Recycling and public incompetence

talksalot81

IvanOpinion,

They simply cannot fine a household for not producing anything!!!! What would be next? Charging a household because they do not produce enough dirty water?!

If they try and charge people for too much, then people will just do the whole thing another way. The only thing they can reasonably charge for is if a percentage of total is not recycled, anything else is simply impossible.

IvanOpinion

As I said I don't know how it is going to work but there are things afoot. And yes, at the minute it looks highly likely that we are going to have to pay a 'fine' to the EU for not meeting 2010 recycling targets (which will probably be embedded into the rates system).

What is most important is that we are (apparently) running out of land fill and the onus is on EVERYBODY to reduce the amount of waste we are generating. I have previously said we should go back to recyclable materials such as glass bottles and paper bags instead of plastic bottles and bags.

Ivan

marksimpson

A friend of mine in Waterford tells me you pay per bin of waste on top of a standing charge of €120. €13.00 for the Refuse Bin and €7.50 for the Brown Bin. The price of Recycling Sack tag remains at €2.25.

Personally given that living on my own I create about half a black bag of waste in an average week with all the rest recycled, I resent paying the same as a household of 4 or more creating substantially more rubbish.

belfastgal

I cant be bothered recyling anything...those black boxes drive me to drink....i just chuck it all in the bin......im sooo bad

IvanOpinion

marksimpson, I have always been a firm believer on if you use then you should pay for it and, when they do bring in additional charges for waste management, those not doing their bit should be made to pay for it - however it is possible (at least at the start) that charges will be regional, possibly by council therefore those doing their best will have to pay for others.

Belfastgal, obviously you have no interest in the environment and that is your perogative however that is why every household in NI may soon be fined - because some people can not be bothered. However when the new rules come in you well may be charged for not recycling properly ... your choice!

Ivan

talksalot81

The problem with 'if you use then you should pay' is that it is very broad ranging. I do not use the NHS (we choose to be private), so why should I pay for it? Just one example, but important I would think. It would seem to me that those most able and most likely to not need a public service due to their use of a private alternative is those who will actually pay most into a public system (they earn more and typically pay more tax). Not to say that it wont or isnt happening, but paying only for what you use has the potential to benefit the rich and lead to decreased services for those who cant really afford to go private.

Of course this is a logic based arguement, matters under the control of government and civil service are rarely analysed in this way!

I actually dont know it is correct to force people to recycle. I know the reasons for it, but there are other, more immediate (recycling is a long term problem), problems which go without solution. I come from a scientific background and, while I see the motivation for recycling, it strikes me as a wool pulling exercise making the people of the world think good and not concern themselves. Of course, that is again a common criticism of politics by science.

IvanOpinion

Not much I can argue with there (I could almost have typed it myself )

Ivan

talksalot81

IvanOpinion wrote:

Not much I can argue with there (I could almost have typed it myself )

Ivan

Oh dear! Agreement with my views is a rare and dangerous event! :rolleyes:

marksimpson

talksalot81 wrote:

The problem with 'if you use then you should pay' is that it is very broad ranging. I do not use the NHS (we choose to be private), so why should I pay for it? Just one example, but important I would think. It would seem to me that those most able and most likely to not need a public service due to their use of a private alternative is those who will actually pay most into a public system (they earn more and typically pay more tax). Not to say that it wont or isnt happening, but paying only for what you use has the potential to benefit the rich and lead to decreased services for those who cant really afford to go private.

You can't really compare paying for the NHS and paying for utilities. I don't use the NHS much (thankfully) but it is there should I need it, and you never know when you WILL need it.

But why should I pay the same to have my waste disposed of as a household which creates much more waste? I have no problem with having a water meter either - after all if someone suggested that we all pay the same amount for our electricity bill they'd be told it was a ridiculous idea. I am quite happy to pay for what I use, but as a single person in an average house I have no desire to subsidise large families.

talksalot81

With private healthcare and medical insurance, I am quite able to pay for and deal with a medical emergency WITHOUT the NHS. I maintain that I do not need it and consider it unfair that I should subsidise those who are unwilling or unable to go private themselves. Normally I do not care, but if the reverse is pushed at me on another matter, then I see no reason not to be awkward.

There are other instances as well. I do not go into town, I do not litter the streets, I do not stink the place up with cigarette ends.... so why should I subsidise those who do in order to keep the place clean? I do not go to clubs and pubs, I do not drink. Why should I have to pay towards a police force to deal with drunks outside night spots that I never will be near? I do not use public transport, why should any of my money go into running it?

The list goes on!