Fago! wrote: » Out government are too stupid/incompetent/fat/useless to do anything worth doing!
Penny Sweet Publisher wrote: » It works great in other countries, but I cannot see it working here, somebody would be scamming, retailers wouldn't like it, neither would the drinks companies... I find it to be a great scheme. It really does reduce the price of drink and the likes. Then you will have the fcukers in government banning this as they will claim it will lead to binge drinking, in order to protect their publican friends from losses.
phasers wrote: » Tbh I don't see people picking dirty cans up off the street for 20c and the type of people who throw bottles and cans on the ground wouldn't give two shits about it. My mam always told me not to pick up cans because there was a very high chance there'd be a syringe in it. Also your poll sucks. Where's the "It's a nice idea but I don't see it working" option?
phasers wrote: » The fourth option is not for me. You poll is just crap and biased. You may as well not have a poll at all. Ireland isn't Germany . I somehow can't see the junkies in my local park picking up their cans when they're done and I sure as hell wouldn't touch them either.
alex73 wrote: » What does a 15c deposit on a can of beer have to do with binge drinking? At the moment I see dozens of beer cans dumped in lanes and parks after a group of lads drinking. You can be damn sure if there were 15c per can when returned then you would not see a single can dumped anywhere.
Penny Sweet Publisher wrote: » I am not claiming it has anything to do with binge drinking, but I can see some tossers in government suggesting that it will as it reduces the cost of the product, which it does.
auldwan wrote: » 15c is quite a lot to give out for each bottle and can bought in this country. How about impose a tax on the purchase of non-biodegradable bottles that will offset the 15c, and have no such tax on biodegradable bottles
segaBOY wrote: » No it doesn't. An extra charge would be applied in the first place to all products and this would be refunded upon return of the can/bottle.
Penny Sweet Publisher wrote: » Well the way I understand it to be is they brought in the incentive to return bottles by giving them cheaper products on return of old ones. You buy your 24 bottles of stella for 15 quid. That's the price, unless you have a crate of empty bottles of stella and if that's the case you get the crate for about 11 euro. There is no "fee" or increase in price. Otherwise why the hell would you buy the crate? Better to give people money off when they return it and keep the prices as they are.
segaBOY wrote: » How do you think this one would be funded? Our cash strapped public purse? If you look at the thread title it's a "returnable charge". Just like the "Producer Recycling Fund" for electronics the consumer ended up paying in order to return their goods. The money for this project would have to come from somewhere. More than likely it would be an extra charge levied on all glass bottles/cans which would be refunded upon returning the bottles/cans to the designated centre.
Sofiztikated wrote: » It'd be a great idea, which is why it would never be introduced here.
admiralofthefleet wrote: » when i was a kid you could get 10p return on a glass lemonade bottle
Penny Sweet Publisher wrote: » With people recycling more, the production costs would decrease, now this would really only benifit the brewers/producers. Fine these companies that don't use over a certain percentage of recycled goods? Force them to create incentives for people to bring these bottles back? Not sure who funds it in Belgium and the likes, but if beer increased in price for this, I couldn't see it working as well.
piby wrote: » It should be more than 15c.
segaBOY wrote: » Who's going to pay for it?
Bucklesman wrote: » The buyer does, at the point of sale. You pay 15c extra and get it back for returning the bottle for recycling. Do try to keep up.