing trash barrels. Not the people who purchased and then recycled.
I don't care who makes money if it is better for the environment. But don't forget that when the "state makes money" much of is put back "to use in the state." (eg, lottery and cigarette taxes.)
People who care about the environment would not be upset about "the state making money" if the environment benefited from this.
I don't know why i expected more environmental concern from the people of MA.
A link to some better data and the lies that were told to get this law passed:
"The opponents’ ads say that 90 percent of state residents have curbside recycling, which they use to suggest that the bottle redemption law is no longer needed. . . . .
. . . . .The state Department of Environmental Protection, however, says only 47 percent of Massachusetts cities and towns offer curbside recycling, reaching 64 percent of the population."
Hopefully, the DEP will run accurate (or ANY) ads next time and include pictures of all of the non-redeemables among all piles of trash, beaches, sidewalks, etc.
--I didn't "know the answer." I suspected the answer. My hypothesis was confirmed by the posts.
-- Again, as i stated in my posts, it is difficult to obtain data as to whom collects bottles and where they end-up from state to state. Yet it's very easy to look at trash on sidewalks and see that the redeemable bottles are just not there- they have been picked up.
People in MA who voted are either: 1. not looking at the types of trash they have in their neighborhoods or 2. just don't care. This is not "justification" to ignore the obvious.
To those who don't care about the environment, it is obvious that the whopping 5 cents or paranoid risk of *gasp* "possible MORE THAN 5 cents" is the problem.
Again, lack of trash is my entire justification. I could take pictures of said trash with no current redeemables in it from multiple towns and still get the BS rationalization here (which seems to be a cover up for not wanting to pay 5 cents.) Or even better, people who do not care about the environment i'm sure would accuse me of "planting trash."
--"or become a dictator"
Sure, i'll get right on that.
Most of the trash I see is paper and plastic food wrappers. I see about as many redeemable beverage containers as non-redeemable. I definitely see far more paper and foam drink cups than juice and water bottles. Your anecdotal evidence doesn't match with mine, and yet you claim that your view is obvious. Perhaps to you, but certainly not in the parts of Boston, Cambridge, and Dedham I travel through frequently.
I think everyone agrees that adding a redemption value will reduce some of the trash the disagreement is whether it will remove enough to justify the added expense. There's been no compelling case made that it will. There's been anecdotes on both sides, but anecdotes shouldn't get laws passed.
And you still cling to the "it's only 5 cents" argument as if 5 cents per bottle has no value to anyone. Why not add 1 cent to the price of each loaf of bread to educate people about the dangers of moldy bread? It would do good and "it's only one cent"?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The REAL Data re Curbside Recycling
