⚠️ This forum has been restored as a read-only archive so the knowledge shared by the community over many years remains available. New registrations and posting are disabled.

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 235 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 16  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 21:23 
Xtreme Contributor
Xtreme Contributor

Joined: Jan 18th, '12, 22:11
Posts: 101
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: perth
It's not a tax. It's a deposit which is refunded to whoever returns the bottle for recycling. If the original person who bought the bottle returns it then they're no worse off.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
    Advertisement
 
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 21:26 
SuperVeg wrote:
Isn't it called a "bottle tax" ?

Nope... it's called a "container deposit scheme"...

Quote:
Coke is taxed 10c per bottle ? This "tax" sounds very much like a "tax" to me :dontknow:

So they then have to absorb this arbitrary cost, or pass it on to the consumer. Like all taxes the consumer has to pay for it.

Nope again.... Coke isn't charged anything... the consumer pays the deposit... and can get it refunded later

Quote:
1. This prevents poorer people from purchasing a product they want (those at the margin)
2. Those that still decide to purchase the product then have less money to spend on other things, this makes them poorer overall.

Coke doesn't want this.

You'll probably find the poor people collect and refund the containers... so that they can buy a Coke...

"Coke doesn't want this"..... :laughing3:

OMG... I didn't realise that Coke was so benevolent... and just acting out of social concern.... :lol:

Of all the justifications you could have come up with SV.... what a pathetic load of nonsense... :laughing3:


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 21:38 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Oct 16th, '11, 06:12
Posts: 2019
Gender: Male
Are you human?: 0110010110
Location: Brisbane, qld
RupertofOZ wrote:
Nope... it's called a "container deposit scheme"...

Why don't you type "bottle tax" into google and then explain what the difference is ?

It's a tax, dress it up however you like

Quote:
Coke isn't charged anything... the consumer pays the deposit... and can get it refunded later

So does the shop get charged the tax? How is it collected ? -Genuine question

Quote:
You'll probably find the poor people collect and refund the containers... so that they can buy a Coke...
Maybe, maybe not. (If it was a "deposit" then others couldn't collect it. )

Quote:
"Coke doesn't want this"..... :laughing3:

OMG... I didn't realise that Coke was so benevolent... and just acting out of social concern.... :lol:

Of all the justifications you could have come up with SV.... what a pathetic load of nonsense... :laughing3:


Aside.... from.... the..... petty..... insults...

Are you trying to tell me Coke doesn't want to increase its profits ??
I'm pretty sure you know how the market works Rupe.... :)

EDIT: tone fixed :)


Last edited by SuperVeg on Mar 18th, '13, 21:53, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 21:49 
Legend Member
Legend Member
User avatar

Joined: Nov 3rd, '08, 09:49
Posts: 944
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: Kalamunda Western Australia
RupertofOZ wrote:
Frankly.. I think it's about the dumbest corporate marketing move ever....


Up there with the Fiji bottled water Clevland fiasco. Check youtube and you will find out about it, hopefully it bites Coke on the ar$e in the same way. Whle you are there watch some of the bottled water vs tap water videos, more Coke, Pepsi, Nestle brainwashing using lies to facitate corporate greed.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 22:02 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Nov 14th, '10, 00:16
Posts: 511
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: S Norway
SuperVeg wrote:
Isn't it called a "bottle tax" ?

Coke is taxed 10c per bottle ? This "tax" sounds very much like a "tax" to me :dontknow:

So they then have to absorb this arbitrary cost, or pass it on to the consumer. Like all taxes the consumer has to pay for it.

1. This prevents poorer people from purchasing a product they want (those at the margin)
2. Those that still decide to purchase the product then have less money to spend on other things, this makes them poorer overall.

Coke doesn't want this.
Coke of course is free to increase their prices for other reasons, but the price of coke like many other products tend towards the price that balances profit margin with number of goods sold.

Imagine how many sales BYAP would lose if they were forced to increase everything by 10%.
BYAP already have to push their margins low enough to get adequate sales (most businesses do). I'm sure they would like to make their products even cheaper but would not be profitable if they did.

It's not their fault if their customers then decide to use their systems for crimes against seabirds.


No it's not called a tax
It's called a refund.

I'm sitting with a botle of beer in front of me right now (from the local brewery where my oldest son works)

Made for export to the USA, on the stciker it says :
Nøgne Ø , Jolly Pupkin Artisan Ales Stone Brewing CO, Special Holiday Ale
Ale brewed with spices
Brewed and bottled by Nøgne Ø, Grimstad, Norway

On the side it's writen in inglish a US governement warning about the dangers of alcohol bla bla....
And below that

IA,OR,VT,CT,MA,ME,DE,NY,HI 5 c REF/ MI 10 c REF

FL CA CASH REFUND OK+

in USA imported by Shelton Brothers Belchertown, MA

The Norwegian brewery (Nøgne Ø) are paying a Norwegian botlle deposit when the botlle is purchased, once exported to USA the deposit (wich is 25c here) is refunded including the Norwegian VAT (25%)
Then in the differente US states, that have refund regulations, the proper price/value 5c or 10c
(se state codes as listed above) is aded to the price of the bottle + state VAT (iff/where such exist)
Then the refund 5c or 10c follows the bottle until the bottle is returned to recycelingplant and the refund price of the bottle, refunded to the holder of the botlle.

It's not a tax do you get it ?

Iff you don't care to return the bottle and get the refund back then that is the price you pay for poluting read not wanting contribute to recyceling garbage.
It's not the poor that pay the price it's the holder of the botlle that can afford to throw it out the window that pays a xtra fee for the polution.

cheers


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 22:14 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Oct 16th, '11, 06:12
Posts: 2019
Gender: Male
Are you human?: 0110010110
Location: Brisbane, qld
If the government makes you pay something, it is a tax.
So in some cases it might be a tax, in other cases it might be a refund initiated by the company.

Council rates is a tax, you can call them rates all you like, but they are not voluntary so they are a tax.


I have no problem with the idea of a bottle refund, it might even work (haven't seen any proof yet, it has only been claimed)
I just have a problem with people/companies getting ever more taxes, which consumers always end up paying.
Even if every bottle is returned, there is still all the additional cost of the collection, storage and recycling (if that actually happens) of the bottles, all (or part) paid for by other taxes.

Aluminium is the only thing actually worth recycling isn't it ?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 22:28 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced

Joined: Dec 3rd, '11, 11:12
Posts: 1462
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: east Texas
SuperVeg wrote:
If the government makes you pay something, it is a tax.
So in some cases it might be a tax, in other cases it might be a refund initiated by the company.

Council rates is a tax, you can call them rates all you like, but they are not voluntary so they are a tax.


I have no problem with the idea of a bottle refund, it might even work (haven't seen any proof yet, it has only been claimed)
I just have a problem with people/companies getting ever more taxes, which consumers always end up paying.
Even if every bottle is returned, there is still all the additional cost of the collection, storage and recycling (if that actually happens) of the bottles, all (or part) paid for by other taxes.

Aluminium is the only thing actually worth recycling isn't it ?



So true, funny how people can be told things are not taxes and they believe them. Just because it is called something different does not change the fact that you have to pay money to the government. It is a tax. I get a refund on the taxes I pay at the end of the year, just because I get some of it back, or even if I get all of it back ,(like my 17 year old son does) it does not change the fact that it is a tax.


tax
[taks] Show IPA
noun
1.
a sum of money demanded by a government for its support or for specific facilities or services, levied upon incomes, property, sales, etc.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 23:13 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Nov 14th, '10, 00:16
Posts: 511
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: S Norway
SuperVeg wrote:
If the government makes you pay something, it is a tax.
So in some cases it might be a tax, in other cases it might be a refund initiated by the company.

Council rates is a tax, you can call them rates all you like, but they are not voluntary so they are a tax.


I have no problem with the idea of a bottle refund, it might even work (haven't seen any proof yet, it has only been claimed)
I just have a problem with people/companies getting ever more taxes, which consumers always end up paying.
Even if every bottle is returned, there is still all the additional cost of the collection, storage and recycling (if that actually happens) of the bottles, all (or part) paid for by other taxes.

Aluminium is the only thing actually worth recycling isn't it ?


No glass botlles actualy works best, because they are cleaned and reused instead of new produced, so in the long run it makes the product cheaper for the consumers do to lower over all manufacturing costs.
Thaats why Scweeps in the late 1700 introduced a bottle refund on their botlles.

Aluminum is also working at the moment because of the currant high price on aluminum raw material it's cheaper to recycle used aluminum cans.
Here in Norway it ads to the overall price to the consumers with aluminum cans because the used cans are shiped to france for remanufacturing compared to glass botlles, but that is the price we (consumers) have to pay for "free trade" agreements.

You don't have to look fare to see if return works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Container_ ... egislation

Switzerland one of your other favorit countrys have a law saying unless 75% of the cans,botlles etc is returned there will be put a specific return price on the containers.
It works but it's not "free of any charge" to make the wolunter return system runing, it's just not spesifically priced but rather incorporated in the generall garbage handeling regime.
Is that a fair system ? everybody pays for the handeling of drinking containers wether you buy it or not?

And forget about the dead duck in the opening post thats just a symbol

Hi Hellom I see you are generally opposed to anything governemental I can respect that, I must admit that I lost respect when you oppenly admited that you would cheet the terrible system though.
You would arange for your wife to recive health care in one state outside of a seceeded Texas, I sort of lost the respect at that point, no problem with reciving only contributing.
That shows no/low etics or moral IMHO

cheers


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 18th, '13, 23:22 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced

Joined: Dec 3rd, '11, 11:12
Posts: 1462
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: east Texas
SolTun wrote:


Hi Hellom I see you are generally opposed to anything governemental I can respect that, I must admit that I lost respect when you oppenly admited that you would cheet the terrible system though.
You would arange for your wife to recive health care in one state outside of a seceeded Texas, I sort of lost the respect at that point, no problem with reciving only contributing.
That shows no/low etics or moral IMHO

cheers


I really don't care who on here has respect for me, but I have been robbed of my hard earned money for many years now, and I am sick and freaking tired of taking care of those that don't want to work. If this gets much worse you can bet your arse that I will try to abuse the system to cause it to fail. It is theft of my money, and I plan on doing what ever it takes to get as much of it back as possible. IMO those that don't work should not get money from those that do. You want something work for it, or else. So no I have plenty of moral and ethics, but I am tired of supporting a class of people that are freaking worthless.

I have a problem with both receiving and contributing, but since I have no control over the contributing part I will take part in the receiving part. It is my money, I just want it back. In fact they stole about 29k dollars from me this year alone.

Oh and btw my wife earned her healthcare, she is a disable veteran. Anything she gets from the federal government is not a handout, it is a benefit earned by serving our country. I also earned certain benefits by serving my country. That is not a handout, or abusing the system. It is getting what you where promised for fighting for your country.

But if obama care causes my company to drop my health care, I will quit working and get every damn government check I can, and I will work on the side for cash only.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 19th, '13, 10:05 
Bordering on Legend
Bordering on Legend

Joined: Mar 3rd, '10, 12:09
Posts: 431
Images: 0
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: Brisbane, QLD
i'd love to be able to buy stuff in returnable bottles, but i'll think the retailers are against it in australia. they dont wanna have to supply the space to hold onto the crates of empties. it works well enough in europe, you buy your beer, and return the bottles for a discount on the next case. if you break any, or dont return them, you dont get your refund. This was working at service station around victoria inthe 90's for softdrink. It went the way of independant service stations when coles/woolworths took them all over and forced the others out of business.

the container deposit scheme here is the same. you pay an extra 10 cents on the bottle, then get it back when you return it. I cant understand how people can be so *frack* bull headed to argue that its not a good idea. South Australia has had one of these in place for decades, and as such, you never ever find empties littering the sides of the roads, or campsites. Everyone takes them to be recycled for the extra 10c a bottle/can, and uses it as a discount on the next box. and if you do litter, you can be guaranteed the kids or others will pick up the bottles and trade them in.

as for helomechs premise that your taxes should only pay for things that you need, that runs about in line with what I figure most americans think. as long as i'm OK, then *frack* everyone else. No wonder everyone in American cant help but shoot up schools and shopping centres. if I had to live with a bunch of rednecks who thought that way, I may take things into my own hands too.


Top
 Profile Personal album  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 19th, '13, 10:17 
A posting God
A posting God

Joined: Nov 10th, '12, 09:27
Posts: 2667
Gender: Male
Are you human?: maybe
Location: Vic
^ this.

Although i would like to see all sport funding removed and placed into a scheme like this or something actually usefull.
Maybe im a little like HelloMech.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 19th, '13, 10:22 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced

Joined: Dec 3rd, '11, 11:12
Posts: 1462
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: east Texas
orcy2010 wrote:

as for helomechs premise that your taxes should only pay for things that you need, that runs about in line with what I figure most americans think. as long as i'm OK, then *frack* everyone else. No wonder everyone in American cant help but shoot up schools and shopping centres. if I had to live with a bunch of rednecks who thought that way, I may take things into my own hands too.


You need to go back to school because you can't read. I never said my taxes should go to what I need. I said the exact opposite. Taxes should only go to the good of the community, not the individual. The constitution points out what the government is supposed to do and welfare is not one of them.


LMAO, you guys believe the news to much. If we believed the news we would think all of you ran around like steve irwin.

Us Americans believe in taking care of ones self. Everyone needs help once in a while, but that is not the job of government. Stealing money and giving it to others is theft plain and simple, even if the government is the one doing it. The strong survive, the weak perish, it is natures way. We in the U.S. don't shoot up schools. You are a freaking idiot if you believe that. The POS taking over prescribed medication, and the welfare trash are the ones that do this type of thing. Most of the crime in our country takes place in a few areas, want to fix the problem go there and fix it. yall have a higher rate of home invasions and so on than we do. All of our violent crime rates have been on a massive decline since the 90's. Much higher decline that your country has.

I won't stoop to the name calling you have started, but I will say I can bet a years pay you would not call me names in person twice.

Sure hope most Australians are not like you. I know at least one of your countrymen on here makes sense.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 19th, '13, 10:28 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mar 12th, '06, 07:56
Posts: 17803
Images: 4
Location: Perth
Gender: Male
Blog: View Blog (1)
You know, I started to respond to these posts but decided that there's just no point... Every time, from now on people start with the whole idea that company profits and rights to free markets are more important than ANYTHING in the world, I'll just keep quoting this...

Quote:
Now there are some things in the world we can’t change – gravity, entropy, the speed of light, the first and second Laws of Thermodynamics, and our biological nature that requires clean air, clean water, clean soil, clean energy and biodiversity for our health and well being. Protecting the biosphere should be our highest priority or else we sicken and die. Other things, like capitalism, free enterprise, the economy, currency, the market, are not forces of nature, we invented them. They are not immutable and we can change them. It makes no sense to elevate economics above the biosphere, for example


Top
 Profile Personal album  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 19th, '13, 10:32 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced

Joined: Dec 3rd, '11, 11:12
Posts: 1462
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: east Texas
earthbound wrote:
You know, I started to respond to these posts but decided that there's just no point... Every time, from now on people start with the whole idea that company profits and rights to free markets are more important than ANYTHING in the world, I'll just keep quoting this...

Quote:
Now there are some things in the world we can’t change – gravity, entropy, the speed of light, the first and second Laws of Thermodynamics, and our biological nature that requires clean air, clean water, clean soil, clean energy and biodiversity for our health and well being. Protecting the biosphere should be our highest priority or else we sicken and die. Other things, like capitalism, free enterprise, the economy, currency, the market, are not forces of nature, we invented them. They are not immutable and we can change them. It makes no sense to elevate economics above the biosphere, for example



I don't believe company profits are the most important thing, I just disagree in boycotting a company that is following the law. If there is something you don't like about it, then get angry with the people that make the rules. I also don't believe charging more for a product helps anything. I don't litter (ever) but 10 cents is not going to make me do something extra. I recycle all our aluminum cans, but the other stuff gets burned. We don't have a garbage service, all our garbage is taken care of by me on my property. I can bet that I contribute less trash than 99% of the people on this forum.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Boycot coke.
PostPosted: Mar 19th, '13, 10:37 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mar 12th, '06, 07:56
Posts: 17803
Images: 4
Location: Perth
Gender: Male
Blog: View Blog (1)
But what you do or don't do is just you, it has nothing to do with the majority... The statistics show that this scheme works for the general population. Litter rates go down, people willingly collect the rubbish to make money and consciously don't throw it... IT WORKS.....


Top
 Profile Personal album  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 235 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Portal by phpBB3 Portal © phpBB Türkiye
[ Time : 0.109s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]