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

271–280 of 322 posts

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

#271

Post by zb3 »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #245
zb3 wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While my sibling comment said it all, note that destroying them also costs money, hence if those can't be sold, it's a loss of profit already, lower the price and let people eat.. > higher costs. Higher costs of what? Of those new fruits? Well, maybe wasting food should cost?

Destroying food is pretty cheap. you put it in the dumpster. Picking through it, sending it to a shelter, and vetting the people at the shelter seems more expensive. > Well, maybe wasting food should cost? Why? Wasting food should be be free. The owner paid for it.

> Destroying food is pretty cheap. you put it in the dumpster. Picking through it, sending it to a shelter, and vetting the people at the shelter seems more expensive.

But at least first lowering prices until they reach 0 seems cheaper?

> Why? Wasting food should be be free. The owner paid for it.

Because that's a vile thing to do when someone else wants to eat it, don't you think?

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

#272

Post by UltraSane »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #270
UltraSane wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"do you imagine anyone can walk into the store and get it" YES, BECAUSE THEY WERE GOING TO THROW IT AWAY! You would prefer to see edible food being wasted instead of eaten? That is very weird.

You have some cultural beliefs about food being of special reverence which is not reflected in its utility and cost.

No, I have a accurate belief that food is one of the most fundamental and important resources for humans and the lack of it causes enormous suffering and long term harm.

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

#273

Post by s1artibartfast »

UltraSane wrote: post #269
s1artibartfast wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who packs it up? Who finds the hungry? Who reviews their financial situation? Who delivers it? Alternatively, do you imagine anyone can walk into the store and get it, and decide if they feel like paying today at the register?

"do you imagine anyone can walk into the store and get it" YES, BECAUSE THEY WERE GOING TO THROW IT AWAY! You would prefer to see edible food being wasted instead of eaten? That is very weird.

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.

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

#274

Post by Dylan16807 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #248
Dylan16807 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that scenario supposed to be relevant? This isn't some random guy. Their entire job is dealing with the logistics of big piles of clothes, and they have months in advance to plan.

There just aren't that many people in developed countries who can make use of a pallet of unsellable clothing. Even free clothing distributors - which most organizations accepting clothing donations are not, by the way - generally strive to provide a broad selection of desirable clothing rather than a bunch of copies of an unpopular shirt.

What makes you think these are unsellable? Would you be happy if the law mandated a certain amount of time offering deep discounts and only then could allow shredding? Because I bet the vast majority of these clothes would sell just fine at 75% off, brand new.

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

#275

Post by cromka »

dash2 wrote: post #192
cromka wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it promotes recycling instead of being another tax.

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?

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

#276

Post by altairprime »

maccard wrote: post #268
altairprime wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU has targeted foodservice with regulation as well, though it’s phased much more slowly (2030) than the clothing law was: https://food.ec.europa.eu/food-safety/food-waste/eu-food-was... Here, too, they consider “stop overproducing” to be the biggest problem on the pyramid. I’m not as familiar with this effort (nor if it, or any related initiative, affects to-go / disposal-ware) but one can reasonably imagine the…

Sure - but my point is that the waste by businesses absolutely dwarves domestic waste. I used to work in a shop, and we “recycled” (LDPE so not recyclable) more plastic in a week than I have used in the 10 years since I worked there. I’m not saying that individuals have no impact; our habits are absolutely important and we influence industry. But moving the needle on industry waste will have a more significant on the…

The EU seems to agree: the 2030 target, set in 2025, requires a reduction of “10%, in processing and manufacturing” which will probably have an oversized impact on waste in actual kilos reduced, relative to the combined retail-domestic target.

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

#277

Post by altairprime »

mpyne wrote: post #229
altairprime wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a charity sets up a ‘returned product classification’ flow and issues tax credits to companies donating their return flow to the charity, then companies can simply shunt returns to charity and lower their costs in triplicate: 1) changeover of return provider replaces expense with deduction; 2) compliance with EU regulations costs shipping to charity; 3) charity provides itemized receipts for compliance and further…

Couldn't they already do this today, without an additional regulation? Why is a charity supposed to be able to magically conjure sales the original seller was unable to find? I just think if it was as easy to doing this, there's already be nothing for regulators to be complaining about.

Possibly? I’m not sure anyone’s ever considered it before, since prior to this EU regulation there was nothing directing innovation in this space. I might well be the first to come up with the idea :)

Corporations regularly price goods higher than demand in order to delay lowering prices or create artificial scarcity — see gas stations, rental collusion companies, and Prada bags, for example. Charities don’t have to sell clothes received at all to ‘pay’ the donator in tax credits. This law is about forcing corporations to one way or another deliver 100% of their finished goods to end users rather than diverting a massive fraction of that to waste streams, and charities can use clothes up to a point.

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

#278

Post by altairprime »

ryandrake wrote: post #228
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really the case that Nike is a wealth signalling brand? In the investigation I think you're referring to ( https://www.fastcompany.com/90697259/nike-appears-to-be-shre... ), I find Nike's side of the story much more plausible: if they find in processing returns that a shoe appears to have been altered, they prefer to reuse the shoe materials for other purposes, rather than carefully inspecting individual shoes…

It’s probably been 20 years since I’ve even noticed what brand of shoes anyone was wearing, let alone processed that information into some kind of economic class judgment. Is this really still a thing?

Brand signaling is taught to Marketing bachelor graduates and is taken for granted as a legitimate and real thing in their profession. I am rather brand-blind myself but I tend not to extrapolate from my own experiences to that of others.

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

#279

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #274
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There just aren't that many people in developed countries who can make use of a pallet of unsellable clothing. Even free clothing distributors - which most organizations accepting clothing donations are not, by the way - generally strive to provide a broad selection of desirable clothing rather than a bunch of copies of an unpopular shirt.

What makes you think these are unsellable? Would you be happy if the law mandated a certain amount of time offering deep discounts and only then could allow shredding? Because I bet the vast majority of these clothes would sell just fine at 75% off, brand new.

I'd be much happier with a law like that, yes. Clearance racks and outlet stores are already a well-known practice, so it seems like a minimal distortion to require that all clothing product lines have to cycle through them before being destroyed or recycled. My experience with clearance racks, though, is that people ~never buy something they're not excited about just because the discount is high. They browse to see if they get lucky on something they might have bought anyway, and if they don't they go buy something else at full price.

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

#280

Post by groundzeros2015 »

UltraSane wrote: post #272
groundzeros2015 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have some cultural beliefs about food being of special reverence which is not reflected in its utility and cost.

No, I have a accurate belief that food is one of the most fundamental and important resources for humans and the lack of it causes enormous suffering and long term harm.

Good thing options and supply are abundant!
Post reply on HN