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

EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

environment.ec.europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 894 posts

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#791

Post by quotemstr »

Atreiden wrote: post #742
quotemstr wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What makes you think that what's cost effective...involves optimally conserving resources The words "cost" and "effective "perhaps? > Polluting Pollution is an economic externality. If I buy a shift and throw it out unworn, I've wasted only my own resources. (I'm paying for the landfill of course.) You could argue that my wasting that shirt hurt you because I could have instead spent those resources on productive a…

Are you under the impression that the planet has effectively infinite carrying capacity and ability to support an "optimal market" indefinitely?

I am of the opinion that markets and prices, not EU regulators, should tell us where scarcity is. We're bad at optimizing manually for the same reason we're bad at guessing where program hotspots are. The market is a profiler.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#792

Post by quotemstr »

OrangeMusic wrote: post #659
quotemstr wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If disposing of my own shirt in a landfill I pay for is an "externality[y]" justifying state intervention, then every domain of life is subject to top down control. I don't want to live in a society in which resources are allocation in general by edict instead of the market.

Look it's not that hard. Is (in this case, pollution) a problem that needs solving? If the answer is yes, then it needs to be regulated even if you personally don't like laws. Sorry!

Why is a problem? Because you say so? If it's such a problem, why is it so cheap to do? What cost is unaccounted?

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#793

Post by imperfect_blue »

motbus3 wrote: post #204

I'm reading the comments and I get confused. I kinda think this is a good idea and it is not like the government is purely making it a 3rd party problem only. This might make production more complicated for a while, but nowadays it is much easier to predict demand and produce quicker in smaller batches. In the 90s you might need change a whole factory setting for every single piece of fabric but nowadays it is that m…

It's a terrible idea because approximately 90% of the cost of clothing is not in producing it, but in the supply chain - keeping it in stock, transporting it to and from warehouses, the manpower needed to organize and sorting and inspect it.

So by saving the 10% of the cost of the clothing, you end up wasting way more in labor and transport and inventory costs. All of which ends up way worse for the environment than had you just shredded it and treated it as compost.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#794

Post by throwaway2037 »

epolanski wrote: post #549
tjwebbnorfolk wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One man's trash is another man's treasure. They will be able to sell them for pennies on the dollar so that some fraction of them can be resold for cheap in Africa or somewhere else poor. Those companies can then dispose of them however they wish. The reseller makes a small profit, and the original moanufacturer gets the PR of "clothing the poor" or whatever. And, as usual, EU regulations achieve absolutely nothing -…

1. Modern clothing is terrible, plastic filled, hardly resists multiple washings. This isn't the 1990s/2000s anymore where you could buy mid budged solid apparel and keep it forever. The gold existed, up to pre COVID. But since then and the rapid spread of fast fashion collecting cloth wastes is a bad business. 2. The market for vintage quality clothing is super strong and booming. You don't need to export it. 3. No…

What about Uniqlo and Muji? They make exactly what you describe: mid-budget solid apparel. Their clothes last for years and resist multiple washings.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#795

Post by etiennebausson »

wolvoleo wrote: post #748
Nevermark wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we need intelligent regulation Absolutely. Poorly thought out, too strict, performative, or obsolete regulations create opposition for any regulation. I also think we need to co-opt the “enemy” to be regulated, in their terms. E.g. get all the major fossil fuel CFO’s in a room, and figure out the financials encouraging green energy, and away from polluting and geopolitically complicated energy, that would make cold…

> include and involve the military, insurance giants, large food security/supply chain companies like Cargill, reactor companies, big enterprise customers that want rapid energy growth, and all the other major sectors that take climate change and energy expansion seriously and will get value out of a more stable world, with better energy technology in practical terms. The people that CEOs respect Oh yeah let the corp…

Nowadays, "Free Market" mostly means its actors are free of the consequences of their externalities.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#796

Post by etiennebausson »

randomtoast wrote: post #772
hilbert42 wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So instead of destroying those clothes in Europe, we'll just add an unnecessary shipping step to the process, producing tons of unnecessary CO2." The world being as it is you're likely correct and your cynicism makes sense, but I'd like to think somehow you're wrong. That EU regulators actually saw need for such regulations makes me both sad and annoyed because they ought not be necessary. What's wrong with clothing…

"So instead of destroying those clothes in Europe, we'll just add an unnecessary shipping step to the process, producing tons of unnecessary CO2." > The world being as it is you're likely correct and your cynicism makes sense, but I'd like to think somehow you're wrong. I don't see any cynicism here, only pure realism. The real question is why EU law tries to create a utopia on paper while ignoring real-world situati…

That extra step mean selling what remains at low cost might be more financially interesting than if they could destroy it 'on site'. Not a perfect solution, but it push the incentives in the right direction.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#797

Post by fireflash38 »

randomtoast wrote: post #772
hilbert42 wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So instead of destroying those clothes in Europe, we'll just add an unnecessary shipping step to the process, producing tons of unnecessary CO2." The world being as it is you're likely correct and your cynicism makes sense, but I'd like to think somehow you're wrong. That EU regulators actually saw need for such regulations makes me both sad and annoyed because they ought not be necessary. What's wrong with clothing…

"So instead of destroying those clothes in Europe, we'll just add an unnecessary shipping step to the process, producing tons of unnecessary CO2." > The world being as it is you're likely correct and your cynicism makes sense, but I'd like to think somehow you're wrong. I don't see any cynicism here, only pure realism. The real question is why EU law tries to create a utopia on paper while ignoring real-world situati…

I see this response as the exact same one about tax cheating and how the rich will just move away or be better at cheating taxes.

Did we forget how to discover and punish bad actors? Do you think we should just do nothing and let casual bad behavior go because some people are gonna be abusive? No. I refuse to accept that. It is not your false dichotomy.

If people abuse the system, fine and punish them. More than they profit off of the bad actions.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#798

Post by yunohn »

miki123211 wrote: post #373
motbus3 wrote: post #204

I'm reading the comments and I get confused. I kinda think this is a good idea and it is not like the government is purely making it a 3rd party problem only. This might make production more complicated for a while, but nowadays it is much easier to predict demand and produce quicker in smaller batches. In the 90s you might need change a whole factory setting for every single piece of fabric but nowadays it is that m…

Here's how this law is actually going to work. Instead of destroying the unsold clothes in Europe, manufacturers are going to sell them to "resale" companies in countries with little respect for the rule of law, mostly in Africa or Asia. Those companies will then destroy those clothes, reporting them as sold to consumers. So instead of destroying those clothes in Europe, we'll just add an unnecessary shipping step to…

> manufacturers are going to sell them to "resale" companies in countries with little respect for the rule of law, mostly in Africa or Asia

Look, I fully agree with what is going to happen in reality. But isn't it a bit misleading and ironic to accuse the recipient countries as disrespecting the "rule of law", when the companies selling them there are fully/partially aware and doing business with them to bypass the exact (proposed) law being discussed? As with historic examples of waste management, recycling, etc as well, where everybody in the chain knew and wanted what was /actually/ happening.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#799

Post by codingbot3000 »

As a EU citizen it is really frustrating to watch that they just can't stop themselves from introducing new regulation. And we don't have non-hallucinating AI yet that can help businesses keep track of all this legislative diarrhea.

Re: EU bans the destruction of unsold apparel, clothing, accessories and footwear

#800

Post by kwanbix »

em-bee wrote: post #770
kwanbix wrote: post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have had that in Argentina for 40 years. The result? One of the most expensive countries to live in the world. The PS5 you can buy for 500 dollars in USA? it is 1000 here in Argentina. The Samsung Galaxy you pay 800 in USA? It is 1600 in Argentina. The Levi jean you pay 100? It is 250 in Argentina. Or, if you want to pay the same price for a jean, you can, but the quality will be 1/3 of the one you can buy in USA/…

we are not talking about banning the import of regular products, but about donated or second hand items that are sold for next to nothing, half of which is useless junk. the point is to not allow these inferior imports to undercut local products, not to make any imports more expensive than local ones. the latter happens too, and it's stupid, but just because that is bad, and we should be allowed to sell our products,…

there are people in developing countries where this is a treasure. Trust me, I've been to such countries.
Post reply on HN