[LINK] Surveillance in extremis

[Deus Ex Machina]

cant think of a more totalitarian solution.

Vic


Karl Auer [kauer at biplane.com.au] wrote:
> > ...separating paper from containers for recycling doesn't work either
> 
> Funny, it works in LOTS of other countries.
> 
> The way many countries do it is not by weight. They just sell garbage
> bags. The more garbage you produce, the more you will pay in garbage
> bags. If it isn't in a sanctioned garbage bag (the pay-for bags are
> emblazoned with the local authority's name and logo), it will not be
> picked up. If non-sanctioned bags are found in skips and things, they
> are opened and the contents used to track down the malefactor, who is
> then fined heavily. The only way to avoid this is to anonymise your
> garbage. However, since the authorities can and do go as far as
> fingerprinting the bags (!) and staking out repeat sources, very few
> people get away with it for long. The penalties then include the costs
> of the stakeouts...
> 
> > there has to be a benefit passed onto users...reduce your waste and pay 
> > lower rates...but it is more likely that it is the opposite...reduce 
> > your waste, but higher rates for systems to monitor waste and which 
> > won't work because those doing the right thing will continue to do so 
> > and the others will circumvent the measures - if the systems work at all.
> 
> The above system works extremely well, especially as paying consumers
> take a very dim view of non-payers. The benefit is very direct - less
> garbage, less cost. It is extremely simple for consumers, so it works.
> 
> The best way to tackle waste, however, is one that few places if any
> have had the courage to implement, namely a requirement on manufacturers
> to take absolute responsibility for their products and packaging. This
> would be three pronged - you (the producer) MUST accept all packaging
> and the product itself back for disposal at no cost (the cost can be
> built into the sell price though). You MUST provide reasonable means for
> the return of your packaging and your product, and YOU are responsible
> for any of your discarded products or packaging. For imports, read
> "importer" for "producer". Only if another person - a specific person -
> can be not only shown to be responsible but actually be held
> responsible, can the producer escape that last one (so littering by
> others is still an offence).
> 
> Production of anonymous products would need to be made illegal - the
> producer's name must be in the substance of the item and the packaging
> (embossed, watermarked, whatever). The sale of anonymous products would
> also need to be made illegal. The interesting thing is that pretty
> water-tight laws could be drafted relatively easily (trivial compared
> with the current laws and regulations covering product identity and
> packaging).
> 
> There would be a EXTREMELY rapid move by manufacturers of all stripes to
> biodegradable packaging, deposit systems and above all LESS packaging.
> And it would probably cause a renaissance in local production, and many,
> many new markets.
> 
> Regards, K.
> 
> -- 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)                   +61-2-64957160 (h)
> http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/                  +61-428-957160 (mob)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link