162
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
162 points (95.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43744 readers
1898 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Money. Plastic is so integrated into the supply chain that divesting from it would require retooling probably thousands of bottling plants, at significant expense, with no guarantee of ROI.
Increase the costs by adding taxes to the plastic that account. Sucks to use the stick instead of the carrot, but if it’s a real societal cost then the cost should be paid by those introducing it. They’d raise prices for these goods and consumers can decide if it’s still worth buying.
Then give a loan to a worker co-op that would like to take over and force THAT sale to happen. That way the everything is equally shared amongst the workers, diffusing the wealth and power into the working class.
Not the vast majority going to some billionaires looking to undermine the very nation they were founded.
Plastic is cheaper and less damaging to the environment.