6 ms·

This also reminds me, in a way, of the argument I always make about water waste. Yes, it is great to keep your faucet off if you aren't using it. And yes, if e

This also reminds me, in a way, of the argument I always make about water waste. Yes, it is great to keep your faucet off if you aren't using it. And yes, if enough people keep theirs off, it will make a big impact on water waste. But as an individual, or a neighborhood, you will never waste as much as factory farms, chemical processing, and many other industries. Add to it the fact that these companies produce these products, with these wasteful systems, to maintain profit margins so that they can enrich themselves. If they were making them and breaking even, not paying themselves much. Like if it was a government run industry, and the demand was just so high for this shitty wasteful thing, maybe then you could blame the consumer. But those who take the most profit accept responsibility.

gm-conspiracy 8y ago
But the water you and I waste by leaving the sink on, goes back to the water supply. It is not like drywall manufacturing, where the water is tainted and should not be put back into the supply.
- johnsnowtho 8y ago
  Yes, and I think their point is that the big manufacturers are just going to waste the water you saved, too.
  - robotrout 8y ago
    We still get yellowpages telephone books vomited on our porch to throw away, about twice a year. Three guys in an overloaded car grace us with them, one guy on each side of the street, throwing yellowpages at houses, and one guy driving. All paper recycling does is keep paper prices low enough that these people can afford to print these things and force them on every household in a city. Remind me why I should be recycling a renewable resource again? You end up subsidizing marginal paper using businesses, who enjoy cheaper paper prices because of the efforts of millions of people, all because society thinks tree farmers should be paid less.
    - jklinger410 8y ago
      Because you're a good citizen, just doing their part! Maybe if we virtue signal enough, they'll save the dolphins!
- jklinger410 8y ago
  This is also an important distinction which I forgot to touch on.
- wiredfool 8y ago
  Sort of, but not really. The water on the input side of your tap is much more valuable than the sewer side. It's not usable for drinking water, it is usable for greywater purposes. If you've got a septic system, it'll go through that into the local ground water, if not, it'll go into the septic sewer and eventually to a treatment plant, and from there a river. If it was originally aquifer water, you've taken (likely) high quality water from a diminishing resource and put it in the environment.
  - ars 8y ago
    > and from there a river. And from there it goes to the next community downstream.
  - StephenConnell 8y ago
    Northern California gray water and black water is treated and sent to Southern California as drinking water. So it depends on where you are.
    - mehrdadn 8y ago
      Is this for real? I didn't know this. Any links?
darkerside 8y ago
> so they can enrich themselves That's the only thing I take issue with here. Characterizing this as intentional misconduct muddies the waters. The line between cutting costs and benefiting from an increased share price is long and winding. Don't blame people; examine systems. Where most of the money goes is back to keeping costs low for consumers, the same ones that are conscientiously keeping the tap water off.
- jklinger410 8y ago
  I understand what you are getting at, but it seems like "blame the system" is an effective excuse for capitalism to literally destroy the planet we live on. If you subscribe to the "a fool and his money are soon departed" philosophy, which is essentially like, "well if they want products that destroy the world I will give them that" you are passing the moral accountability buck onto human society in its entirety. We know that a human is smart, but that people are dumb. We also know that people are responding to norms that they are taught. So you can't teach people to buy your products no matter what with endless advertisements but expect them to change their lives for "the greater good" when your company would literally do anything possible to make a buck. That's a disproportionate amount of responsibility when "people" as a rule are just doing what they do to get by, but you are doing what you do to get a mansion.
  - TooBrokeToBeg 8y ago
    > We know that a human is smart Not every person is smart, nor does that translate into correct behavior. Even herd mentality has limits.
  - Silfen 8y ago
    I don't disagree with you, but the systems-level view is important not insofar as it shows us who to blame, but because it shows us the kinds of solutions that might actually work. The combination of incentives over the entire system must produce the correct emergent behavior. So, for example, instead of trying to get individuals to voluntarily use less carbon without changing anything else (this will never work), you can educate the public, pressure politicians, and end up with a large-scale carbon tax (although this particular case may be wishful thinking!).
oldcynic 8y ago
You'll never waste as much as is used in plastic recycling either. The number of separate hot and cold washing stages is quite astonishing.
gutnor 8y ago
People behaviour matters indirectly at least. If the environment is important enough in people mind that it affects their behaviours, you bet that politician will play on that card. Similarly, as an investor, if you notice the trend, you will find investing in wasteful companies to be riskier.

gm-conspiracy 8y ago

But the water you and I waste by leaving the sink on, goes back to the water supply. It is not like drywall manufacturing, where the water is tainted and should not be put back into the supply.

johnsnowtho 8y ago
Yes, and I think their point is that the big manufacturers are just going to waste the water you saved, too.
- robotrout 8y ago
  We still get yellowpages telephone books vomited on our porch to throw away, about twice a year. Three guys in an overloaded car grace us with them, one guy on each side of the street, throwing yellowpages at houses, and one guy driving. All paper recycling does is keep paper prices low enough that these people can afford to print these things and force them on every household in a city. Remind me why I should be recycling a renewable resource again? You end up subsidizing marginal paper using businesses, who enjoy cheaper paper prices because of the efforts of millions of people, all because society thinks tree farmers should be paid less.
  - jklinger410 8y ago
    Because you're a good citizen, just doing their part! Maybe if we virtue signal enough, they'll save the dolphins!
jklinger410 8y ago
This is also an important distinction which I forgot to touch on.
wiredfool 8y ago
Sort of, but not really. The water on the input side of your tap is much more valuable than the sewer side. It's not usable for drinking water, it is usable for greywater purposes. If you've got a septic system, it'll go through that into the local ground water, if not, it'll go into the septic sewer and eventually to a treatment plant, and from there a river. If it was originally aquifer water, you've taken (likely) high quality water from a diminishing resource and put it in the environment.
- ars 8y ago
  > and from there a river. And from there it goes to the next community downstream.
- StephenConnell 8y ago
  Northern California gray water and black water is treated and sent to Southern California as drinking water. So it depends on where you are.
  - mehrdadn 8y ago
    Is this for real? I didn't know this. Any links?

darkerside 8y ago

> so they can enrich themselves That's the only thing I take issue with here. Characterizing this as intentional misconduct muddies the waters. The line between cutting costs and benefiting from an increased share price is long and winding. Don't blame people; examine systems. Where most of the money goes is back to keeping costs low for consumers, the same ones that are conscientiously keeping the tap water off.

jklinger410 8y ago
I understand what you are getting at, but it seems like "blame the system" is an effective excuse for capitalism to literally destroy the planet we live on. If you subscribe to the "a fool and his money are soon departed" philosophy, which is essentially like, "well if they want products that destroy the world I will give them that" you are passing the moral accountability buck onto human society in its entirety. We know that a human is smart, but that people are dumb. We also know that people are responding to norms that they are taught. So you can't teach people to buy your products no matter what with endless advertisements but expect them to change their lives for "the greater good" when your company would literally do anything possible to make a buck. That's a disproportionate amount of responsibility when "people" as a rule are just doing what they do to get by, but you are doing what you do to get a mansion.
- TooBrokeToBeg 8y ago
  > We know that a human is smart Not every person is smart, nor does that translate into correct behavior. Even herd mentality has limits.
- Silfen 8y ago
  I don't disagree with you, but the systems-level view is important not insofar as it shows us who to blame, but because it shows us the kinds of solutions that might actually work. The combination of incentives over the entire system must produce the correct emergent behavior. So, for example, instead of trying to get individuals to voluntarily use less carbon without changing anything else (this will never work), you can educate the public, pressure politicians, and end up with a large-scale carbon tax (although this particular case may be wishful thinking!).

oldcynic 8y ago

You'll never waste as much as is used in plastic recycling either. The number of separate hot and cold washing stages is quite astonishing.

gutnor 8y ago

People behaviour matters indirectly at least. If the environment is important enough in people mind that it affects their behaviours, you bet that politician will play on that card. Similarly, as an investor, if you notice the trend, you will find investing in wasteful companies to be riskier.