4 ms·

Exactly. In addition to regulation on what is okay packaging, if producers somehow had more responsibility for where the end waste goes, it would encourage a cl

Exactly. In addition to regulation on what is okay packaging, if producers somehow had more responsibility for where the end waste goes, it would encourage a closed system It's in corporations interest to shift the responsibility entirely in the consumer http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-perspec-indian-crying-environment-ads-pollution-1123-20171113-story.html http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-per...

ThrustVectoring 8y ago
Don't regulate packaging, put a Pigouvian Tax on it. It's far better.
- nimish 8y ago
  Why is that? A tax is slower and exempts the wealthy while inflicting the costs onto the poor. Regulation is cheaper, better, fairer and faster at getting policy implemented than a technical tax, and doesn't have the behavioral issues that abound when telling people they are "taxed" for doing something.
  - r00fus 8y ago
    Taxes don't always need to be slower or more weighted to lower income (e.g. property taxes). However, they tend to be gamed more easily and sometimes have unintended consequences. Regulation and taxes go hand in - how are you going to pay for regulatory enforcement unless you dip into some general fund? Answer: a tax. The biggest lie about government is the one that claims all taxes are bad. Without taxes, you get Somalia. Someone is going to run the roads/commerce and enforce a tax to do so - do you want it to be the local strongman or an elected official (where you may be able to vote on how taxation works and/or vote someone else in)?
    - nimish 8y ago
      Taxes are fine, but thinking that you can replace regulation with a tax -- pigouvian or no -- is fantasy
  - ThrustVectoring 8y ago
    Prices do a great deal of work communicating and providing feedback about what consumers value. When you ban the product outright, you lose any ability to use that price information to make good tradeoffs between various goals of environmental improvement and consumer satisfaction. Ignoring the price that these regulations put on consumers isn't in their best interest.

ThrustVectoring 8y ago

Don't regulate packaging, put a Pigouvian Tax on it. It's far better.

nimish 8y ago
Why is that? A tax is slower and exempts the wealthy while inflicting the costs onto the poor. Regulation is cheaper, better, fairer and faster at getting policy implemented than a technical tax, and doesn't have the behavioral issues that abound when telling people they are "taxed" for doing something.
- r00fus 8y ago
  Taxes don't always need to be slower or more weighted to lower income (e.g. property taxes). However, they tend to be gamed more easily and sometimes have unintended consequences. Regulation and taxes go hand in - how are you going to pay for regulatory enforcement unless you dip into some general fund? Answer: a tax. The biggest lie about government is the one that claims all taxes are bad. Without taxes, you get Somalia. Someone is going to run the roads/commerce and enforce a tax to do so - do you want it to be the local strongman or an elected official (where you may be able to vote on how taxation works and/or vote someone else in)?
  - nimish 8y ago
    Taxes are fine, but thinking that you can replace regulation with a tax -- pigouvian or no -- is fantasy
- ThrustVectoring 8y ago
  Prices do a great deal of work communicating and providing feedback about what consumers value. When you ban the product outright, you lose any ability to use that price information to make good tradeoffs between various goals of environmental improvement and consumer satisfaction. Ignoring the price that these regulations put on consumers isn't in their best interest.