Cyclist v driver litter road rage
Discussion
popeyewhite said:
Seriously?
Do you really need a bag to go with your Maccy D's drive thru burger? Of course you don't. Do fag packets have to have that foil lining? Of course not. That coke can - can it be made of biodegradable material? Of course it can.
You appear to think that profit oriented companies enjoy wasting money on packaging.Do you really need a bag to go with your Maccy D's drive thru burger? Of course you don't. Do fag packets have to have that foil lining? Of course not. That coke can - can it be made of biodegradable material? Of course it can.
I can assure you that you are 100% wrong.
Firstly, no one buys just a burger. They get the value meal which comes with chips flying everywhere. So yes, you need a bag. Secondly, even if you are some heathen just buying the burger the incredibly lightweight packaging they now have wrapping the burger (to appease eco-friendly muppets who want people to litter) isn't sufficiently thick to protect the inside of your car and your trousers from grease leakage.
So patrons will insist on a bag.
If BK or MCD could get away with giving out NO bags and not have thousands of lawsuits for greasy trouser problems I assure you they would. Because... profit.
Now coke. Well it comes in two main forms of HIGHLY RECYCLABLE material.
Aluminium and PET. Both have minimal taste transfer.
That is VERY important and frankly impossible for most biodegradable materials such as cardboard. Which also happens not to be great at holding a. liquids and b. pressure (important for carbonated beverages apparently, who'da thunk it?!).
In any case you DO get MCD coke in a biodegradable package - those white cups.
Most of the US sells carbonated drinks like that from corner stores. And the place is... for want of a better word... littered in them.
Lastly, the foil in fag packets.
Again do you honestly think that cigarette manufacturers are putting extra barriers in the way of their customers getting to their next smoke ASAP?
What about the plastic wrapping - I mean what are they thinking! Just do away with both and save $$ on your packaging costs.
Or... just perhaps... fags go stale. And wrapping them in plastic and foil keeps them fresh a whole lot longer.
Honestly - try to come up with just ONE example that has any practical relevance.
It is not the fault of the manufacturers or retailers, whatever they did with packaging, cretins would still drop it on the floor, they like being s
t and they like to wallow in st, they have the choice when they buy something to dispose of the packaging thoughtfully but, oh no, toss it out of the window so everyone else can see it.
t and they like to wallow in st, they have the choice when they buy something to dispose of the packaging thoughtfully but, oh no, toss it out of the window so everyone else can see it.austinsmirk said:
as a cyclist, IF that paper cup had been directly thrown at me AND even more, if it had been full: I would have weighed up ness of car and implications of me having a ruck with said driver and my chances.
if it was just littering, well at that point, let the chav get on with it. How has it really impacted on me ?
Unless you head back into space at the end of each day, littering impacts on all of us. ness of car and implications of me having a ruck with said driver and my chances.if it was just littering, well at that point, let the chav get on with it. How has it really impacted on me ?
I'm guessing you're ok with people throwing litter over your garden fence? It's only litter.
oyster said:
I'm guessing you're ok with people throwing litter over your garden fence? It's only litter.
That reductio ad absurdum is... well... absurd.It would be like saying - well if you don't mind a little public urination onto a tree in the park - so it's fine for me to whop out the old fella and water your freshly planted petunias.
Or you don't mind a little scuffle outside the pub on a Friday night so it's fine to host a ruck on your recently shampooed faux-Persian rug in the living room.
Or you don't mind the odd homeless person on your walk to work so it's fine for me to move into your house, raise your kids, drink your cellar dry and start knobbing your missus.
Litter by the side of a road I whizz past at 60 has obviously a very different impact on my life versus someone emptying a skip on my front lawn.
walm said:
That reductio ad absurdum is... well... absurd.
It would be like saying - well if you don't mind a little public urination onto a tree in the park - so it's fine for me to whop out the old fella and water your freshly planted petunias.
Or you don't mind a little scuffle outside the pub on a Friday night so it's fine to host a ruck on your recently shampooed faux-Persian rug in the living room.
Or you don't mind the odd homeless person on your walk to work so it's fine for me to move into your house, raise your kids, drink your cellar dry and start knobbing your missus.
Litter by the side of a road I whizz past at 60 has obviously a very different impact on my life versus someone emptying a skip on my front lawn.
Oh, so it's a very literal case of " NIMBY"?It would be like saying - well if you don't mind a little public urination onto a tree in the park - so it's fine for me to whop out the old fella and water your freshly planted petunias.
Or you don't mind a little scuffle outside the pub on a Friday night so it's fine to host a ruck on your recently shampooed faux-Persian rug in the living room.
Or you don't mind the odd homeless person on your walk to work so it's fine for me to move into your house, raise your kids, drink your cellar dry and start knobbing your missus.
Litter by the side of a road I whizz past at 60 has obviously a very different impact on my life versus someone emptying a skip on my front lawn.
Littering is always really in your back yard if its in public, because you have to look at it, it is an affront to aesthetics, cleanliness and decency, if someone drops it in your view they dont care what you think, so another affront, or, even worse they think you are as unpleasant as they are.
I think if the government did some market research and identified the demographics and who they respect, then get those people to do adverts denouncing littering, it might get the message across, for example Ant and Dec, I bet the average litterer loves a bit of Saturday night telly.
I think if the government did some market research and identified the demographics and who they respect, then get those people to do adverts denouncing littering, it might get the message across, for example Ant and Dec, I bet the average litterer loves a bit of Saturday night telly.
walm said:
You appear to think that profit oriented companies enjoy wasting money on packaging.
I can assure you that you are 100% wrong.
Firstly, etc etc
It's nice of you to offer your assurance, but as your assumption is totally incorrect I didn't bother reading the rest of your post. I can assure you that you are 100% wrong.
Firstly, etc etc
I'll make this clear: Global corporations needlessly spend millions on packaging to make the product more attractive to the buyer. However if they cut the packaging the consumer would buy the product anyway, and litter would be reduced drastically. But the corporations are so determined to protect their billions in profit they see this as a commercial risk, even though research says this is not so. Fact is they would be saving money, not wasting it.
popeyewhite said:
I didn't bother reading the rest of your post.
Global corporations needlessly spend millions on packaging to make the product more attractive to the buyer. However if they cut the packaging the consumer would buy the product anyway.
Like for example plain packaging for cigarettes?Global corporations needlessly spend millions on packaging to make the product more attractive to the buyer. However if they cut the packaging the consumer would buy the product anyway.
The legislation cigarette companies have fought tooth and nail to prevent?
Which has shown in Australia to reduce substantially the incidence of youth smoking?
You're deluded.
If you think that global corps don't spend millions testing various different packaging options in the field then you are even more ignorant than your posts suggest.
You are empirically wrong.
When you make a claim like that you're supposed to back it up with supporting material. Class. But that's what happens when you let mouth run away with you.walm said:
popeyewhite said:
When you make a claim like that you're supposed to back it up with supporting material.
The example was in the post.Try reading.
You can do better than that I'm sure. Well, maybe
Just to make a slightly relevant point.
I'm not going to defend litter droppers since they are obviously not the sort of people that one should associate with. And as for the attitude by some that to tell or confront a litter dropper makes you equally stupid. Well that just says more about those people than the people that actually challenge anti-social types. Whilst it's not civil rights levels of importance, the old adage about "all it takes is for good men to do nothing" springs to mind.
Anyway, what I have noticed of late is that there seems to be a shortage of bins generally. Sure you get them every 100 metres in town centres. But out in the greener parts of the world (where I cycle often - see the relevance now to the thread
) you can go for a good few miles before seeing them. And surely it's the green parts of the co8untry that would probably benefit from being kept cleaner?
And that's before the older people here will tell you how the IRA pretty much wiped out bins in London for years.
I'm not going to defend litter droppers since they are obviously not the sort of people that one should associate with. And as for the attitude by some that to tell or confront a litter dropper makes you equally stupid. Well that just says more about those people than the people that actually challenge anti-social types. Whilst it's not civil rights levels of importance, the old adage about "all it takes is for good men to do nothing" springs to mind.
Anyway, what I have noticed of late is that there seems to be a shortage of bins generally. Sure you get them every 100 metres in town centres. But out in the greener parts of the world (where I cycle often - see the relevance now to the thread
) you can go for a good few miles before seeing them. And surely it's the green parts of the co8untry that would probably benefit from being kept cleaner?And that's before the older people here will tell you how the IRA pretty much wiped out bins in London for years.
walm said:
You appear to think that profit oriented companies enjoy wasting money on packaging.
I can assure you that you are 100% wrong.
Firstly, no one buys just a burger. They get the value meal which comes with chips flying everywhere. So yes, you need a bag. Secondly, even if you are some heathen just buying the burger the incredibly lightweight packaging they now have wrapping the burger (to appease eco-friendly muppets who want people to litter) isn't sufficiently thick to protect the inside of your car and your trousers from grease leakage.
So patrons will insist on a bag.
If BK or MCD could get away with giving out NO bags and not have thousands of lawsuits for greasy trouser problems I assure you they would. Because... profit.
Now coke. Well it comes in two main forms of HIGHLY RECYCLABLE material.
Aluminium and PET. Both have minimal taste transfer.
That is VERY important and frankly impossible for most biodegradable materials such as cardboard. Which also happens not to be great at holding a. liquids and b. pressure (important for carbonated beverages apparently, who'da thunk it?!).
In any case you DO get MCD coke in a biodegradable package - those white cups.
Most of the US sells carbonated drinks like that from corner stores. And the place is... for want of a better word... littered in them.
Lastly, the foil in fag packets.
Again do you honestly think that cigarette manufacturers are putting extra barriers in the way of their customers getting to their next smoke ASAP?
What about the plastic wrapping - I mean what are they thinking! Just do away with both and save $$ on your packaging costs.
Or... just perhaps... fags go stale. And wrapping them in plastic and foil keeps them fresh a whole lot longer.
Honestly - try to come up with just ONE example that has any practical relevance.
I can assure you that you are 100% wrong.
Firstly, no one buys just a burger. They get the value meal which comes with chips flying everywhere. So yes, you need a bag. Secondly, even if you are some heathen just buying the burger the incredibly lightweight packaging they now have wrapping the burger (to appease eco-friendly muppets who want people to litter) isn't sufficiently thick to protect the inside of your car and your trousers from grease leakage.
So patrons will insist on a bag.
If BK or MCD could get away with giving out NO bags and not have thousands of lawsuits for greasy trouser problems I assure you they would. Because... profit.
Now coke. Well it comes in two main forms of HIGHLY RECYCLABLE material.
Aluminium and PET. Both have minimal taste transfer.
That is VERY important and frankly impossible for most biodegradable materials such as cardboard. Which also happens not to be great at holding a. liquids and b. pressure (important for carbonated beverages apparently, who'da thunk it?!).
In any case you DO get MCD coke in a biodegradable package - those white cups.
Most of the US sells carbonated drinks like that from corner stores. And the place is... for want of a better word... littered in them.
Lastly, the foil in fag packets.
Again do you honestly think that cigarette manufacturers are putting extra barriers in the way of their customers getting to their next smoke ASAP?
What about the plastic wrapping - I mean what are they thinking! Just do away with both and save $$ on your packaging costs.
Or... just perhaps... fags go stale. And wrapping them in plastic and foil keeps them fresh a whole lot longer.
Honestly - try to come up with just ONE example that has any practical relevance.
Excellent points. I didn't have time to reply to that ridiculous post this morning before work. Someone was trying to be clever, but all the examples given have extremely clear practical reasons for existing (as you have described).
popeyewhite said:
It's nice of you to offer your assurance, but as your assumption is totally incorrect I didn't bother reading the rest of your post.
I'll make this clear: Global corporations needlessly spend millions on packaging to make the product more attractive to the buyer. However if they cut the packaging the consumer would buy the product anyway, and litter would be reduced drastically. But the corporations are so determined to protect their billions in profit they see this as a commercial risk, even though research says this is not so. Fact is they would be saving money, not wasting it.
Some packaging is completely unnecessary, you are right there. But your examples of McDonalds and cigarette packaging are bad examples to prove the point you are trying to make. A good example is the snack boxes that you can (or could) get on Easyjet. Easily half of the weight of the thing is/was the packaging. The food was a TINY amount of the weight and volume.I'll make this clear: Global corporations needlessly spend millions on packaging to make the product more attractive to the buyer. However if they cut the packaging the consumer would buy the product anyway, and litter would be reduced drastically. But the corporations are so determined to protect their billions in profit they see this as a commercial risk, even though research says this is not so. Fact is they would be saving money, not wasting it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff