Massaschusetts Town Bans Sale of Small Bottles of Water

[earthJoker]

I see what you mean. But the wicket becomes sticky when the consumer is 'punished' for living in certain regions that don't have comprehensive waste management, or even recycling options.

A well deserved punishment.

Ah, but you live in a space-confined nation, where every citizen understands the impacts of waste disposal, energy extraction, water purity, and public safety.

I think you are a bit illusionary about the understandings of our citizen. Most people don't dispose their waste illegally because it's - well - illegal. Why would you risk getting cough for something so stupid? Of course it is still possible, there some people just throw their trash just out of the car window, but over all, repression works.

[GGT]

Take some time and look at a map. Then ask yourself if Swiss regulations would work so well in vast land masses. We not only have disparate square mileage, but legislative limitations.

[Loki]

Of course you can ask, you just shouldn't believe in any polls. Only the vote is the real deal.

Erm, why shouldn't I believe polls when polls carried out by reputable companies tend to be fairly accurate, especially if there are multiple polls on the same question?

[RandBlade]

Erm, why shouldn't I believe polls when polls carried out by reputable companies tend to be fairly accurate, especially if there are multiple polls on the same question?

Party etc voting intention polls are accurate. Other types not so much.

[Loki]

And you're basing this on?

[earthJoker]

Erm, why shouldn't I believe polls when polls carried out by reputable companies tend to be fairly accurate, especially if there are multiple polls on the same question?

I have very different experiences. And we have 4 votings a year, each with 1 to 6 questions.

As you don't have regular votings on issues I wonder on what experiences you want to base your claim.

Take some time and look at a map. Then ask yourself if Swiss regulations would work so well in vast land masses. We not only have disparate square mileage, but legislative limitations.

Take a look at population distribution. It is OK if you start with those regions which have a similar density as Europe (Bos-Wash corridor, ect). Most waste is produced where people live.

[GGT]

Take a look at population distribution. It is OK if you start with those regions which have a similar density as Europe (Bos-Wash corridor, ect). Most waste is produced where people live.

Your nation is smaller in square mileage than some of our states. Many states still have tons of rural/agricultural residents that balk at "city standards". Mostly because they don't have the same services -- public water, sanitary sewer, municipal trash removal, etc -- but use private well water, septic tanks, and mish-mash trash disposal.

Only after ex-urban and suburban areas sprawled into rural/ag areas, did comprehensive waste management becomes a tax payer and voting issue. It worked the other way, too -- most folks didn't follow rural/ag waste management until it started to contaminate river beds or aquifers, or their burning garbage and farm manure was too "stinky". New suburbanites (in mostly upscale neighborhoods) notice abandoned cars and toilets on farms, like junkyards. Home builders and waste companies petitioned for control over that, for profits in that sector, and sometimes managed to drive out small family farmers.

Party etc voting intention polls are accurate. Other types not so much.

Really? Let's ask the Republican Party if their polling was so accurate in November.

[Loki]

I have very different experiences. And we have 4 votings a year, each with 1 to 6 questions.

As you don't have regular votings on issues I wonder on what experiences you want to base your claim.

We have 50 states, annual local elections, Congressional elections (for 435 seats) every 2 years, as well as senatorial and presidential elections. Pretty sure there are more polls taken in the US than the rest of the world combined...

[earthJoker]

Your nation is smaller in square mileage than some of our states. Many states still have tons of rural/agricultural residents that balk at "city standards". Mostly because they don't have the same services -- public water, sanitary sewer, municipal trash removal, etc -- but use private well water, septic tanks, and mish-mash trash disposal.

Read my post again. Start with the cities, most US citizen live there. Make a list of most populous US states, and you see that most are quite dense.

We have 50 states, annual local elections, Congressional elections (for 435 seats) every 2 years, as well as senatorial and presidential elections. Pretty sure there are more polls taken in the US than the rest of the world combined...

That are voting for parties and people that's not the same as voting over an issue.

BTW there are 26 cantons in Switzerland each of those have election, referendums and initiatives as well, and there are a few other federal countries in my corner of the world as well.

[Loki]

Well, I'm glad you've done a careful study to determine how accurate Swiss polls are.

[GGT]

Read my post again. Start with the cities, most US citizen live there. Make a list of most populous US states, and you see that most are quite dense.

I wasn't disagreeing with you, just explaining how the US is different, and why there's still so much political disagreement here.

Practically speaking, our 50 states often operate like 50 different nations. And within these states, densely populated cities don't necessarily dictate policy for its rural populations. Not for resource extraction, waste disposal, water safety.....super-sized sodas, Happy Meal toys, gas taxes....or even firearm regulations.

The debate about energy resources makes it pretty clear that rural areas, and less populated areas, rich in resources -- feel the fight is urban vs rural, state vs nation. It's a powerful issue that hasn't been covered very well by the media, or understood by legislators or even voters (who would vote their own interests above anything else)

This Do-or-Die attitude has been framed as us-or-them, win-or-lose, employment and jobs today, at all costs, with any/all costs paid by future generations. Drill baby, drill?

[earthJoker]

Well, I'm glad you've done a careful study to determine how accurate Swiss polls are.

The first polls almost never equal the end result. The amount of undecided always declines during a campaign. You don't need a study to verify that. Even the poll publisher explicitly write this in any statistics. And the undecided don't spilt 50%/50% they tend to go towards the "no". This is one of the main reason why you can't compare it with a voting for people, the is no "no" option in parties.

I wasn't disagreeing with you, just explaining how the US is different, and why there's still so much political disagreement here.

Practically speaking, our 50 states often operate like 50 different nations. And within these states, densely populated cities don't necessarily dictate policy for its rural populations. Not for resource extraction, waste disposal, water safety.....super-sized sodas, Happy Meal toys, gas taxes....or even firearm regulations.

I live in a federal country myself. Garbage collection is not done the same way in every city here. Quite the opposite. It's a small country over here, but the needs of urban Zürich are totally different to the mountain village in the alps. The federal system is not the problem but the solution of the different needs. Of course there is a danger that some parts totally go off by far, that's where a federal law needs to set the limits.

[GGT]

snip

I live in a federal country myself. Garbage collection is not done the same way in every city here. Quite the opposite. It's a small country over here, but the needs of urban Zürich are totally different to the mountain village in the alps. The federal system is not the problem but the solution of the different needs. Of course there is a danger that some parts totally go off by far, that's where a federal law needs to set the limits.

That's where our nations are different. The US has tons of anti-federal voters, most often in "red" states (Texas) but also in "blue" states with rural minorities (PA). It's ironic that our Republic, a Union of states, can have so many objections to national continuity and frame it as a states-rights vs federal power issue.

[earthJoker]

Just to avoid confusion. Over here pro-federal means that the cantons have more to say, anti-federal means that the central government has more to say.
A federal solution is one were each state can adjust the rule to their local needs.

[GGT]

Yet another example of how our nations are different.

The nomenclature matters less than the motives or effects. I doubt that Switzerland would want one locality, citing "cantons" or "local needs", to engage in behaviors that could destroy national resources, or endanger all its citizens.

[kateR]

You can see bottled water everywhere. As more and more schools and organizations increase their efforts to "go green," the issue of bottled water gets more heated. Some states have already banned the use of it. Concord, Mass. is one of the areas that banned bottled water. It is not about the water, it is about the waste that every person has to pay attention to. Read more: Bottled water ban.

[Hazir]

Amsterdam has several public watering points where you can fill up your bottle free of any charge. Funny thing is that they is no signage whatsoever so that the average tourist has no idea what they are.

Oh, and Amsterdam drinking water is really great.

[Aimless]

Can't remember if this is the right thread for it but now taking bets on soda tax vote:

http://www.berkeleyside.com/2014/09/...omment-page-1/

Whatcha reckon, will they or won't they?

[Loki]

Maybe they should call for a tax on expensive wine, expensive cars, and expensive apartments instead. Or is going after poor people becoming a hobby of the limousine liberals?

[Aimless]

They can use the tax to pay for more food stamps

[Loki]

Extra food stamps that will be used to buy the more expensive soda. Great rationale for implementing a new policy.

[Aimless]

Ah but see, in terms of total numbers, more middle-class and wealthy people buy soda than do poor people, so it will lead to a transfer of wealth. This isn't about cigarettes after all anyway, the question was whether or not this'll be passed.

[Loki]

I'm actually not sure that's true.

[Flixy]

Maybe they should call for a tax on expensive wine, expensive cars, and expensive apartments instead. Or is going after poor people becoming a hobby of the limousine liberals?

I see this more as a tax equal to the excise on, say, tobacco, which is both to deter smoking since it is bad for your health, and to offset the extra costs for society it causes. Sugar is also bad for you, so I guess it's similar, but very arbitrary to take sugar, and nothing else.

[Loki]

Sugar is not bad for you in moderation; tobacco is. There's no equivalence here.

[LittleFuzzy]

Minx, as the article indicated, if it can pass anywhere it would be the People's Republic of Berkeley.

For myself, you know I'm opposed to the idea of the "sin tax."

[Dreadnaught]

I don't oppose Berkley's effort to turn itself into a left-wing hellhole. Though I do generally oppose the idea of taxing certain industries just "'cause". And Robert Reich is an increasingly annoying pundit. Yes, a pundit. His public service experience gets less and less relevant.

[GGT]

There is extensive infrastructure in place to deliver water from pipes. There is no such infrastructure in place to deliver sodas to every/many homes and businesses.

From an environmental perspective, the delivery of bottled water is hugely wasteful in terms of the energy spent to produce and ship those bottles.

Water is a premium commodity. Public infrastructure was designed around water's inherent value....and plenty of soda manufacturers rode their way to profits using that water, often portraying corn syrup sweeteners against corn feed for animals, or water needs for the petroleum industry.

The truth is....no industry, people, or nation, can survive without potable water. Water is more valuable than the oil/petroleum products holding or carrying that water in plastic bags or bottles. I have no problem with towns or localities "banning" plastic by-products that don't optimize or conserve water supply.

[Loki]

See GGT, not everyone disagrees with you.

[Dattu]

Well, it may have been somewhat of an overstatement but it really was very chlorinated, which also makes everything that it's used in (icecubes, etc) rather gross. Over here tap water doesn't have any chlorine, but even compared to most countries I've been in, it was shit in the US. And IIRC, while I was there there was a story in the newspapers there too about how shitty the tap water was.

Interesting! In the U.S., we're required to maintain a chlorine disinfectant residual between 0.2 and 4.0 mg/L in all parts of the distribution system. I'm working on a project right now (on the regulation side) where a 28-mile, 42-inch diameter water transmission pipeline in south Texas is unable to maintain the minimum chlorine residual near the end of its run. Now the water supplier is experiencing nitrification events, so I was pulled in to assist with modeling chloramine decay.