[LINK] Surveillance in extremis

[Deus Ex Machina]

Kim Holburn [kim at holburn.net] wrote:
> 
> On 2006 Aug 29, at 12:20 PM, A Dramatic Effect wrote:
> >Kim Holburn [kim at holburn.net] wrote:
> >>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.
> 
> Business already pass on all the costs and people already do whatever  
> they like with it.  Next.

rubish isnt a problem its a fact of life. what is a problem is wannabe
do gooders who think the world should run like a neat and tidy machine.

Vic