|
|
|
Author |
|
Message | |
|
robkb
Joined: 29 May 2009 Posts: 4205 Location: SE London
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
|
|
|
|
Mrs R
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Posts: 7202
|
|
|
|
|
Bernie66
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 13967 Location: Eastoft
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
|
|
|
|
Bernie66
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 13967 Location: Eastoft
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
|
|
|
|
Bernie66
Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 13967 Location: Eastoft
|
|
|
|
|
Mrs R
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Posts: 7202
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 11 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
cab wrote: |
Dances With Cows wrote: |
Why would it not mean they would? |
Largely because the amount of change needed to get there is so massive. At present, you can be pretty sure that you'll get away with it. The police aren't responsible, local authorities don't care, and demonstrating that such refuse poses a public health problem is very hard indeed. Been there, done that, and seen just how entirely useless 'authorities' are at helping. |
right, but the amount of change needed to implement this scheme woud be 'massive' - if we're going that far in this theoretical situation, why would we not implement a corresponding 'stick' for nobbers, and also hammer the supermarkets about producing the excess packaging etc. in for a penny, in for a pound. For me, that's all part of the new scheme. It'd be senseless to simply switch off bin lorries and say 'right, you're on your own'. |
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 11 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
Dances With Cows wrote: |
right, but the amount of change needed to implement this scheme woud be 'massive' - if we're going that far in this theoretical situation, why would we not implement a corresponding 'stick' for nobbers, and also hammer the supermarkets about producing the excess packaging etc. in for a penny, in for a pound. For me, that's all part of the new scheme. It'd be senseless to simply switch off bin lorries and say 'right, you're on your own'. |
At lunchtime I was talking to a chap in a charity shop (which shall remain nameless). He's doing community service, he had something like 200 hours to do originally, he's just been given another 200 hours 'for doing it again' (what it was shall remain unsaid; it wasn't nice). He's sure he'll get that to do at the same charity shop, so he's okay with it.
We're not looking at changing culture around waste to make your idea work. We're looking at changing the entire culture of crime and punishment. Massive is under-stating it. |
|
|
|
|
Mrs R
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 Posts: 7202
|
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
Posted: Tue Feb 15, 11 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
Dances With Cows wrote: |
cab wrote: |
We're not looking at changing culture around waste to make your idea work. We're looking at changing the entire culture of crime and punishment. Massive is under-stating it. |
I don't think so, we haven't established what the exact methods would be! |
Not really. At present you can basically do what you like with rubbish and while, in theory, if you fly tip it, let it pile up, burn it, or whatever, you might be in trouble. In practice no one in any kind of authority cares. At all. Even a bit. So the result is that individuals get away with being dreadful. And unfortunately thats also true for lots of other petty crime like nicking a few things from shops, speeding,etc. To change things such that there are real ways of people dealing with waste in a future where we're meant to get rid of our own... Its unrealistic. Sorry. I don't see us getting hard on any of those other criminal activities either. |
|
|
|
|
cab
Joined: 01 Nov 2004 Posts: 32429
|
|
|
|
|
Barefoot Andrew Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 21 Mar 2007 Posts: 22780 Location: In the 17th century
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
|