Deposit return scheme (recycling) - Part 2

I don't remember posts from people critical of Re-turn denying that it would be one of their sources of funding, which was the original claim.

Everyone knew the aluminium was valuable - nope, not the posters who were trying to deny that it was likely bin companies would have to increase prices to cover the loss of their resale value.

There may have been discussion over how important a % it was versus unclaimed deposits, which would have been distorted by the large numbers of unclaimed deposits build up in year one e.g. in rollout a large volume of products being sold with a deposit weren't actually in the scheme. Lots of posts on this thread from people who had such issues.

Had a quick search but search is crap.

The discussions happened on the thread. I have firm recollection of same. Maybe you missed them.

Or you've imagined them.

Without actual posts to back it up, one seems more likely.

You're seriously shifting the goalposts here and indeed, being massively disingenuous in the process.

The post of yours that I quote-replied to had two claims in that I suspect you will be entirely unable to back up, as I don't remember them being made at all

"pro-Return posters denying that it was one of their main sources of income" and "The phrase pocket change may have been used or maybe it was coins found behind the sofa."

That the aluminium was valuable was never, ever in dispute.

That the aluminium was valuable was never, ever in dispute.

Sssssh. If anyone asks it's plastic. Wink. Wink.

Ireland's Deposit Return Scheme (DRS), launched in February 2024, is 

a mandatory initiative under the EU Single-Use Plastics Directive aimed at reducing plastic waste

They are via Producer fees, which ultimately will be passed onto consumers like any other cost.

You are now giving posts that support the argument against what you originally claimed.

Nope. It reinforces my rejection of the original claim and shows that posters critical of Re-turn highlighted the loss of revenue from re-sale to bin companies and that that was downplayed by pro-Return posters.

Meanwhile to reinforce the original claim I countered nothing has been provided.

Still no proof of the original claim but I'm the one waffling? Give over.

Direct dealings I'm probably up as well, but many not as fortunate either.
Also, the loss of some imported products such as cheap non alcoholic beer when Return was brought in also has led to me paying higher prices.

They'll catch us up eventually on the penny farthings in the unit price.

I don't get the level of support that mostly rational people give this whole scheme.

The scheme is designed specificilly to take the pressure off the producers and protect the profits of those that continue to distribute their products in these containers.

The scheme is user the word recycling in certain areas but is now a recycling scheme - numbers are yet to be produced (correct me if I am wrong) for the amount of material that is getting recycled.

The scheme promised that those who find it difficult to leave their house or shopped from home would be facilitated.

The scheme adds significantly to the carbon footprint of the overall collection of these materials relative to before hand and one could argue the overall carbon footprint of householders.

The scheme does absolutely NOTHING to reduce the amount of these items in circulation. This is a core issue.

The scheme is run as a monopoly and has taken almost all responsibility off the local authority for it.

Where is the money going on unclaimed deposits - how is this going towards the reduction of plastics?

I don't get the level of support that mostly rational people give this whole scheme.

It's sunk cost fallacy again. Some people just cannot detach themselves from something that they've spent so much time trying to justify lest they end up looking foolish, all of which takes place purely in their head of course.

Anyone who's honestly looking at this farce of a scheme has to come to the conclusion that it's implementation has been an absolute joke and a massive pain in the arse for the consumer, while the private company at the heart of it all are making out like bandits.

It's being continually sold under the guise of "reducing plastics" while it's really about selling aluminium.

Absolutely NOBODY that I have met in real life has been supportive of this nonsense.

I made a claim that the only organisation spending money on propaganda was ReTurn, I got the figure wrong.

I adjusted the figure based on:

Marketing, Communications and public awareness, 4.6 Million in 2024, 1.2 million in 2023 from here: https://re-turn.ie/re-turn-2024-annual-report/

which is 5.8 million in 2023 and 2024. I am going to make the guess that they spent at least another 4.6 million from that start of last year till this point bringing total to 10 million - a figure I am willing to settle on.

It's irrelevant in any event, my point is there is only one organisation spending millions (not tens of millions) on propaganda. If you want to keep arguing that point, go ahead.