Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 111 posts

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#71

Post by ZeroGravitas »

danieltillett wrote: post #3

This goes for most (almost all) recycling programs. Recycling programs are a worse than a waste of money since you are using up some of people’s limited support for environmental causes. This would not matter if we did not have some really huge, long term problems that we need to deal with that we are not doing enough about.

I think this is a weird American political myth, like evolution not being real, or global warming being a Chinese conspiracy, or electric cars being worse than gas due to coal.

You go online and you find the same talking point, the same urban myths (they just dump it in a landfill!), the same links to professional political pundit's think pieces rather than to actual expert opinion.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#72

Post by legulere »

brownbat wrote: post #56
twblalock wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> things revert to normal when you stop paying Not if you do it right. If your goal is to destroy an industry in another country, you can stop dumping after that industry has been destroyed. Then, the people of that country will have no choice but to buy from you, because there is nobody left in that country that produces the goods you produce.

Well, there's one hiccup. You can't privately dump. Well, you can try. Since you're selling at a loss on the open market, others with capital will see an unexpected price and wonder if you have developed a unique efficiency. After some basic research, some will guess at what you're trying to do. They then have some great options. Invest in competitors or substitutes for the coming reduced supply. Or, stockpile the go…

> Invest in competitors or substitutes for the coming reduced supply

Which will be at a loss, so you need just as much money. This is especially hard in developing countries. The market will still be destroyed, and you'll end up with a oligopoly.

> Or, stockpile the goods you sell,

Many things can't be stockpiled, and stockpiling also costs money (see the above)

One example where private dumping is tried, is uber with the taxi business. Uber regularly subsidizes fares (e.g. [1]). Local independent taxi drivers don't have the economic backing of investors and can't fight against dumping.

[1]: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/busin...

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#73

Post by chillwaves »

dingleberry wrote: post #57
titzer wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't drive without glasses. You're likely violating the law and you are putting others in danger.

for motorbike, it's okay because the distance to front wheel is short and my vision is sharp up to the distance. i can't read number plates and stuffs clearly; however, i don't drive to see those things clearly. my mission is move from a to b without collisions.

Motorbike without vision is so much safer than car without vision. I'm relieved to hear.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#74

Post by markvdb »

jlg23 wrote: post #10

Questions unfortunately not answered by the article: a) Who profits from this recycling program? How many people get a western salary to coordinate all this? b) Following from (a), how many optometrists and lens makers could make a living in Cambodia if people just put $1 in a collection box each time they'd dump their used glasses in a box? This suspiciously sounds like the "2nd hand clothes for Africa" scam that on…

More of the second hand clothing from Western Europe at least ends up in Eastern Europe than in Africa: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-30227025 .

Anecdata. My second home country, Latvia, has so many more second hand than new clothes shops. At the same time, local textile industry seems to be thriving even within the EU single market. Local shops manufacturing high end clothing for Western EU clients...

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#75

Post by redthrow »

dahart wrote: post #62
redthrow wrote: post #18

Recycling is Garbage (1996) http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/30/magazine/recycling-is-garb...

Wow, hard to believe this was actually linked to. That opinion article article was thoroughly debunked two decades ago, yet somehow it's still doing damage. Debunking the Myths of the “Anti-Recyclers” http://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/174_Sep96.pdf Recycling is not garbage - MIT technology review 1997 https://www.technologyreview.com/s/400100/recycling-is-not-g...

Think Globally, Act Irrationally: Recycling

http://econlib.org/library/Columns/y2007/Mungerrecycling.htm...

http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2007/07/munger_on_recyc.htm...

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#76

Post by WalterBright »

xyzzy123 wrote: post #69
WalterBright wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide a case history of an industry destroyed in this manner (selling below cost), where the dumper goes on to enjoy monopoly profits?

None of the cases I could read about discussed monopoly profits (so I guess, no - although it was not my argument). Rather they focused on the destruction of what were otherwise perfectly good industrial bases. So I suppose the point I'd like to refute is that "dumping is always a losing game for the dumper". The following article: http://www.nap.edu/read/5902/chapter/28 Discusses the case of the British steel indust…

If you're selling surplus steel at a discount because it would cost more to not make it, that is not dumping. It's maximizing profits.

I'm aware that many countries have anti-dumping laws and protective tariffs. I suspect the "dumping" charge is just an excuse to insulate oneself from competition. The cost of protecting an industry in this way is higher prices for everyone else in the country.

Economic prosperity comes from exploiting comparative advantage, not blunting it.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#77

Post by WalterBright »

legulere wrote: post #72
brownbat wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there's one hiccup. You can't privately dump. Well, you can try. Since you're selling at a loss on the open market, others with capital will see an unexpected price and wonder if you have developed a unique efficiency. After some basic research, some will guess at what you're trying to do. They then have some great options. Invest in competitors or substitutes for the coming reduced supply. Or, stockpile the go…

> Invest in competitors or substitutes for the coming reduced supply Which will be at a loss, so you need just as much money. This is especially hard in developing countries. The market will still be destroyed, and you'll end up with a oligopoly. > Or, stockpile the goods you sell, Many things can't be stockpiled, and stockpiling also costs money (see the above) One example where private dumping is tried, is uber wit…

The taxi business is easy to get into (absent government regulations trying to prevent that). It's hard to see how dumping could prevent competition from rebounding quickly after the dumper's investors get tired of the losses.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#78

Post by throwaway6436 »

acoravos wrote: post #64

This study is old, but glad it's getting published on major media sources. The cost of distributing the glasses and reaching rural locations is often more challenging than the cost of the glasses itself. One of the leading companies distributing low-cost eye glasses is VisionSpring (www.visionspring.org), and they are also main partner for Warby Parker ( https://www.warbyparker.com/buy-a-pair-give-a-pair ). VS is mak…

You could have warned of an incoming message from our sponsors.

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#79

Post by reitanqild »

WalterBright wrote: post #39
xyzzy123 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point, but there is a good deal of hypocrisy in the way this kind international "trade" is viewed. Giving away second hand clothes to developing countries is indistinguishable from "dumping", a trade practice which more developed countries (including the U.S) frequently take trade action against. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)

Dumping is a losing game for the dumper. It's nearly as bad as paying someone to buy your products. It only "works" as long as you keep paying, things revert to normal when you stop paying. Meanwhile, the dumpees are better off at your expense.

Not always:

Often there exists a price point where it is more profitable to sell less than 100% at a larger price point instead of lowering the price until you can sell everything.

At this point the question is what to do with the rest supply. Physically dumping it is one option that might not be legal. Selling it to another market[0] may net you a small profit on top of the already good profit of the amount sold at the optimal price point.

[0]: this might be another country or even as white label to local distributors.

(Source: farming school economics. : )

Re: Recycling Eyeglasses Is a Waste of Money

#80

Post by popra »

WalterBright wrote: post #77
legulere wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Invest in competitors or substitutes for the coming reduced supply Which will be at a loss, so you need just as much money. This is especially hard in developing countries. The market will still be destroyed, and you'll end up with a oligopoly. > Or, stockpile the goods you sell, Many things can't be stockpiled, and stockpiling also costs money (see the above) One example where private dumping is tried, is uber wit…

The taxi business is easy to get into (absent government regulations trying to prevent that). It's hard to see how dumping could prevent competition from rebounding quickly after the dumper's investors get tired of the losses.

You're just arguing that dumping can be fought with dumping and hence it's not rational for economic agents to engage in dumping. When did a rational argument stop the market from doing something?
Post reply on HN