21 ms·

Exactly like when restaurants would rather throw away food instead of donating it. If they sell bikes to people that would otherwise use their service, they wou

Exactly like when restaurants would rather throw away food instead of donating it. If they sell bikes to people that would otherwise use their service, they wouldn't have any customers. But they're wrong, people that own bikes aren't the same people that want to use a bike ad-hoc.

jedberg 6y ago
That's not why restaurants throw away food. They do it because of liability laws. There is a super high risk of getting sued if you give away food and someone gets sick.
- tylerchilds 6y ago
  Fair enough and about bikes?
  - jedberg 6y ago
    Same problem. The risk of getting sued if someone injures themselves on the bike is too high.
- baq 6y ago
  tax also could be an issue, it is in my country.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    In the US it's often tax-neutral for corporations, which is kind of unfortunate. If they donate it to a nonprofit the cost is deductible, but if they throw it away as spoiled food then it still is as a write off (cost of doing business). It basically means businesses can't get the deduction for donating their old stuff because they'd lose an equivalent deduction they were already getting. What would fix it is to let them deduct the value of the donated food/whatever instead of its cost, because then the deduction would be bigger from donating something than throwing it away. The result would be a huge reduction in taxes on businesses, because then everybody would do it and get a ton of tax deductions, but it could be well worth it for the enormous reduction in waste and increase in charitable donations. And it might not even cost that much in tax revenue, because it would be an alternative to a lot of the shell games corporations already play to reduce their tax burden, but in this case it would actually be helping somebody.
    - danans 6y ago
      > It basically means businesses can't get the deduction for donating their old stuff because they'd lose an equivalent deduction they were already getting. That's because according to the tax code, businesses can claim depreciation of all capital property. They can't claim their cost of the donated property because they are already claiming the depreciation. > What would fix it is to let them deduct the value of the donated food/whatever instead of its cost The IRS already bases deductions for donations on Fair-market-value (FMV) of the donation. They have an entire guide for assessing FMV for the purposes of donation: https://www.irs.gov/publications/p561 https://www.irs.gov/publications/p561 [1] The guide explicitly addresses the question of cost vs value and how time between the initial purchase and sale might affect the value. This is even easier for businesses, since for things like bikes that strictly decrease in value, the donation value is probably just the purchased price - accrued depreciation (which itself was modeled using methods similar to FMV).
      - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
        > That's because according to the tax code, businesses can claim depreciation of all capital property. Food isn't "capital property" in general, so it's a different deduction, but in the end it comes out much the same. Which is what I said. The price they paid for it is already a deduction, so there is generally no further deduction from donating it vs. throwing it away and writing it off. > This is even easier for businesses, since for things like bikes that strictly decrease in value, the donation value is probably just the purchased price - accrued depreciation (which itself was modeled using methods similar to FMV). But that's the problem. They buy something, use it (or intend to use it but don't), and then throw it away. One way or another that allows them to write off the entire cost. Which means there isn't any additional deduction available for donating it to a charity instead of wasting it at the end, so there is nothing there to offset their cost/risk of making a donation instead of throwing it in a dumpster, and that causes tons more stuff to end up in the dumpster.
- cubedrone 6y ago
  That's not true, and it is frustrating to read such a pointless falsehood. I worked in a soup kitchen for years. The Bill Emerson's Good Samaritan Act of 1996 codified in federal law what states had started implementing in the 70s, that good faith donations won't hold people/corporations liable to food injury.
  - jedberg 6y ago
    That doesn't stop you from getting sued. That law still says you can sue for "gross negligence". You still have to go to court to prove you weren't grossly negligent. It's easier to just not donate.
- jrace 6y ago
  What laws? -This has not been a real issue for a while now(in the US/Can that is)
  - jedberg 6y ago
    General liability. There are some laws that specifically exempt food donations, but they still have "gross negligence" clauses, and it's easier to just not donate than worry about getting sued for gross negligence.
    - mthoms 6y ago
      Why are you all over this topic trying to support this misinformation? You've already been corrected (with citations) and yet you continue. Is it just a matter of being seen as "wrong", because it's okay. Really, it is. It's a very common myth. You claimed "There is a super high risk of getting sued if you give away food and someone gets sick". Now if you want to continue this claim, you need to provide citations. Who, exactly says that such "high risk" exists?
      - jedberg 6y ago
        I worked with restaurants in a previous business. We tried to get them to donate food. Not a single one would because they were afraid of even the chance of being sued, because their liability insurance would not cover donations. Their insurers and lawyers all advised against donating unused food because of the risk of a lawsuit that wasn't covered by insurance. So people can post all the "facts" they want to but the crux of the matter is that most restaurants are very risk averse and donating food is a risk.
        Melting_Harps 6y ago
        > So people can post all the "facts" they want to but the crux of the matter is that most restaurants are very risk averse and donating food is a risk. Very. I resorted to creating a cycle count in the walk in after every shift (off the clock) and giving it away pre-packaged 'meal prep' to employees, as most were just college kids, as so much high quality Salmon, chicken breast and other proteins that otherwise just ended up wasted. Its ironic because this restaurant got a James Beard Award for sustainability and low waste practices. In other places I just made family meal with the 'scraps' leftover for BOH/FOH family meals as we normally got off at ~2am and choices for food sucked. Its just something I had adapted to after my apprenticeship in Biodynamic Ag, and wished I saw more of it in the Industry. I'm not sure what to make of the bike thing, as the Lime scooters I rode were already pretty beat up and I used them not long after the deployed. I can't imagine what it must of have been for these bikes, the Google bikes around the Boulder campus look decent from afar (they're non EV, I think), but I never rode one so can't speak to its life-time. Waste in all transportation looks like this, I wish I could show the amount of recall parts I threw out on a daily basis at BMW but I signed an NDA. Its often cheaper to just discard the parts as-is at a minor loss than it is to pay for a much bigger loss for shipping back to a factory and then pay staff to sort through it and only to do the same at their local facility. I'm talking about pallet loads of differentials, driveshafts, and engine blocks as well as crate loads of ECUs etc... Although to be fair we did sell those for metal for their junk PM prices if/when I had down time. I actually re-learned how to solder, barely only ok at it now, because I was taking wiring harnesses and LED taillights home and tearing them apart and putting them back together. This is how a lot of VWs sat for a little over 2 years after the buyback [1]. Some made it back into the market, many didn't and I was just glad I wasn't in the Industry by then as it made me physically ill to see the waste a SOFTWARE issue ended up costing in an Environmental level. 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/business/volkswagen-diesel-vw-tdi-resales.html#commentsContainer https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/business/volkswagen-diese...
- danans 6y ago
  > That's not why restaurants throw away food. They do it because of liability laws. Here is an organization that collects excess food from restaurants, etc, and uses it to provide 20K meals a week to hungry people (in supposedly over-regulated San Francisco no less): http://www.foodrunners.org/ http://www.foodrunners.org/ If restaurants are throwing away food, it's because they don't care about the waste because there is no financial loss to them - and there are no local organizations like Food Runners to facilitate the donation.
  - jedberg 6y ago
    They assume the liability: http://www.foodrunners.org/donor-liability/ http://www.foodrunners.org/donor-liability/
    - danans 6y ago
      No they do not assume liability. From Public Law 104-210 - OCT. 1, 1996 (linked from that page): "(2) LIABILITY OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—A nonprofit organization shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability arising from the nature, age, packaging, or condition of apparently wholesome food or an apparently fit grocery product that the nonprofit organization received as a donation in good faith from a person or gleaner for ultimate distribution to needy individuals." The protections for nonprofits doing this sort of work are pretty extensive, in part because many such organizations in the US are religiously affiliated nonprofits.
      - jedberg 6y ago
        Right exactly. They are not liable, but the donator isn't either. They've essentially erased the risk for the restaurant.
        danans 6y ago
        > That's not why restaurants throw away food. They do it because of liability laws. Regarding the food distribution nonprofits: > They assume the liability > Right exactly. They are not liable I'm not sure how to reconcile those comments of yours, but regardless, I think we agree that donations of food to non-profits for distribution to the needy incurs no liability for any of the parties involved, and haven't since 1996. It is a persistent myth that liability is a major disincentive to food donation, motivated by who-knows-what. The USDA has even clearer guidance on this subject here: https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usda-good-samaritan-faqs.pdf https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usda-good... And there are no lack of organizations to facilitate these donations with no liability: https://www.usda.gov/oce/foodwaste/resources/donations.htm https://www.usda.gov/oce/foodwaste/resources/donations.htm
- mthoms 6y ago
  Absolutely, 100% untrue. [0] "There is no available public record of anyone in the United States being sued...because of harms related to donated food." [1] [0] https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Liability%20Protection%20Food%20Donation.pdf https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/re... [1] https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/restaurants-that-dont-donate-because-of-liability-are-just-making-excuses-experts-say_n_577d6f92e4b0344d514dd20f?ri18n=true https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/restaurants-that-dont-do...
  - jedberg 6y ago
    Because no one does it...?
    - mthoms 6y ago
      Is that a statement of fact or a question? The article I cited says one organization alone "has 650 cafes nationwide and donated more than 286,000 pounds of food last year." It also mentions several other organizations who do similar work. The root problem is people spreading this misinformation. Please don't.
sky_rw 6y ago
This is not at all like when restaurants throw away food. The key distinction here is is that the bikes are getting recycled. They will be broken down and sold as scrap materials.

jedberg 6y ago

That's not why restaurants throw away food. They do it because of liability laws. There is a super high risk of getting sued if you give away food and someone gets sick.

tylerchilds 6y ago
Fair enough and about bikes?
- jedberg 6y ago
  Same problem. The risk of getting sued if someone injures themselves on the bike is too high.
baq 6y ago
tax also could be an issue, it is in my country.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  In the US it's often tax-neutral for corporations, which is kind of unfortunate. If they donate it to a nonprofit the cost is deductible, but if they throw it away as spoiled food then it still is as a write off (cost of doing business). It basically means businesses can't get the deduction for donating their old stuff because they'd lose an equivalent deduction they were already getting. What would fix it is to let them deduct the value of the donated food/whatever instead of its cost, because then the deduction would be bigger from donating something than throwing it away. The result would be a huge reduction in taxes on businesses, because then everybody would do it and get a ton of tax deductions, but it could be well worth it for the enormous reduction in waste and increase in charitable donations. And it might not even cost that much in tax revenue, because it would be an alternative to a lot of the shell games corporations already play to reduce their tax burden, but in this case it would actually be helping somebody.
  - danans 6y ago
    > It basically means businesses can't get the deduction for donating their old stuff because they'd lose an equivalent deduction they were already getting. That's because according to the tax code, businesses can claim depreciation of all capital property. They can't claim their cost of the donated property because they are already claiming the depreciation. > What would fix it is to let them deduct the value of the donated food/whatever instead of its cost The IRS already bases deductions for donations on Fair-market-value (FMV) of the donation. They have an entire guide for assessing FMV for the purposes of donation: https://www.irs.gov/publications/p561 https://www.irs.gov/publications/p561 [1] The guide explicitly addresses the question of cost vs value and how time between the initial purchase and sale might affect the value. This is even easier for businesses, since for things like bikes that strictly decrease in value, the donation value is probably just the purchased price - accrued depreciation (which itself was modeled using methods similar to FMV).
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      > That's because according to the tax code, businesses can claim depreciation of all capital property. Food isn't "capital property" in general, so it's a different deduction, but in the end it comes out much the same. Which is what I said. The price they paid for it is already a deduction, so there is generally no further deduction from donating it vs. throwing it away and writing it off. > This is even easier for businesses, since for things like bikes that strictly decrease in value, the donation value is probably just the purchased price - accrued depreciation (which itself was modeled using methods similar to FMV). But that's the problem. They buy something, use it (or intend to use it but don't), and then throw it away. One way or another that allows them to write off the entire cost. Which means there isn't any additional deduction available for donating it to a charity instead of wasting it at the end, so there is nothing there to offset their cost/risk of making a donation instead of throwing it in a dumpster, and that causes tons more stuff to end up in the dumpster.
cubedrone 6y ago
That's not true, and it is frustrating to read such a pointless falsehood. I worked in a soup kitchen for years. The Bill Emerson's Good Samaritan Act of 1996 codified in federal law what states had started implementing in the 70s, that good faith donations won't hold people/corporations liable to food injury.
- jedberg 6y ago
  That doesn't stop you from getting sued. That law still says you can sue for "gross negligence". You still have to go to court to prove you weren't grossly negligent. It's easier to just not donate.
jrace 6y ago
What laws? -This has not been a real issue for a while now(in the US/Can that is)
- jedberg 6y ago
  General liability. There are some laws that specifically exempt food donations, but they still have "gross negligence" clauses, and it's easier to just not donate than worry about getting sued for gross negligence.
  - mthoms 6y ago
    Why are you all over this topic trying to support this misinformation? You've already been corrected (with citations) and yet you continue. Is it just a matter of being seen as "wrong", because it's okay. Really, it is. It's a very common myth. You claimed "There is a super high risk of getting sued if you give away food and someone gets sick". Now if you want to continue this claim, you need to provide citations. Who, exactly says that such "high risk" exists?
    - jedberg 6y ago
      I worked with restaurants in a previous business. We tried to get them to donate food. Not a single one would because they were afraid of even the chance of being sued, because their liability insurance would not cover donations. Their insurers and lawyers all advised against donating unused food because of the risk of a lawsuit that wasn't covered by insurance. So people can post all the "facts" they want to but the crux of the matter is that most restaurants are very risk averse and donating food is a risk.
      - Melting_Harps 6y ago
        > So people can post all the "facts" they want to but the crux of the matter is that most restaurants are very risk averse and donating food is a risk. Very. I resorted to creating a cycle count in the walk in after every shift (off the clock) and giving it away pre-packaged 'meal prep' to employees, as most were just college kids, as so much high quality Salmon, chicken breast and other proteins that otherwise just ended up wasted. Its ironic because this restaurant got a James Beard Award for sustainability and low waste practices. In other places I just made family meal with the 'scraps' leftover for BOH/FOH family meals as we normally got off at ~2am and choices for food sucked. Its just something I had adapted to after my apprenticeship in Biodynamic Ag, and wished I saw more of it in the Industry. I'm not sure what to make of the bike thing, as the Lime scooters I rode were already pretty beat up and I used them not long after the deployed. I can't imagine what it must of have been for these bikes, the Google bikes around the Boulder campus look decent from afar (they're non EV, I think), but I never rode one so can't speak to its life-time. Waste in all transportation looks like this, I wish I could show the amount of recall parts I threw out on a daily basis at BMW but I signed an NDA. Its often cheaper to just discard the parts as-is at a minor loss than it is to pay for a much bigger loss for shipping back to a factory and then pay staff to sort through it and only to do the same at their local facility. I'm talking about pallet loads of differentials, driveshafts, and engine blocks as well as crate loads of ECUs etc... Although to be fair we did sell those for metal for their junk PM prices if/when I had down time. I actually re-learned how to solder, barely only ok at it now, because I was taking wiring harnesses and LED taillights home and tearing them apart and putting them back together. This is how a lot of VWs sat for a little over 2 years after the buyback [1]. Some made it back into the market, many didn't and I was just glad I wasn't in the Industry by then as it made me physically ill to see the waste a SOFTWARE issue ended up costing in an Environmental level. 1: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/business/volkswagen-diesel-vw-tdi-resales.html#commentsContainer https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/22/business/volkswagen-diese...
danans 6y ago
> That's not why restaurants throw away food. They do it because of liability laws. Here is an organization that collects excess food from restaurants, etc, and uses it to provide 20K meals a week to hungry people (in supposedly over-regulated San Francisco no less): http://www.foodrunners.org/ http://www.foodrunners.org/ If restaurants are throwing away food, it's because they don't care about the waste because there is no financial loss to them - and there are no local organizations like Food Runners to facilitate the donation.
- jedberg 6y ago
  They assume the liability: http://www.foodrunners.org/donor-liability/ http://www.foodrunners.org/donor-liability/
  - danans 6y ago
    No they do not assume liability. From Public Law 104-210 - OCT. 1, 1996 (linked from that page): "(2) LIABILITY OF NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION.—A nonprofit organization shall not be subject to civil or criminal liability arising from the nature, age, packaging, or condition of apparently wholesome food or an apparently fit grocery product that the nonprofit organization received as a donation in good faith from a person or gleaner for ultimate distribution to needy individuals." The protections for nonprofits doing this sort of work are pretty extensive, in part because many such organizations in the US are religiously affiliated nonprofits.
    - jedberg 6y ago
      Right exactly. They are not liable, but the donator isn't either. They've essentially erased the risk for the restaurant.
      - danans 6y ago
        > That's not why restaurants throw away food. They do it because of liability laws. Regarding the food distribution nonprofits: > They assume the liability > Right exactly. They are not liable I'm not sure how to reconcile those comments of yours, but regardless, I think we agree that donations of food to non-profits for distribution to the needy incurs no liability for any of the parties involved, and haven't since 1996. It is a persistent myth that liability is a major disincentive to food donation, motivated by who-knows-what. The USDA has even clearer guidance on this subject here: https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usda-good-samaritan-faqs.pdf https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usda-good... And there are no lack of organizations to facilitate these donations with no liability: https://www.usda.gov/oce/foodwaste/resources/donations.htm https://www.usda.gov/oce/foodwaste/resources/donations.htm
mthoms 6y ago
Absolutely, 100% untrue. [0] "There is no available public record of anyone in the United States being sued...because of harms related to donated food." [1] [0] https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/resources/Liability%20Protection%20Food%20Donation.pdf https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/re... [1] https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/restaurants-that-dont-donate-because-of-liability-are-just-making-excuses-experts-say_n_577d6f92e4b0344d514dd20f?ri18n=true https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/restaurants-that-dont-do...
- jedberg 6y ago
  Because no one does it...?
  - mthoms 6y ago
    Is that a statement of fact or a question? The article I cited says one organization alone "has 650 cafes nationwide and donated more than 286,000 pounds of food last year." It also mentions several other organizations who do similar work. The root problem is people spreading this misinformation. Please don't.

sky_rw 6y ago

This is not at all like when restaurants throw away food. The key distinction here is is that the bikes are getting recycled. They will be broken down and sold as scrap materials.