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

291–300 of 322 posts

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

#291

Post by thefourthchime »

cbg0 wrote: post #168
thefourthchime wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU is doing everything it can to fail. The only thing that seems to be coming out of the EU in the last 20 years is regulation. It seems to be its only invention and contribution to itself. They have no upper bounds on creativity when it comes to creating rules that disrupt business. I can't tell if this is coming from jealousy or incompetence—or perhaps a combination of both. They see the rest of the world, espe…

You're arguing in favor of destroying unworn clothes instead of donating to charity or discounting them as somehow being good for business? The point of this is to control against wasteful business practices, not a ban on producing or selling clothes. The EU is a $23 trillion economy, hardly a slouch even though it is underperforming. The VW example is actually something you probably don't understand - they're failin…

In the last 20 years, the EU has grown about %1.5. In 2005, the EU accounted for 25% of the global GDP. Now it's about 17%.

GDP per capita in the United States is about twice of Europeans. 85k per capital in the US, vs 43k in the EU.

The only tech companies I can think of in Europe are Spotify and Umm.. sure there are others..

One brightside is Sweden who has decided to embrace capitalism and has turned themselves around.

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

#292

Post by groundzeros2015 »

UltraSane wrote: post #283
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good thing options and supply are abundant!

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo... 13.7 percent (18.3 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2024. 8.3 percent (11.1 million) of U.S. households had low food security in 2024. 5.4 percent (7.2 million) of U.S. households had very low food security at some time during 2024.

Where do you think I should send my bruised bananas to be eaten?

The definition for the largest category is a subjective feeling of not being able to buy all food options you would buy.

The narrow categories which have better defined criteria also include anyone with any administrative dysfunction which limits their ability to plan or navigate serivces. Which is a real and different problem from having edible mass.

To put it another way, almost everything you need to do to survive as an adult in the US is harder than acquiring food. The problems you have in this category are a bottomless pit.

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

#294

Post by dash2 »

esterna wrote: post #262
dash2 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming there is such a price! Charity shops throw out the majority of clothes they are given: some things just will never sell.[1] [1] https://theclothingbank.org.uk/what-happens-to-the-clothes-y...

Once once they are rejected by charities, they can be destroyed just like before this law. EU regulators are flawed humans, but you can be assured that any argument you can come up with in 10 minutes has been considered.

Fair enough, but now I would "solve for the equilibrium" and assume that any large clothing company will have a friendly charity to reject its clothes for it.

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

#295

Post by dash2 »

cromka wrote: post #275
dash2 wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A tax would also promote recycling, since that would avoid the tax?

How's that different to current asking for recycling and fining on incompliance?

The difference is that a tax can be per-item, and doesn't need as much regulatory and legal machinery.

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

#296

Post by s1artibartfast »

UltraSane wrote: post #284
s1artibartfast wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone ever pay at the store then instead of getting the free food? E.g. Just wait and it is all free. I dont prefer to see food thrown away, but I also like having Markets and farmers with functional businesses.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/is-frances-groundbreaking-... A third of the world's food goes to waste, but France is attempting to do something about it. Since 2016, large grocery stores in the country have been banned from throwing away unsold food that could be given away.

Can they at least feed it to animals?

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

#298

Post by altairprime »

Schiendelman wrote: post #232
altairprime wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nike certainly could choose to sell at a discount rather than grind unsold shoes into rubber. They have a wealth-signal brand to maintain, however, so they will resist doing so if at all possible.

Nike is famously one of the less wealth signalling shoe brands. Until recently I don't think they had a product for sale for more than ~$220 at all.

That sounds very expensive, given that I was raised lower-middle class. Perhaps not so much to pro sports or tech folks? Apologies for misreading, I guess :)

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

#299

Post by UltraSane »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #292
UltraSane wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/fo... 13.7 percent (18.3 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2024. 8.3 percent (11.1 million) of U.S. households had low food security in 2024. 5.4 percent (7.2 million) of U.S. households had very low food security at some time during 2024.

Where do you think I should send my bruised bananas to be eaten? The definition for the largest category is a subjective feeling of not being able to buy all food options you would buy. The narrow categories which have better defined criteria also include anyone with any administrative dysfunction which limits their ability to plan or navigate serivces. Which is a real and different problem from having edible mass. T…

"Where do you think I should send my bruised bananas to be eaten?"

They should be on a shelf with a giant "FREE" sign. You act like it is so hard to give away food instead of throwing it in the dumpster. Well it isn't.

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

#300

Post by petre »

altairprime wrote: post #165
kelvinjps10 wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't they have to make discounts or sell it therefore lowering the price.

Nike certainly could choose to sell at a discount rather than grind unsold shoes into rubber. They have a wealth-signal brand to maintain, however, so they will resist doing so if at all possible.

I used to hate on Nike because of their signalling until I got a pair of court sneakers with minimal branding for like 40€ which are leather made held better and are more confortable than my sambas or gazelles (too narrow). The only inconvenience is that they're white.
Post reply on HN