The issue is we have something that was complimentary which is now being charged a marked up price to generate further profit, at further expense to the customer. All the while we’re being told this change is for the environment, rather than for profit. It’s the deceit that annoys people.
It’s sad that kids growing up today will see it as normal. People shouldn’t be conditioned to serve profiteering corporations, we should be teaching people to demand better terms.
Why can’t something be both for profit and for the environment? Because frankly, after living with a plastic bag ban for years (Canada started the process in 2020), I haven’t seen random nasty plastic bags being blown around on the street. So it’s helped my immediate environment.
I feel we gotta reduce plastic use on all fronts. Yes, individual consumers pollute less than corps, but that doesn’t mean that consumerism as a culture doesn’t produce unnecessary waste. Think about a single store and just how much packaging there is in that one place, and where all of that will ultimately end up.
So like, I’m personally for bringing reusable containers to stores to fill up on things like say, shampoo or milk. Milk delivery was a thing for a long time, so there’s nothing saying our cultural approach to these things can’t or shouldn’t change, especially if it means less waste is generated.
And if reusable containers become a thing, I promise you there will be people whinging that it’s profitable for the groceries that they’re selling bottles that you used to get for free with the soap or whatever.
Why can’t something be both for profit and for the environment?
Because inevitably the pursuit of profit takes priority over better solutions. Case in point, recycling has also reduced the amount of plastic waste around, however really that’s just fuelling a waste processing industry that opposes re-using of materials - not without reprocessing through their business. Meanwhile, if you look to countries like Germany they’ve put business profits to the side and created a system that re-uses glass for almost all drinks, all now completely maintained by the income of its deposit system.
And if reusable containers become a thing, I promise you there will be people whinging that it’s profitable for the groceries that they’re selling bottles that you used to get for free with the soap or whatever.
Well, if they were charging you for the use, then yes that would be reasonable to complain about. They should be providing them with a fully refundable deposit - you return them, you get your money back. If you look at re-usable water bottles, that market has exploded with a bunch of over-priced crap, rather than the best solution being mass produced and distributed with the product.
The issue is we have something that was complimentary which is now being charged a marked up price to generate further profit, at further expense to the customer. All the while we’re being told this change is for the environment, rather than for profit. It’s the deceit that annoys people.
It’s sad that kids growing up today will see it as normal. People shouldn’t be conditioned to serve profiteering corporations, we should be teaching people to demand better terms.
Why can’t something be both for profit and for the environment? Because frankly, after living with a plastic bag ban for years (Canada started the process in 2020), I haven’t seen random nasty plastic bags being blown around on the street. So it’s helped my immediate environment.
I feel we gotta reduce plastic use on all fronts. Yes, individual consumers pollute less than corps, but that doesn’t mean that consumerism as a culture doesn’t produce unnecessary waste. Think about a single store and just how much packaging there is in that one place, and where all of that will ultimately end up.
So like, I’m personally for bringing reusable containers to stores to fill up on things like say, shampoo or milk. Milk delivery was a thing for a long time, so there’s nothing saying our cultural approach to these things can’t or shouldn’t change, especially if it means less waste is generated.
And if reusable containers become a thing, I promise you there will be people whinging that it’s profitable for the groceries that they’re selling bottles that you used to get for free with the soap or whatever.
Because inevitably the pursuit of profit takes priority over better solutions. Case in point, recycling has also reduced the amount of plastic waste around, however really that’s just fuelling a waste processing industry that opposes re-using of materials - not without reprocessing through their business. Meanwhile, if you look to countries like Germany they’ve put business profits to the side and created a system that re-uses glass for almost all drinks, all now completely maintained by the income of its deposit system.
Well, if they were charging you for the use, then yes that would be reasonable to complain about. They should be providing them with a fully refundable deposit - you return them, you get your money back. If you look at re-usable water bottles, that market has exploded with a bunch of over-priced crap, rather than the best solution being mass produced and distributed with the product.
So what’s a better solution than reusing grocery bags?
Would reusable grocery bags suddenly be ok if they were free? Because honestly I feel that would just fuel forgetful people’s bad habits.
They should be provided at cost price.