[PublicAnimalNo9]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

llama66 llama66:

Taxing me for "creating carbon" will do nothing. Robbing me of my money to save me is a retarded idea.

Worked for smoking.

llama66 llama66:

Did it? Smoking is still a thing

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Not as much as it used to be.



https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82- ... 76-eng.htm

But how much of that is a result of higher taxes as opposed to education and increased awareness of the dangers of smoking?

In 1986 gasoline was around $5 a gallon the UK. Today's it's around $10 a gallon and there's more cars than ever on Britain's roads and highways.

Taxes on alcohol keep going up. Has that slowed down the alcohol consumption rate?

[llama66]

BeaverFever BeaverFever:

When things are made cheaper more of them ste consimed. When things sre made more expensive less of them are consumed. These straws and plastic bags and coffee stirrers are literally given away for free.

Also isn’t funny how the people who hate government and want less of it think it’s the government’s job to pay for and conduct product research for the plastic industry?

And so also mow apparently laws have no effect on behaviour so I guess we should just now repeal all the laws? I guess all the plastic manufacturing companies and distributors and retailers will just go rogue and keep manufacturing and shipping and stocking out contraband or something ?

1. Laws affect only the law abiding. Criminals don't really give two shits what laws you pass.
2. Government should take some money and invest in research, not conduct and bankroll said research.
3. Only the plastic stir sticks and bags and straws are factored into the costs. Nothing is free. Except my sarcasm. That will always be free for my friends.

[DrCaleb]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

But how much of that is a result of higher taxes as opposed to education and increased awareness of the dangers of smoking?

In 1986 gasoline was around $5 a gallon the UK. Today's it's around $10 a gallon and there's more cars than ever on Britain's roads and highways.

Taxes on alcohol keep going up. Has that slowed down the alcohol consumption rate?

Ask someone who smokes if they can handle the increase of the price of a pack. Ask someone who used to smoke if it was a factor in their decision to quit.

Ask someone in the UK if they could afford to drive big V8 pickups and SUVs like we do here. Look at the trend of putting V6s and 4's in pickups. And Mustangs.

Look up statistics on alcohol related diseases.

Look at the rate of return on drink bottles and cans.

And then, tell me a tax on recyclable plastic won't result in plastic actually being returned for recycling instead of put in landfills.

[stratos]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

But how much of that is a result of higher taxes as opposed to education and increased awareness of the dangers of smoking?

In 1986 gasoline was around $5 a gallon the UK. Today's it's around $10 a gallon and there's more cars than ever on Britain's roads and highways.

Taxes on alcohol keep going up. Has that slowed down the alcohol consumption rate?

Ask someone who smokes if they can handle the increase of the price of a pack. Ask someone who used to smoke if it was a factor in their decision to quit.

Ask someone in the UK if they could afford to drive big V8 pickups and SUVs like we do here. Look at the trend of putting V6s and 4's in pickups. And Mustangs.

Look up statistics on alcohol related diseases.

Look at the rate of return on drink bottles and cans.

And then, tell me a tax on recyclable plastic won't result in plastic actually being returned for recycling instead of put in landfills.

I wont even attempt to refute any of those above. Though I will ask for one thing. Tax, at the same level and rate, chocolate and other none essential foods that have been shown to lead to diabetes, obesity and other such health issues.

[DrCaleb]

stratos stratos:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

But how much of that is a result of higher taxes as opposed to education and increased awareness of the dangers of smoking?

In 1986 gasoline was around $5 a gallon the UK. Today's it's around $10 a gallon and there's more cars than ever on Britain's roads and highways.

Taxes on alcohol keep going up. Has that slowed down the alcohol consumption rate?

Ask someone who smokes if they can handle the increase of the price of a pack. Ask someone who used to smoke if it was a factor in their decision to quit.

Ask someone in the UK if they could afford to drive big V8 pickups and SUVs like we do here. Look at the trend of putting V6s and 4's in pickups. And Mustangs.

Look up statistics on alcohol related diseases.

Look at the rate of return on drink bottles and cans.

And then, tell me a tax on recyclable plastic won't result in plastic actually being returned for recycling instead of put in landfills.

I wont even attempt to refute any of those above. Though I will ask for one thing. Tax, at the same level and rate, chocolate and other none essential foods that have been shown to lead to diabetes, obesity and other such health issues.

Australia already does. Cost of a candy bar is something like triple what it is here.

Edit: Mexico taxes sugary drinks, and has already seen benefits from it.

That's one of the few things governments can do to change consumption - tax it.

[llama66]

Social Engineering via Taxes is not the right way to do things.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

Social Engineering via Taxes is not the right way to do things.

Limited toolset. They can't make cigarettes or pop illegal, because they are legal now. There is no justification for it.

Groups like Greenpeace or the Sierra Club have been trying to social engineer a change in behaviour for decades. All they get is mocked. So, swing and a miss.

What's left?

[llama66]

So because Greenpeace and the Sierra Club want societal changes, it's the government's role to bring about said changes?

[raydan]

If your habits brings an additional cost to society, you should be taxed more.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

So because Greenpeace and the Sierra Club want societal changes, it's the government's role to bring about said changes?

No. The problems with plastic waste are obvious, and were predicted. Although, whales dying because of a belly full of grocery bags, and birds feeding their chicks with plastic pellets instead of actual food, were unexpected. People can all agree this is a problem.

So now its up to the groups responsible for environmental protection (us and the government) to find a solution. If the public isn't ready to buy in, then it's up to the governments limited toolset to engage.

I suspect people don't understand that non recyclable plastics, like those bags of soup, or pre-cut salad and e-coli, are the problem. Banning those is a good step, and the average consumer won't care. But people can't change any sort of habit that prevents industrial plastic production from washing tons of plastic pellets into the environment, or getting the microplastics out of hundreds of consumer products, like toothpaste. That has to be the manufacturers, and they won't do shit unless legislated to do so.

raydan raydan:

If your habits brings an additional cost to society, you should be taxed more.

Simple consumption tax. Don't want to pay tax, don't consume the product.

[Thanos]

Solution #1 - tax the plastic manufacturers before the consumers, and give them tax breaks if they use non-plastic forms of packaging

Solution #2 - incineration of as much trash as possible, and put an end to this nonsense that recycling is the only option; it isn't, and if left-wing countries like Sweden and Germany, and left-wing places like BC's lower mainland, are incinerating then everyone else should be doing it too

[llama66]

raydan raydan:

If your habits brings an additional cost to society, you should be taxed more.

Do *my* habits cost society money? this can be quantified, that *I*, Llama cost society money? Who has determined this? What are their qualifications?

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Simple consumption tax. Don't want to pay tax, don't consume the product.

Except that's a slippery slope, the Government is no longer beholden to the people they allegedly serve. Once the revenue stream is created, it's just one more way they can farm you for money.

[DrCaleb]

Thanos Thanos:

Solution #2 - incineration of as much trash as possible, and put an end to this nonsense that recycling is the only option; it isn't, and if left-wing countries like Sweden and Germany, and left-wing places like BC's lower mainland, are incinerating then everyone else should be doing it too

See Beave's video over here:

current-events-f59/ottawa-moves-to-ban-single-use-plastics-as-part-of-waste-red-t123032-45.html#p2335218

The problem with #2 is finite resources. Burning it moves it out of sight, but isn't sustainable. And recyclable plastics have a low incidence of being recycled. Estimates are 5% are actually recycled, and only recycled once before being landfilled.

I know, I burn all my non-recycleable plastics, but I prefer not to waste money on things I'm going to end up throwing away to begin with.

[DrCaleb]

llama66 llama66:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Simple consumption tax. Don't want to pay tax, don't consume the product.

Except that's a slippery slope, the Government is no longer beholden to the people they allegedly serve. Once the revenue stream is created, it's just one more way they can farm you for money.

'Slippery Slope' is a logical fallacy. If the government no longer serves the people, that is a problem beyond the scope of this thread.

If taxation of the product results in less product being sold, then how can a government rely on that revenue stream?

[llama66]

Any government that can vote itself a raise is not beholden to the people.

It's social engineering and profiting off addiction. Many who smoke or drink are addicted, do the monies collected go to funding services that can help rehabilitate with said addiction or does the money go to the general coffers?