4 ms·

> lobbyists are merely revealing the very real preference that Americans love using single use plastics. Citation needed? So are you saying that it is the con

> lobbyists are merely revealing the very real preference that Americans love using single use plastics. Citation needed? So are you saying that it is the consumer that drives demand for single-use plastic? The massive cost reduction for the manufacturer has absolutely nothing to do with this push?

bobthepanda 4y ago
Who else but the consumer is asking for rock bottom pricing? Even if not verbally, people vote with their feet and wallets. We need to restore the relationship between disposal and cost, by charging manufacturers a cost to recycle or trash. https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2022-2-summer/notes-here-there/shifting-costs-recycling-manufacturers-not-consumers?amp https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2022-2-summer/notes-here-t...
- hunter-gatherer 4y ago
  The narrative that 'people vote with their wallets' get pushed around a lot on this forum but I fear it is often disingenuous to the nuances of a given situation. I can't really cast meaningful votes with a lot of items because I'm still at the mercy of what is manufactured and readily available. Despite not wanting a touch screen and only a barebones car, nobody is going to make one. Thus I'm left with a few options I don't like, one of which I have to take. To be clear I don't think the wallet-vote narrative is completely wrong-I just think consumers have less voting power than everyone thinks they do (in this narrative)
  - Aunche 4y ago
    > Despite not wanting a touch screen and only a barebones car, nobody is going to make one. This isn't a great example because the government mandates all cars have a back up camera, so given the real estate that takes in the center console, you might as well make it a touch screen and outsource some functionality to it. Mazda cars probably come closest to what you're looking for though.
  - jcampbell1 4y ago
    Tropicana, which was owned by Pepsi at the time, gained significant market share when they switched from paper cartons to plastic bottles. It was in the glossy annual report, but I can’t remember what year. The real culprit for all the clear plastic was the anti-landfill environmental movement that deceived the public that plastic can be recycled in an environmentally beneficial way. I suspect this lie was backed by the manufacturers. The other environmental scam brewing is how hard the oil and gas industry are secretly and falsely pushing hydrogen as a solution to carbon emissions. They are salivating at the idea of federally funded pipelines and know hydrogen from methane is going to be the cheapest source for decades. The backup camera thing was regulation announced in 2002, with more than decade allowed to implement. The reason was because about 25 kids per year were being backed over and killed, often by their parents.
  - hcarvalhoalves 4y ago
    > Despite not wanting a touch screen and only a barebones car, nobody is going to make one. Thus I'm left with a few options I don't like, one of which I have to take. You’re not a victim. Don’t buy, or buy products you value second hand. I have a 2015 notebook that I can repair and still works great, an older car I can repair and works great, a 2009 professional camera that works great with lenses from 1970, etc.
- nerdponx 4y ago
  Nobody "asked for" it. People are presented a cheap option and an expensive option, and without a strong reason to prefer the latter, choose the former. Or people do actually prefer the slightly-more-expensive option, but it gets phased out and then there is only the cheap option and some artisanal bullshit version that costs 5x and much so only rich people buy it. Some combination of price discrimination via "quality bundling" and shrinkflation. However I agree that the solution is to un-externalize these costs.
  - Aunche 4y ago
    > Or people do actually prefer the slightly-more-expensive option, but it gets phased out and then there is only the cheap option and some artisanal bullshit version that costs 5x and much so only rich people buy it. If the majority of people prefer plastic jugs of milk over reusable bottles of milk, then the milkman no longer benefits from economies of scale, so they have to increase prices. This causes more people to switch to plastic jugs of milk, so milkmen have even less economies of scale, etc. The only stable equilibrium is for the milkman to market his service as a luxury.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  > by charging manufacturers a cost to recycle or trash I've been advocating for decades the taxing of pollution to "internalize the externalities". In this case, taxing plastic.
- juve1996 4y ago
  Plastic, at the time, was simply better. It is lighter, not brittle, and cheap to mass-produce. Shipping costs are greatly reduced. Consumers benefit from cheaper pricing, companies get better margins, everyone wins. Now we see the externalities, or are forced to accept them. But it's not just the consumer's fault. Lots of cheaper items went directly to profit and not to consumers.

bobthepanda 4y ago

Who else but the consumer is asking for rock bottom pricing? Even if not verbally, people vote with their feet and wallets. We need to restore the relationship between disposal and cost, by charging manufacturers a cost to recycle or trash. https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2022-2-summer/notes-here-there/shifting-costs-recycling-manufacturers-not-consumers?amp https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/2022-2-summer/notes-here-t...

hunter-gatherer 4y ago
The narrative that 'people vote with their wallets' get pushed around a lot on this forum but I fear it is often disingenuous to the nuances of a given situation. I can't really cast meaningful votes with a lot of items because I'm still at the mercy of what is manufactured and readily available. Despite not wanting a touch screen and only a barebones car, nobody is going to make one. Thus I'm left with a few options I don't like, one of which I have to take. To be clear I don't think the wallet-vote narrative is completely wrong-I just think consumers have less voting power than everyone thinks they do (in this narrative)
- Aunche 4y ago
  > Despite not wanting a touch screen and only a barebones car, nobody is going to make one. This isn't a great example because the government mandates all cars have a back up camera, so given the real estate that takes in the center console, you might as well make it a touch screen and outsource some functionality to it. Mazda cars probably come closest to what you're looking for though.
- jcampbell1 4y ago
  Tropicana, which was owned by Pepsi at the time, gained significant market share when they switched from paper cartons to plastic bottles. It was in the glossy annual report, but I can’t remember what year. The real culprit for all the clear plastic was the anti-landfill environmental movement that deceived the public that plastic can be recycled in an environmentally beneficial way. I suspect this lie was backed by the manufacturers. The other environmental scam brewing is how hard the oil and gas industry are secretly and falsely pushing hydrogen as a solution to carbon emissions. They are salivating at the idea of federally funded pipelines and know hydrogen from methane is going to be the cheapest source for decades. The backup camera thing was regulation announced in 2002, with more than decade allowed to implement. The reason was because about 25 kids per year were being backed over and killed, often by their parents.
- hcarvalhoalves 4y ago
  > Despite not wanting a touch screen and only a barebones car, nobody is going to make one. Thus I'm left with a few options I don't like, one of which I have to take. You’re not a victim. Don’t buy, or buy products you value second hand. I have a 2015 notebook that I can repair and still works great, an older car I can repair and works great, a 2009 professional camera that works great with lenses from 1970, etc.
nerdponx 4y ago
Nobody "asked for" it. People are presented a cheap option and an expensive option, and without a strong reason to prefer the latter, choose the former. Or people do actually prefer the slightly-more-expensive option, but it gets phased out and then there is only the cheap option and some artisanal bullshit version that costs 5x and much so only rich people buy it. Some combination of price discrimination via "quality bundling" and shrinkflation. However I agree that the solution is to un-externalize these costs.
- Aunche 4y ago
  > Or people do actually prefer the slightly-more-expensive option, but it gets phased out and then there is only the cheap option and some artisanal bullshit version that costs 5x and much so only rich people buy it. If the majority of people prefer plastic jugs of milk over reusable bottles of milk, then the milkman no longer benefits from economies of scale, so they have to increase prices. This causes more people to switch to plastic jugs of milk, so milkmen have even less economies of scale, etc. The only stable equilibrium is for the milkman to market his service as a luxury.
WalterBright 4y ago
> by charging manufacturers a cost to recycle or trash I've been advocating for decades the taxing of pollution to "internalize the externalities". In this case, taxing plastic.
juve1996 4y ago
Plastic, at the time, was simply better. It is lighter, not brittle, and cheap to mass-produce. Shipping costs are greatly reduced. Consumers benefit from cheaper pricing, companies get better margins, everyone wins. Now we see the externalities, or are forced to accept them. But it's not just the consumer's fault. Lots of cheaper items went directly to profit and not to consumers.