I do agree that the tax is useful but it needs to go further. Re: Gp point. How do you think the government can determine wasteful disposables? There's cars t

I do agree that the tax is useful but it needs to go further. Re: Gp point. How do you think the government can determine wasteful disposables? There's cars that only last 5 years instead of 40+. (Apparently replacing metal with plastic cut costs but increases maintenance costs). Is a car lasting 5 years, a wasteful disposable? What if it's still functional but needs replacing with more plastic? At 10 cent a car, why would this discourage car companies from 1 year car use? What i see is that the gov will need a big agency to determine which disposable is wasteful (non biodegradable/recycable?) vs those that are not. Either that or the agency approve exceptions which may not be cheap either? My proposal means the costs of environmentally friendly products are reflected in the price instead of a tax. By making companies take back waste. A car with plastic will cost a lot to dispose of, just like a lot of plastic products. Now imagine if all products were replaced with aluminium and glass. Less disposable costs. Edit: in economic terms. The waste is an externalised cost by companies. My proposal privatises it.