6 ms·
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with the corporation if they are instilling a polluting culture that benefits them. There are edge cases in this argument of
by osrec 7y ago
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with the corporation if they are instilling a polluting culture that benefits them. There are edge cases in this argument of course, but in my opinion, a large number of companies produce mountains of wasteful unrecyclable packaging in the name of brand-building or low cost. They use this to bolster their business, and therefore they should be ultimately responsible for cleaning it up.
- cco 7y agoYour thesis is that the main driver for plastic water bottles or to go coffee cups is branding? I don't think that passes the smell test.
- osrec 7y agoNot quite, but it's a low cost convenience that makes people spend on coffee more readily. If they were made to bring their own cup to take coffee out (or some other less polluting method), I bet it would hurt sales significantly.
- stephen_g 7y agoMost cafes in Australia give a discount (up to 50c) for bringing your reusable cup. It’s very popular and very effective. Of course, disposable cups are still available.
- AmericanChopper 7y agoIf you wanted to talk about the costs of disposing of packaging, then there’s some valid points you could make. But to say producers are responsible for littering is insane. There’s nothing about Coca Cola as a company, or the way their products are packaged, or the way they sell them that would lead me to throw the packaging on the ground rather than in the trash can. Anybody that litters is wholly responsible for that act. If you wanna discuss what happens to the packaging after it’s thrown in the trash or the recycling bin, and who bears the costs, then there’s arguments you can make for the producer to have additional responsibilities, but it’s not their job to make sure the consumer doesn’t litter.
- osrec 7y agoPeople litter because it's convenient. Corporations ignore litter because it's convenient. The truth is everyone plays their part in this, but it is my opinion that those that produce waste must have a plan to deal with it. For example, Coke could offer to refill their drink bottles, but the truth is, if you're out and about and want another pint of coke, you need to buy another container with it, which ultimately will need to be dealt with by your areas waste management system etc etc. As a company they contribute so much to waste, and draw such significant profits that they must at least be somewhat implicated for the production of this pollution. Another angle: if cars are being marketed to everyone left right and centre, and lots of people buy cars that ultimately produce tonnes of greenhouse gasses, who do you hold ultimately accountable for the pollution? the consumer who has had adverts/dreams rammed down their throat or the chaps selling the cars?
- AmericanChopper 7y ago>my opinion that those that produce waste must have a plan to deal with it. Any plan to deal with waste is going to be entirely thwarted by people who choose to litter. The lifecycle of Coca Cola packaging could become 100% waste free, but litter would still be created any time somebody chooses the throw the packaging on the ground. People have an individual responsibility to not litter, and it really doesn’t have to do much with the discussion on sustainable packaging. If your starting premise to solving any problem is ‘people are 100% not responsible for their choices’, then you’re never going to solve anything.