So. Stop the citizen charges.
Go target every company over 50 workers.
Make them pay. Suddenly we've saved a magnitude more
Puff prices like this putting the onus on citizens
It's corps and government.
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2025
52 points (87.1% liked)
News
30898 readers
3291 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They do this since one year locally and it really feels like your municipality hates you. And I hate it too. Sometimes the garbage can is not opening, but it has already scanned your waste-card. That's a very expensive empty can. You think I want to call to dispute the charges on my goshdarn garbage bag? Also, The price per bag is NOT mentioned on the can, only that it will cost ya money.
This system makes it so throwing your garbage from the window is the cheapest option. Which is what folks are doing now. If you make it hard or expensive to do it the right way, folks will do it the wrong way. (2,39 euro per 60L bag of garbage. If you only throw away 13 bags a year, you break even with last year's cost.)
That sounds like a different system than the article is talking about. People were driving their trash to the dump for a flat rate:
Under the town’s system, residents would buy a $240 sticker for their cars that allowed them yearlong access to the dump, where they could dispose of as much garbage as they wished.
So why would you go to the dump with an empty can or leave the dump without your garbage being taken?
I've had a similar system for years and I don't see it as that unfair (given I don't have a lot of financial troubles). Every week they empty my bin for a flat rate and if I have more than what fits into the bin I get an extra charge.
They were charging a flat rate ($240/year) for households to buy a sticker to dispose of as much waste as they wanted. The town was losing money and was concerned about doubling the annual price, as it would disproportionately affect low-income and smaller households, so they started charging $65/year plus per-bag of trash. This lead to a decrease in the amount of trash being discarded so that their municipal refuse program is now breaking even instead of losing something like $65k/year, and it costs smaller households significantly less than if they had doubled the all-you-can-discard sticker.
That's my summary, but the full article is a quick read and contains some interesting details.
(Edit: corrected a typo)
It's called putting the responsibilities of corporate onto citizens.
How is a corporation responsible for my household trash?
Where do you think all the real ecological damage and cost is coming from? Your taxes paid the subsidies of these businesses who get breaks on their trash, causing this issue.
But we should pay more. Got it
You very clearly didn't read the story. Most households are paying LESS than they were when they were allowed to discard unlimited trash for a flat rate. Hopefully because they are being encouraged to recycle more and produce less waste, rather than just dumping it on the side of the road. It's a simple case of demand elasticity in response to a pricing-structure change. If people can save money by throwing away less stuff, they throw away less stuff.
I agree that corporations should pay their share to handle their own cleanup, but I don't see any direct link between that and household waste disposal, or any indication from this story that corporations are getting any breaks. It's a very small township in rural Massachusetts. They don't even have municipal trash collection. People have to take their own trash to the transfer station/landfill.
I read it. You're missing my point, which isn't your fault. I'm clearly not explaining myself correctly, and frankly. I'm too tired to try again, so I bow out.
Good evening