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

EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

environment.ec.europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 322 posts

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#71

Post by bulder »

dash2 wrote: post #58

I don’t understand why they would ban this rather than charge for it. It seems very likely that destroying unsold clothes is sometimes the socially efficient thing to do, even after taking into account the environmental externalities.

Destroying unsold clothes is financially the most efficient thing to do. It remains unclear to me how taking actions to maintain higher markups on products would be socially efficient in any way. Companies of course can keep doing it, they just will face financial and legislative repercussions for it.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#72

Post by s1artibartfast »

josephcsible wrote: post #54
nieksand wrote: post #36

It seems like this policy would lead to shortages in less common sizes of clothing.

How do you figure?

It's really different depending on if the manufacturer has Brand reputation or is just a replaceable good. For no name jeans, they probably just keep making them and donate the leftovers.

For a high-end designer dress, may be better to not manufacture large or small sizes that don't sell frequently.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#73

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

rzwitserloot wrote: post #62
jandrewrogers wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who pays for the logistics cost of moving and stocking these products in discount stores and giveaway centers? That is a large percentage of the total cost of production and the reason disposal is cheaper. If those costs are paid for by taxpayers then the consumers are in effect involuntarily buying products they would not have otherwise bought, just with more steps. We already see this with agricultural subsidies. I…

It's a somewhat blunt instrument used to internalize some externalities: Making a product and then destroying it is wasteful, and the market will fix all internalized costs of that waste, but some of those costs are externalized. Having society pay somewhat for producing clothes that are then worn, that's one thing. Having society pay for pointless waste is another. What you've said is: Looking only at the internaliz…

Again, the waste is not pointless, it's part of an inventory management strategy to ensure adequate supply. If your local grocery store established a policy that they'll never buy more meat than they're sure they can sell before the expiration date, they'd routinely run out.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#74

Post by roysting »

dash2 wrote: post #58

I don’t understand why they would ban this rather than charge for it. It seems very likely that destroying unsold clothes is sometimes the socially efficient thing to do, even after taking into account the environmental externalities.

That was my initial thought too; just make it a non-deductible charge, ideally, payable from executive compensation.

Or they could also just levy higher taxes/fees on synthetic fibers and clothing that cannot be repaired (there are several reasons), and at the same time support the industry for natural, truly biodegradable fibers and their research?

This seems like more ivory tower navel gazing.

And that doesn’t even touch on all the jurisdictional and financial shenanigans that immediately come to my mind how you can circumvent that.

Government legislatures really should have red team groups that have to be included in legislative processes with the objective of punching holes into legislation.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#75

Post by watermelon0 »

toast0 wrote: post #65
josephcsible wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you figure?

If your minimum run is 1000 of a size, and you can only really sell 500 because it's an uncommon size, and you would prefer to sell at full price or not at all, seems like making that size no longer fits your plans.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to only produce 500 items, instead of producing 1k, and throwing half of it away?

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#77

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

watermelon0 wrote: post #75
toast0 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your minimum run is 1000 of a size, and you can only really sell 500 because it's an uncommon size, and you would prefer to sell at full price or not at all, seems like making that size no longer fits your plans.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to only produce 500 items, instead of producing 1k, and throwing half of it away?

1k in this example would be the minimum needed to make it worth the static cost of setting up and tearing down the production run.

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#78

Post by cm2012 »

josephcsible wrote: post #54
nieksand wrote: post #36

It seems like this policy would lead to shortages in less common sizes of clothing.

How do you figure?

Normally you can overproduce clothing and make three of every size or something, knowing that it only costs a couple bucks to make another shirt, for instance. And you can throw out if you make too many. If it's illegal to throw it out, maybe that raises the price from $2 to $4 because now you have to pay for storage for a long time. So you'll buy less inventory at the start, which usually means cutting less common sizes first

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#79

Post by jyounker »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #73
rzwitserloot wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a somewhat blunt instrument used to internalize some externalities: Making a product and then destroying it is wasteful, and the market will fix all internalized costs of that waste, but some of those costs are externalized. Having society pay somewhat for producing clothes that are then worn, that's one thing. Having society pay for pointless waste is another. What you've said is: Looking only at the internaliz…

Again, the waste is not pointless, it's part of an inventory management strategy to ensure adequate supply. If your local grocery store established a policy that they'll never buy more meat than they're sure they can sell before the expiration date, they'd routinely run out.

Do you have proof of that assertion?

Re: EU ban on destruction of unsold clothes and shoes enters into application

#80

Post by thewebguyd »

toast0 wrote: post #65
josephcsible wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you figure?

If your minimum run is 1000 of a size, and you can only really sell 500 because it's an uncommon size, and you would prefer to sell at full price or not at all, seems like making that size no longer fits your plans.

> prefer to sell at full price or not at all

That really only applies to luxury designer brands where selling at a discount can dilute the brand prestige, is Gucci, Versace, etc. really destroying unsold inventory at large volumes vs. standard retailers?

Post reply on HN