6 ms·

No! The consumer is responsible for the disposal of containers, NOT Coca Cola. And government is responsible for the recycling of materials, NOT Coca Cola (whi

No! The consumer is responsible for the disposal of containers, NOT Coca Cola. And government is responsible for the recycling of materials, NOT Coca Cola (which supplies drinks in glass, metal, and plastic containers - all recyclable).

dkdbejwi383 4y ago
Not all plastics can be recycled, and even those that can be are often not feasibly recycled. Recycling of plastics (and plastic lined aluminium cans etc) is yet another strategy employed by corporations to pass blame onto the consumer.
eptcyka 4y ago
It never ceases to amaze me that multi-billion dollar conglomerates seemingly get public support for free. Coca-cola is certainly culpable here, since they have the disposable funds and political power to develop recyclable containers or enable the sale of beverages using reusable containers.
- blitzar 4y ago
  > since they have the disposable funds You have disposable funds, you MUST give it to what I deem to be important. Thanks.
  - eptcyka 4y ago
    I just think it's in the interest of Coca Cola to maintain Earth to a sustainable level so that more people can give them money.
    - djbebs 4y ago
      They don't.
  - janalsncm 4y ago
    For the record, yes, they will probably pass the cost off to the consumer (that or lower their profits). Even so, I don’t see it as a bad thing. We’ve lived for too long on cheap disposable plastics. Our descendants will look down on us for the world we’re leaving them with.
- moring 4y ago
  Coca-Cola does not benefit from pollution or from using single-use containers. They use them because incentives are set up that way, i.e. "it's cheaper". Money is only a proxy for the actual incentives, though. If we expect Coca-Cola to use recyclable containers, we should set up the incentives that way, using taxes, subsidies, or outright banning single-use containers. Put another way, what happens right now is that (some) people tell Coca-Cola to "do X, not Y", but actually punish them for doing X and reward them for doing Y.
benj111 4y ago
I'll agree with you to a point. I don't really get the downvotes? But at this point we know that the status quo isn't working. Coca cola is knowingly contributing to a system that isn't working. That for me is the important point. If for example coca cola brought out biodegradable bottles that promise to break down in landfill that's good. They're engaging with the problem etc. If it later turns out that they give off a dangerous toxin, then they need to fix that. They did something with the best of intentions, that isn't in question. But it didn't work out as expected, and they need to fix that.
lost_tourist 4y ago
You're getting downvoted but you are correct. If humans cared they would demand aluminum/glass containers, and only the most recyclable of plastics be in use.
- ben-schaaf 4y ago
  "Humans" did demand recyclable materials, which is why with a looming threat of regulation the plastics industry lied about plastic being recyclable. Industry has a vastly higher capacity to lie, obscure and deflect than any individual has to uncover and understand the full and total consequences of their purchases.
  - fractallyte 4y ago
    And you're still ignoring the role of the consumer. How much of that recyclable trash is dumped? Why does it end up in waterways, and eventually the ocean? That's a problem that's completely separate from the plastics industry. It's a problem of individual responsibility - which is the ‚elephant in the room' for so many people in this discussion.
- fractallyte 4y ago
  And you're equally getting downvoted for stating something that is also absolutely correct: "If humans cared..." The amount of garbage ending up in oceans proves definitively that humans don't care. This completely disregards the recyclability of that garbage. It doesn't matter how much effort the producers put into making their products 'green'. The problem is with filthy, apathetic consumers. How do we fix that?
  - lost_tourist 4y ago
    so maybe it's time for us to extinct ourselves?
fractallyte 4y ago
I will stand by this, despite the disagreements. How far should a company go to make its products disposable in a responsible way? They're already recyclable! So the responsibility passes to the consumer: I've witnessed countless instances where recyclable items are put into general trash (or littered). It's unacceptable! Well, for me it is - but not for many (MANY!) average consumers. And how does that trash end up in rivers and the sea? Hint: it wasn't Coca Cola company. It's up to municipal authorities (with direction from central government) to provide recycling facilities, and to enforce recycling for those ignorant/recalcitrant/idiot consumers who can't/won't follow basic instructions. And it's up to central government to appropriately punish the irresponsible dumping of trash. That's a long trail of responsibility, necessitating some really tough choices and actions. Easier to just blame the company, right? That's a pathetic argument. It should be a closed system, from producer to consumer to recycler. That system is incomplete! Fix it!

dkdbejwi383 4y ago

Not all plastics can be recycled, and even those that can be are often not feasibly recycled. Recycling of plastics (and plastic lined aluminium cans etc) is yet another strategy employed by corporations to pass blame onto the consumer.

eptcyka 4y ago

It never ceases to amaze me that multi-billion dollar conglomerates seemingly get public support for free. Coca-cola is certainly culpable here, since they have the disposable funds and political power to develop recyclable containers or enable the sale of beverages using reusable containers.

blitzar 4y ago
> since they have the disposable funds You have disposable funds, you MUST give it to what I deem to be important. Thanks.
- eptcyka 4y ago
  I just think it's in the interest of Coca Cola to maintain Earth to a sustainable level so that more people can give them money.
  - djbebs 4y ago
    They don't.
- janalsncm 4y ago
  For the record, yes, they will probably pass the cost off to the consumer (that or lower their profits). Even so, I don’t see it as a bad thing. We’ve lived for too long on cheap disposable plastics. Our descendants will look down on us for the world we’re leaving them with.
moring 4y ago
Coca-Cola does not benefit from pollution or from using single-use containers. They use them because incentives are set up that way, i.e. "it's cheaper". Money is only a proxy for the actual incentives, though. If we expect Coca-Cola to use recyclable containers, we should set up the incentives that way, using taxes, subsidies, or outright banning single-use containers. Put another way, what happens right now is that (some) people tell Coca-Cola to "do X, not Y", but actually punish them for doing X and reward them for doing Y.

benj111 4y ago

I'll agree with you to a point. I don't really get the downvotes? But at this point we know that the status quo isn't working. Coca cola is knowingly contributing to a system that isn't working. That for me is the important point. If for example coca cola brought out biodegradable bottles that promise to break down in landfill that's good. They're engaging with the problem etc. If it later turns out that they give off a dangerous toxin, then they need to fix that. They did something with the best of intentions, that isn't in question. But it didn't work out as expected, and they need to fix that.

lost_tourist 4y ago

You're getting downvoted but you are correct. If humans cared they would demand aluminum/glass containers, and only the most recyclable of plastics be in use.

ben-schaaf 4y ago
"Humans" did demand recyclable materials, which is why with a looming threat of regulation the plastics industry lied about plastic being recyclable. Industry has a vastly higher capacity to lie, obscure and deflect than any individual has to uncover and understand the full and total consequences of their purchases.
- fractallyte 4y ago
  And you're still ignoring the role of the consumer. How much of that recyclable trash is dumped? Why does it end up in waterways, and eventually the ocean? That's a problem that's completely separate from the plastics industry. It's a problem of individual responsibility - which is the ‚elephant in the room' for so many people in this discussion.
fractallyte 4y ago
And you're equally getting downvoted for stating something that is also absolutely correct: "If humans cared..." The amount of garbage ending up in oceans proves definitively that humans don't care. This completely disregards the recyclability of that garbage. It doesn't matter how much effort the producers put into making their products 'green'. The problem is with filthy, apathetic consumers. How do we fix that?
- lost_tourist 4y ago
  so maybe it's time for us to extinct ourselves?

fractallyte 4y ago

I will stand by this, despite the disagreements. How far should a company go to make its products disposable in a responsible way? They're already recyclable! So the responsibility passes to the consumer: I've witnessed countless instances where recyclable items are put into general trash (or littered). It's unacceptable! Well, for me it is - but not for many (MANY!) average consumers. And how does that trash end up in rivers and the sea? Hint: it wasn't Coca Cola company. It's up to municipal authorities (with direction from central government) to provide recycling facilities, and to enforce recycling for those ignorant/recalcitrant/idiot consumers who can't/won't follow basic instructions. And it's up to central government to appropriately punish the irresponsible dumping of trash. That's a long trail of responsibility, necessitating some really tough choices and actions. Easier to just blame the company, right? That's a pathetic argument. It should be a closed system, from producer to consumer to recycler. That system is incomplete! Fix it!