Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Recycling Bullsh!t

Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/23/2012 5:13:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2012 8:04:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've seen it
I've loved it
I'm now going to +1 it
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Koopin
Posts: 12,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2012 8:48:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've seen this before. I even wrote a paper on it for extra credit. But people get offended like you say you wanna stab their child or something.
kfc
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/25/2012 8:24:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I know aluminum is good to recycle but what about glass? Some states pay you for glass bottles but is that a subsidy or are they really worth recycling?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 9:49:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If people just realized they are hurting future generations who will be able to mine today's garbage dumps for tomorrows resources, we would all go out and buy another garbage can.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 5:14:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/25/2012 8:48:11 AM, Koopin wrote:
I've seen this before. I even wrote a paper on it for extra credit. But people get offended like you say you wanna stab their child or something.

Lololol
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 5:41:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I actually disagree with this. The idea, which seems reasonable, is that If recycling is really profitable, than private companies will pay for it rather than it be subsidized by the government. Except the process of dumping garbage is also an expensive process subsidized by the government. The reason the government subsidizes this instead of charging citizens to dump their trash, is that people would just deposit their trash in unsanitary manners: burning or just dumping it in the woods. This experiment has been done before. It was in freakonomics.

It might be cheaper for companies to just mine the product than use recycled material. But is it cheaper to mine the product and than dump the product vs. recycling the material.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 6:27:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/26/2012 5:41:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I actually disagree with this. The idea, which seems reasonable, is that If recycling is really profitable, than private companies will pay for it rather than it be subsidized by the government. Except the process of dumping garbage is also an expensive process subsidized by the government. The reason the government subsidizes this instead of charging citizens to dump their trash, is that people would just deposit their trash in unsanitary manners: burning or just dumping it in the woods. This experiment has been done before. It was in freakonomics.

Where does government subsidize trash? Everywhere I've ever lived you have to pay for trash pick up and people who live in the country do burn their trash.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 6:45:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/26/2012 6:27:49 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 9/26/2012 5:41:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I actually disagree with this. The idea, which seems reasonable, is that If recycling is really profitable, than private companies will pay for it rather than it be subsidized by the government. Except the process of dumping garbage is also an expensive process subsidized by the government. The reason the government subsidizes this instead of charging citizens to dump their trash, is that people would just deposit their trash in unsanitary manners: burning or just dumping it in the woods. This experiment has been done before. It was in freakonomics.


Where does government subsidize trash? Everywhere I've ever lived you have to pay for trash pick up and people who live in the country do burn their trash.

Does it really cost money for trash pick up? I always thought that it was provided for free. Perhaps its per unit trash collection that causes this incentive problems of burning trash. Anyways, I don't know If the price of trash collection reflects the cost of trash collection. Most public transportation services lose money even though you still have to pay for them.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 7:38:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/26/2012 6:45:54 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/26/2012 6:27:49 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 9/26/2012 5:41:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I actually disagree with this. The idea, which seems reasonable, is that If recycling is really profitable, than private companies will pay for it rather than it be subsidized by the government. Except the process of dumping garbage is also an expensive process subsidized by the government. The reason the government subsidizes this instead of charging citizens to dump their trash, is that people would just deposit their trash in unsanitary manners: burning or just dumping it in the woods. This experiment has been done before. It was in freakonomics.


Where does government subsidize trash? Everywhere I've ever lived you have to pay for trash pick up and people who live in the country do burn their trash.

Does it really cost money for trash pick up? I always thought that it was provided for free. Perhaps its per unit trash collection that causes this incentive problems of burning trash. Anyways, I don't know If the price of trash collection reflects the cost of trash collection. Most public transportation services lose money even though you still have to pay for them.

Yeah, I pay.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 8:14:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/25/2012 8:24:52 PM, lewis20 wrote:
I know aluminum is good to recycle but what about glass? Some states pay you for glass bottles but is that a subsidy or are they really worth recycling?

When I was a kid we did this thing called a "deposit" on glass bottles. You brought them back to the store and they were used over and over again. They were not smashed and melted down. They were washed and reused. The generations from the 80's and after are ten times more wasteful and bad for the environment than previous generations were in terms of reuse and recycling. I acknowledge the air and water thing but you have to know about it to do something about it. We have done enough, we don't need anymore air and water regulations, that job is done and has been successful. Just enforce the laws already on the books and maybe get rid of a few that have no cost benefit.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Polaris
Posts: 1,120
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/26/2012 9:00:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/26/2012 6:45:54 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/26/2012 6:27:49 PM, lewis20 wrote:
At 9/26/2012 5:41:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I actually disagree with this. The idea, which seems reasonable, is that If recycling is really profitable, than private companies will pay for it rather than it be subsidized by the government. Except the process of dumping garbage is also an expensive process subsidized by the government. The reason the government subsidizes this instead of charging citizens to dump their trash, is that people would just deposit their trash in unsanitary manners: burning or just dumping it in the woods. This experiment has been done before. It was in freakonomics.


Where does government subsidize trash? Everywhere I've ever lived you have to pay for trash pick up and people who live in the country do burn their trash.

Does it really cost money for trash pick up? I always thought that it was provided for free. Perhaps its per unit trash collection that causes this incentive problems of burning trash. Anyways, I don't know If the price of trash collection reflects the cost of trash collection. Most public transportation services lose money even though you still have to pay for them.

We have to pay for trash pickup here. I have relatives that always drive to a local dumpster under the veil of darkness to dump their trash. Getting caught would incur a fine.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2012 3:52:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
We recycle, we have five small bins in a room off the kitchen that I throw in the car and dump at a recycling center every weekend (it's on the way almost anywhere from where I live). It's interesting that they addressed how ingrained it is in our minds, we've recycled for years and although I believe everything they said in this video, I don't know that I will be able to stop, it's just something I do now.

Wierd huh?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2012 1:24:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I love how it's put on a moral level, and people that don't recycle are essentially sinning against the earth.

I've known for a long while that paper recycling was just a feel good scam, and people pay extra for recycled copy paper, just so they can feel good.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2012 1:31:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/26/2012 5:41:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I actually disagree with this. The idea, which seems reasonable, is that If recycling is really profitable, than private companies will pay for it rather than it be subsidized by the government. Except the process of dumping garbage is also an expensive process subsidized by the government. The reason the government subsidizes this instead of charging citizens to dump their trash, is that people would just deposit their trash in unsanitary manners: burning or just dumping it in the woods. This experiment has been done before. It was in freakonomics.

It might be cheaper for companies to just mine the product than use recycled material. But is it cheaper to mine the product and than dump the product vs. recycling the material.:

The point they're making is that it's not as cost effective as it seems, makes people in the recycling industry rich, uses more energy to reconstitute products versus making them from scratch. So where's the benefit, other than creating the illusion that you're "making a difference?"

Burning trash or dumping them in the woods is a non-sequitur. No one is arguing that.

Whether it is wholly accurate I do not know for certain.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2012 1:35:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/28/2012 1:24:42 PM, innomen wrote:
I love how it's put on a moral level, and people that don't recycle are essentially sinning against the earth.

I've known for a long while that paper recycling was just a feel good scam, and people pay extra for recycled copy paper, just so they can feel good.:

Because it's been inextricably linked to the whole Earth Movement. But you can tithe for your sins by off-setting your gas emissions via carbon credits.

It's not a ponzi scheme if it's in the name of Global Warming!

Bless you, my child. Recycle thine cardboard, and go forth producing low emissions.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
OllerupMand
Posts: 375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2012 2:05:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
My problem with programs like this is that they have a very clear agenda. We are basical seeing a one round debate. The BoP is put on Pro, but we only see the argumenta that Con can defend against and Pro is never allowed to defend against Cons accusations. Also there are some pretty big leaps in logic here and there.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2012 7:37:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/28/2012 2:05:00 PM, OllerupMand wrote:
My problem with programs like this is that they have a very clear agenda. We are basical seeing a one round debate. The BoP is put on Pro, but we only see the argumenta that Con can defend against and Pro is never allowed to defend against Cons accusations. Also there are some pretty big leaps in logic here and there.

Penn and Teller are libertarian. I don't see how that is inherently biased in favour/opposed to recycling.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/28/2012 10:02:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/27/2012 3:52:56 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
We recycle, we have five small bins in a room off the kitchen that I throw in the car and dump at a recycling center every weekend (it's on the way almost anywhere from where I live). It's interesting that they addressed how ingrained it is in our minds, we've recycled for years and although I believe everything they said in this video, I don't know that I will be able to stop, it's just something I do now.

Wierd huh?

They have addiction centers for that sort of thing.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 12:34:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/28/2012 1:31:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
At 9/26/2012 5:41:38 PM, darkkermit wrote:
I actually disagree with this. The idea, which seems reasonable, is that If recycling is really profitable, than private companies will pay for it rather than it be subsidized by the government. Except the process of dumping garbage is also an expensive process subsidized by the government. The reason the government subsidizes this instead of charging citizens to dump their trash, is that people would just deposit their trash in unsanitary manners: burning or just dumping it in the woods. This experiment has been done before. It was in freakonomics.

It might be cheaper for companies to just mine the product than use recycled material. But is it cheaper to mine the product and than dump the product vs. recycling the material.:

The point they're making is that it's not as cost effective as it seems, makes people in the recycling industry rich,

who gets wealthy off of the recycling industry? I want to know so I can start my own company :p.

uses more energy to reconstitute products versus making them from scratch.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Wrong. There are definitely energy savings. Although I don't particularly care about energy savings in the first place.

So where's the benefit, other than creating the illusion that you're "making a difference?"

There are energy and air pollution savings for most of them. Well, mainly energy savings. Its not super efficient since there are energy costs and pollution costs associated with recycling. But its not greater than the energy and pollution costs of making a new on, which Penn and Teller asserted. Penn & Teller is a lot of bullsh1t.

There could be cost savings. I don't know about the cost savings since both of them are government run industries that its hard to compare prices. I don't know how much more is recyled. But you have to run the analysis not based on how much it costs to produce, but how much it costs to produce AND dispose.

Burning trash or dumping them in the woods is a non-sequitur. No one is arguing that.

Whether it is wholly accurate I do not know for certain.

Yes, but if left to the free market, its a very real possibility.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/29/2012 12:42:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/26/2012 8:14:05 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 9/25/2012 8:24:52 PM, lewis20 wrote:
I know aluminum is good to recycle but what about glass? Some states pay you for glass bottles but is that a subsidy or are they really worth recycling?

When I was a kid we did this thing called a "deposit" on glass bottles. You brought them back to the store and they were used over and over again. They were not smashed and melted down. They were washed and reused. The generations from the 80's and after are ten times more wasteful and bad for the environment than previous generations were in terms of reuse and recycling. I acknowledge the air and water thing but you have to know about it to do something about it. We have done enough, we don't need anymore air and water regulations, that job is done and has been successful. Just enforce the laws already on the books and maybe get rid of a few that have no cost benefit.

Everything was just perfect back then wasn't it? Gosh, how is it that everyone else seems to forget that utopia?!
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-