Deposit return scheme (recycling) - Part 2

they do but they're working off the logic that it you want to keep the can/bottle it costs 15 cent now while before it was included in the price/free

Not at all.

I want them to maintain the price of the product (1 euro for a bottle of water in our example) and not to pass on the cost of recycling to the customer.

Customer continues to pay the Pre-DRS price for the product. This is not a cost reduction.

If customer returns the bottle, fair trade is that you get your 15c back and the scheme gets the bottle.

It's a good job that the deposit isn't €5. That would make a €1 bottle of water (the contents) €6. A €5 empty plastic bottle would be an expensive keepsake.

They just want to keep all of their bottles and cans for some reason and are annoyed that they can't continue the construction of their Evian Eiffel Tower without having to sacrifice the deposit.

Before DRS, 1 euro was the cost of the bottle plus the water.

Do you understand this?

After DRS, 1.15 is the cost of the bottle plus the water.

1.15 > 1.00.

Do you understand that 1.15 is greater than 1.00?

If so, you can conclude that the product price (bottle + water) has increased by 15%, as a result of DRS.

Perhaps some folks do. Or perhaps they want to recycle it themselves for profit.

Either way, its up to them what they do with it. They paid for it.

You know you've lost the argument Rocket when your only comeback is "well, there is no good reason for wanting to keep the thing that you paid for, so we should just forget about the value of it so."

Ultimate strawman argument and does not address the very real fact that the plastic container, does and always did, have monetary value.

One last time..

Before DRS: 1 Euro = Can/Bottle plus contents.

After DRS, 1 Euro = contents only.

Enough people on here understand this is a price increase. So we can leave it there.

It won't be the last time.

What these schemes do is create a false market by confiscating a product.

In this instance the container.

It's the perfect scam, setup a company without actually producing anything, but you steal someone else's product, then you charge for it.

It's genius really.

Obviously the money they earn from selling on the product should be passed back to the consumer.

But that is about as likely as this scam making any difference to less plastic use.

That makes no sense. Because there were previous price increases for reasons X, that means there can never be a different reason for price increases in the future?

Completely illogical.

Also, you offered no response to the other points, such as recouping costs and fees associated with the scheme. The disappearance of cheaper imported products. So all the points stand.

I understand you completely like I understand flat earthers. Remove sense and then intentionally act stupid about logic

Sure, show us how you "proved" the reason for price increase previous to DRS?
Doesn't it actually make it more likelier further price increases are due to DRS and not due to previously adjusted for input cost increases?

Do you have access to internal company meeting notes where such proof is obtainable, and you can provide a breakdown of what price increase was actually down to what cause?

As opposed to any claims made in press releases?

Nope, of course you don't.

It is a social media discussion forum. The observable effective price increases coincidental with the scheme being launched, especially multi-packs and the disappearance of cheaper imported items, are sufficient proof for the purposes of this discussion.

I have also outlined different additional costs incurred by producers in the scheme.
Costs which are not recoupable under the deposit scheme and which need to be recouped from consumers ultimately.

Do you really think retailers are willing to wait to maybe eventually recoup the upfront costs of this scheme? Not a chance. We're paying for it.

Yes 2.2c per container collected.

Where are you reading that "many have recouped their costs already" ?

Carthy caught the Tainaste on the hop. He could have submitted a question in writing to the Minister. But I expect he will follow up to see what happens. By coincidence the matter of Questions is in the news, with Sinn Fein being among those complaining that they are not getting proper answers. I heard on the radio today, that the number of questions has increased a lot in recent years, as have FOI request, 50,000 questions a year. And a lot of manpower and resources have to be devoted to getting the answers for the politicians. Carthy is one of those fond of bombarding them with questions.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2025-05-22/35/#spk_258

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/questions/?member=%2Fie%2Foireachtas%2Fmember%2Fid%2FMatt-Carthy.D.2020-02-08

Looking at the Shabra facility online, it does not give the appearance of being big enough to do what Carthy claims.