[LINK] Surveillance in extremis

[Deus Ex Machina]

Kim Holburn [kim at holburn.net] wrote:
> 
> On 2006 Aug 29, at 11:16 AM, Howard Lowndes wrote:
> >Kim Holburn wrote:
> >>Well, in SA they do this with all drink containers.  Works  
> >>brilliantly.
> >>I have thought for a while that they should introduce a tax on all  
> >>packaging (well on everything that has to go into landfill).  The  
> >>tax should go to local councils who have to make room it.  Buy the  
> >>non-packaged product and save on the packaging.
> >
> >...but a lot of the unnecessary packaging is on food stuffs, and  
> >there you are up against food handling regulations.
> 
> Why shouldn't you pay for things that are going to end up as  
> landfill?  If you charge at the tip then people will find nasty ways  
> of avoiding the tip like putting their rubbish in other people's  
> wheelie bins, dumping it in the bush etc, etc.  If you move the  
> charge to the other end of the "consumer cycle" then it's paid  
> already.  You don't have to have payment at the tip!!!  'Course I  
> don't know if our politicians can actually organise something like  
> that fairly.
> That said, you really don't need that much packaging for hygiene.
> 
> At various points other states tried to bring in something like the  
> SA drink container legislation and there was a massive lobby by the  
> drink industry.  There was an ABC program about it (4 corners?) a few  
> years ago.  It's still a good idea.  It's still a very, very good idea.

its a really really dumb idea. business will pass on these costs
and people will then do whatever they like with the stuff since they
have already "paid" for it.

Vic