(no title)
spats1990 | 4 years ago
Coca Cola and others are largely responsible for the notion that it is the individual's responsibility not to "litter" single-use products that are extremely profitable for corporations: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2006/05/origins-anti-li...
nitrogen|4 years ago
spats1990|4 years ago
There are lots of things in what we call civilised society that act as gentle guidance mechanisms to encourage compliance toward some end that is desirable for everybody.
Without some incentive to transport single use items to an appropriate receptacle some people will always just throw them on the ground, as it costs them nothing to do so.
The makers of single use drink bottles have thus privatised profit and socialised the negative externalities of their product. The money goes in their pockets, and the bottles go in the ocean.
colechristensen|4 years ago
I’m not sure Mother Jones is always the best source of information for accurate historical analysis. I have serious issues with the first paragraph and don’t really feel up to a piece long rebuttal.
spats1990|4 years ago
I think it should lie at least half with manufacturers who provide their product in plastic bottles that can costlessly be thrown away, into the sea, by consumers.
There is no penalty to the individual for doing so.
Gasoline used to have lead in it. Now it doesn't, because people realised it's bad for us and the world we live in.
When supermarkets used to give plastic bags away for free, it would be common to see them blowing around, floating down rivers in urban areas like jellyfish, etc. Now, in places where supermarkets have either been forced to charge for them (or eliminate them) etc, you rarely see plastic bags as a form of roaming trash.
Somebody took a 1% hit to their profits, maybe. But the world didn't end.