Electronics recycling in the 3rd world
-
Maybe a law should be passed to not allow any of our trash to be shipped overseas. http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/08/04/magazine/20100815-dump.html[^] This isn't the first time I've seen an article written about the fake recycling that goes on via our industries.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
That law, if passed, would just move such pollution "here". "Here" being your backyard or close enough to it. Is that really what you want?
He wants a global carbon tax so only the rich can afford electronics.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Maybe a law should be passed to not allow any of our trash to be shipped overseas. http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/08/04/magazine/20100815-dump.html[^] This isn't the first time I've seen an article written about the fake recycling that goes on via our industries.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
Maybe a law should be passed to not allow any of our trash to be shipped overseas. http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/08/04/magazine/20100815-dump.html[^] This isn't the first time I've seen an article written about the fake recycling that goes on via our industries.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
You're assigning blame in the wrong place: you need to be blaming the governments of the country that accepts the rubbish: if they were acting in the interests of their people they would refuse the rubbish or strike better deals that didn't cream off so much for bribery, etc. I'm assuming that bribery and corruption is involved or this wouldn't be happening.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
You're assigning blame in the wrong place: you need to be blaming the governments of the country that accepts the rubbish: if they were acting in the interests of their people they would refuse the rubbish or strike better deals that didn't cream off so much for bribery, etc. I'm assuming that bribery and corruption is involved or this wouldn't be happening.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
Yeah, after all the west has no duty whatsoever to ensure that any contracts it engages is come up to European standards in terms of labour conditions, toxicity, pollution, and so on. Other wise me might be accused of selective morality.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Yeah, after all the west has no duty whatsoever to ensure that any contracts it engages is come up to European standards in terms of labour conditions, toxicity, pollution, and so on. Other wise me might be accused of selective morality.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
You're confused (:-)) - morality and business do not mix: it is up to governments to look after the interests of their people: business is there to do whatever it can to make money.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
You're confused (:-)) - morality and business do not mix: it is up to governments to look after the interests of their people: business is there to do whatever it can to make money.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
Maybe a law should be passed to not allow any of our trash to be shipped overseas. http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2010/08/04/magazine/20100815-dump.html[^] This isn't the first time I've seen an article written about the fake recycling that goes on via our industries.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
We need to go back to the stone age where there is no energy needed other than the fire to heat with. We could all be vegetarians and not need to cook. By the way laws that are designed to make a company do something will always cost the consumer. Tax a company and the consumer pays not the company. It would be nice if we could only make products that are recyclable. If we could come up with a "renewable" power source. (Hey, even the sun is dying.)
-
Yep, when it comes to cash, fuck everyone!
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Yep, when it comes to cash, fuck everyone!
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
I've got a better idea, lets pass laws and spend billions of dollars on farting around with CO2 instead!
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
That's a greenhouse gas as well.
Join the cool kids - Come fold with us[^]
-
That law, if passed, would just move such pollution "here". "Here" being your backyard or close enough to it. Is that really what you want?
Yes. We have safe ways of dealing with it and have, but seem to be unwilling to accept our own lifestyle has a price to it. Waste management has been doing this kind of recycling for years now and has no problem dealing with all of it. Passing pollution to other countries doesn't change the problem or solve our consumption issues. One person's way of life isn't any less valuable than another's. Trashing someone else's backyard and then wondering why they hate us is like shitting on the kitchen table and then asking what's for dinner. :doh: Both of which are incredibly short-sided.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
You're assigning blame in the wrong place: you need to be blaming the governments of the country that accepts the rubbish: if they were acting in the interests of their people they would refuse the rubbish or strike better deals that didn't cream off so much for bribery, etc. I'm assuming that bribery and corruption is involved or this wouldn't be happening.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
These countries have exactly the kind of problems you speak of, but in short we're sending valuable minerals and resources to other countries that would be better served here. In the city I live in they don't recycle glass, but used to. Why don't they anymore, because they changed contractors and they're supposedly cheaper, except they do less work and are more incompetent. This isn't too surprising. Societies and people should be able to clean up after themselves instead of passing the buck to someone else, but since it's easier and lazier not to we don't. Do you think that the world can sustain a western style lifestyle for everyone using the current ways of consumption?
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
Yes. We have safe ways of dealing with it and have, but seem to be unwilling to accept our own lifestyle has a price to it. Waste management has been doing this kind of recycling for years now and has no problem dealing with all of it. Passing pollution to other countries doesn't change the problem or solve our consumption issues. One person's way of life isn't any less valuable than another's. Trashing someone else's backyard and then wondering why they hate us is like shitting on the kitchen table and then asking what's for dinner. :doh: Both of which are incredibly short-sided.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
wolfbinary wrote:
One person's way of life isn't any less valuable than another's.
I have to disagree with that.. In (your) theory that might be so, but in practice it certainly isn't, and "in practice" is what matters because it is reality. Also, if they hate it so much, they should do something about it.
-
We need to go back to the stone age where there is no energy needed other than the fire to heat with. We could all be vegetarians and not need to cook. By the way laws that are designed to make a company do something will always cost the consumer. Tax a company and the consumer pays not the company. It would be nice if we could only make products that are recyclable. If we could come up with a "renewable" power source. (Hey, even the sun is dying.)
djj55 wrote:
We need to go back to the stone age where there is no energy needed other than the fire to heat with. We could all be vegetarians and not need to cook.
false, unhelpful to any conversation to attack the author and not discuss the subject. Common back here.
djj55 wrote:
By the way laws that are designed to make a company do something will always cost the consumer. Tax a company and the consumer pays not the company.
The price of something doesn't just come in dollars and cents and consumers should pay for the entire life cycle of what they buy.
djj55 wrote:
It would be nice if we could only make products that are recyclable.
Everything is recyclable or nearly with the technology I've seen Waste Management use to take apart things. Naturalistic fallacy.
djj55 wrote:
If we could come up with a "renewable" power source. (Hey, even the sun is dying.)
We can, we won't, unless money drives it.
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
wolfbinary wrote:
One person's way of life isn't any less valuable than another's.
I have to disagree with that.. In (your) theory that might be so, but in practice it certainly isn't, and "in practice" is what matters because it is reality. Also, if they hate it so much, they should do something about it.
They do by blowing up buildings with planes, piracy and terrorism. Our response to them of course is to send our military over there some other violent act. When I say way of life I'm talking about standard of living, not things like freedom of speech, etc. I understand what's being practiced and what I'm saying is the practice is bad. Thinking that your way of life is more important than another's is arrogant. This is why people in other countries call us arrogant. We're telling them "We're worth more than you."
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
You're confused (:-)) - morality and business do not mix: it is up to governments to look after the interests of their people: business is there to do whatever it can to make money.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
digital man wrote:
You're confused (Smile ) - morality and business do not mix: it is up to governments to look after the interests of their people:
I'm fully aware of what business does to both it's workforce, the environment, and anyone else I left out as a category. But since a business is considered a person under law you get a contradiction of government looking after the interests of business and every day people or rather mostly the former.
digital man wrote:
business is there to do whatever it can to make money.
Isn't that inherently a form of "survival of the fittest"?
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
-
They do by blowing up buildings with planes, piracy and terrorism. Our response to them of course is to send our military over there some other violent act. When I say way of life I'm talking about standard of living, not things like freedom of speech, etc. I understand what's being practiced and what I'm saying is the practice is bad. Thinking that your way of life is more important than another's is arrogant. This is why people in other countries call us arrogant. We're telling them "We're worth more than you."
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
It's actually different countries and for different reasons that do that.. the 3rd world isn't just 1 place :)
wolfbinary wrote:
We're telling them "We're worth more than you."
Well aren't we? In practice anyway? Sure, it's arrogant.. but it's also the truth. Like I said, they should do something about it. India is a good example of a country that is doing something about it, but they still have a long way to go. Ghana isn't doing shït about its shït, unless becoming a giant landfill is a clever plot to first gain some of our money and later ask for our 'sympathy' (i.e. more money)
-
digital man wrote:
You're confused (Smile ) - morality and business do not mix: it is up to governments to look after the interests of their people:
I'm fully aware of what business does to both it's workforce, the environment, and anyone else I left out as a category. But since a business is considered a person under law you get a contradiction of government looking after the interests of business and every day people or rather mostly the former.
digital man wrote:
business is there to do whatever it can to make money.
Isn't that inherently a form of "survival of the fittest"?
That's called seagull management (or sometimes pigeon management)... Fly in, flap your arms and squawk a lot, crap all over everything and fly out again... by _Damian S_
wolfbinary wrote:
But since a business is considered a person under law you get a contradiction of government looking after the interests of business and every day people or rather mostly the former.
Yes, it's funny how flesh and blood citizens are expected to uphold certain standards of good citizenship and it's perfectly natural for the government to pass laws to enforce some of it. However, the corporate citizens are only expected to service the greed of their owners. Corporations, in democracies anyhow, exist at the sufferance of the citizens. At least that's how I'm going to interpret the US Constitution with the Of the people, by the people, and for the people statement in the preamble. There's absolutely no mention of corporations in the Consitution of the US so they exist by other laws that have been passed by duly elected officials. Presumably, the flesh and blood citizens should expect something in return for granting corporations the right to exist and profit. What we usually get is a few fat cats getting filthy rich, exploitation of the workers, rape of the environment, and finally offshoring of the jobs AND the profits so they don't even contribute taxes. Tell me again how this free market thing polices itself. :laugh:
Once you agree to clans, tribes, governments...you've opted for socialism. The rest is just details.