More Tax's:Fast Food, ATM and Chewing gum

Villain

Bertie stated in his Ard Pheis in Killarney last week that he would be putting tax's on Fast Food bags, Chewing Gum and ATM receipts.

Are these tax's needed to help the enviroment or are they just another form of double taxation??

The Plastic bag levy has worked very well but I think there are some differences here.

The ATM receipt is very optional you can view the information on the screen.

But:

Fast Food is something you CAN'T buy without the packaging.

Chewing Gum is very much a debatable issue.

Is Government going too far with these tax's??

Cork

No, the government is facing the reality of waste. People can avoid these levys just as they can avoid the plastic bag levy. It is all about changing people atitude.

sceptre

Originally posted by irish1
Bertie stated in his Ard Pheis in Killarney last week that he would be

The cynic in me reckons Bertie states he'll do a lot of things that never get done.

Fast Food bags

Bags? Did he say bags? Aren't they made out of paper? Surely he meant that plasticky packaging (damned if I can remember what it's called) that burgers are wrapped in in places other than Burger King? If it's just "bags" couldn't they just enforce the litter laws?

Sparks

How about the third option in the poll - "No, this is just Bertie spouting a lot more white noise that'll never see the light of day, thank god, because it's so ill-thought-out"

Boston

fast food packaging if i recall correctly, which is normally paper so i don't know where hes going with this one

Villain

Originally posted by Boston
fast food packaging if i recall correctly, which is normally paper so i don't know where hes going with this one

I don't think its what there made out of is the problem just the ammount of them that never find bins.

Sparks

Originally posted by irish1
I don't think its what there made out of is the problem just the ammount of them that never find bins.

And as I recall, BK and MacDonalds and the other big chains have been using biodegradable packaging for a decade now...

Cork

Originally posted by Sparks
And as I recall, BK and MacDonalds and the other big chains have been using biodegradable packaging for a decade now...

How long does it take this packaging to biodegrade?

Boston

Originally posted by Cork
How long does it take this packaging to biodegrade?

depends on conditions, if its buried then it take about a year i think,

bonkey

From what I can recall reading about this previously (should have been in a thread in here, if anyone feels like a search), the taxes are being applied on :

1) Printed ATM receipts - yes, they're optional, but so many people have them printed and then throw them beside the ATM that its not funny. If that will cost you a few extra pennies that you can save by spending an extra 30 seconds to ask for a balance (assuming its your own bank), then fair enough...the choice is yours.

What I feel somewhat sorry about is that this will cost people who are simply dillligent book-keepers : those who always want a receipt, but to keep, not to throw away. These people will now be expected to pay for the service.

I'm curious as to whether this may also be a push to encourage greater reliance on plastic. You can choose your own reason why that might be a factor, there's plenty.

2) Fast Food Wrappings : I *may* be mistaken, but I was led to believe that what was being taxed here were the polystyrene (or biodegradeable equivalent) "boxes", rather than the waxed-paper stuff.

Interestingly, here in Switzerland, they charge the business - every McDonalds has to pay for the full cost of street-cleaning for the street they are on. This is purely and solely so that the city doesn't pick up the tab for their waste.

I'm undecided as to whether - in a case like this - making the polluter pay should mean the consumer or the provider, but in principle, I agree fullly with the charge for these, as they are a significant contributor to waste (and thus to costs).

Unfortunately, I'm not sure this one will actually make a difference. I don't think people choose where to get their burger based on cost, so there's no "value add" to offer people tax-less wrapping that the competitor doesn't....unless people simply want to see the stuff gone. Of course, that would mean coming dangerously close to supporting the bill

3) Chewing gum : basically, the reason here is that gum is the single-largest contributor to cleaning costs (again, from memory), and disproportionately so. Personally, I don't think thats a bad reason to tax it.

4) On a related issue, I'm surprised that someone hasn't taken the councils/government to task about cigarette butt litter. The thing is this - while its perfectly legal to smoke outside, where do you put your butt? Yes, the truly responsible carry around little portable ashtrays, but other than that, your choices are to throw it in a regular bin - risking a fire if you don't stub it out right - or
throwing it in the gutter / on the path.

How hard would it be to put butt-bins alongside regular bins? You know the type. It wouldn't be hard, and it wouldn't cost that much, and you know what??? You can tax the smokers to pay for it, and just giggle at their screams of outrage

jc

Dooom

yeah well then we'll er....make a tax be put on...um...non...smokers....for something...yeah! for something!

Imposter

The litter caused by fast food packaging, chewing gum and cigarette butts and ATM receipts is not going to mysteriously dissapear with a new levy on those products. It requires a responsible attitude on the behalf of users as well as visible enforcement of the litter laws.

As Bonkey said I don't think people will care/realise that this extra cost is there and sometimes why it exists at all. I feel it's yet another idea by the government to gather money without addressing the problem at hand.

As for polystryrene packaging I would agree with an extra tax on this. Similarly people can print statements in the bank so perhaps the whole idea of receipts at the ATM machine should be looked at.

therecklessone

ATM receipts...

I once had the misfortune of phoning my bank to query a number of cash withdrawals from my account. Two withdrawals were made on the same day from the account, and I couldn't for the life of me work out the second one, so I rang them to check if the transaction had happened on a different day, but had only been processed on the date mentioned on the statement.

I got a lecture from the school teacher like service agent about keeping my receipts as a record of all my transactions...even though AIB don't tell you that receipts aren't available until after you withdraw your money...

I keep my receipts from now on, and I don't welcome the idea of an ATM receipt tax, which will inevitably be passed onto the customer. Let the banks absorb it for once.

Better still, don't tax receipts at all. Make the banks pay for street cleaning in the vicinity of each branch, like bonkey says happens in Switzerland. They can afford it.

Lennoxschips

I chew gum and I always throw it in the bin. Why should I have to pay the cleaning costs for anti-social people who spit it on the ground?

Perhaps we should start taxing hurleys too, some idiots use them as weapons to hit people and to hold up petrol stations...

Qadhafi

Fast Food is something you CAN'T buy without the packaging.

Chewing Gum is very much a debatable issue.

here, you can buy fast food with LESS packaging! and Im sick of looking on the payement and seeing chewing gum everywhere, people can still chew it but have to pay for the machines to pick it up.

Its about time this country was cleaned up! Before the plastic bag levy, everyone was bitching about how scummy the country looked but wouldnt do anything about it.

Research has shown that its these specific items: Fast Food packaging, ATM receipts, chewing gum and fag buts that is the cause of most of it. Its time for the government to act and send out a signal to companies that we want less packaging!

Personally I think this legisation doesnt go far enough!

Villain

Originally posted by Qadhafi
here, you can buy fast food with LESS packaging! [/B]

Ok so tax the Fast Food outlets for using too much packaging!!!

dazberry

I used to work on North Lotts - behind O'Connell St, in fact behind the first section that has a McDonalds, a Burger King, an Eddie Rockets and something else on the corner (can't remember the name) and there's a cobbled laneway that runs behind them from Middle Abbey Street to the North Quays.

Anyhows, this laneway was as slippy as hell, not just because of the cobbles, but because of all the grease that had found its want on to it. When there were spillages - such as buns or burgers, that were just left there to rot, and in general the smell would would almost make you spew.

Now a fast food packaging tax is all well and good, but as far as I can see, the tax will be passed straight to the consumer, and the offending outlets will be under no obligation to actual clean up their act. So in essence, we all pay more, idiots still litter, and nothing really changes.

With chewing gum (I never actually chew any) but the problem is not the chewing gum per-say, its those people that insist on dropping it on the ground - which then is exceptionally difficult to clean off - IMO its worse than cig buts. Again making people pay more, might stop some people from chewing, but it won't necessarily stop people from dropping it on the ground - and so the problem doesn't actually go away.

IMO, its the typically sledge hammer and nut scenerio that this lot are great at.

D.

bonkey

Originally posted by irish1
Ok so tax the Fast Food outlets for using too much packaging!!!

Which they will in turn pass on to the consumer, rather than changing anything.

You end up paying, and its even more indirect so there's absolutely no chance of getting enough public opinion riled up to make the fast food chains sit up and listen...

As for the "I don't litter and I'm getting taxed" ... well, I guess you just have to thank your caring fellow-citizens for that one.

On a somewhat related note, it would be nice if people actually started thinking ahead of these rules, and started making the changes themselves before the tax comes in. We all have bad societal habits...are you all getting rid of yours whilst complaining about the negative effects those of others have on you?

jc

Imposter

Originally posted by bonkey
As for the "I don't litter and I'm getting taxed" ... well, I guess you just have to thank your caring fellow-citizens for that one.

I sort of agree with you here but lets look at it another way. Is this tax going to stop the problem? Probably not.

It's the same as saying ok we're going to raise income tax by 2% for everyone because all those bin-protesters, Liam Lawlor etc won't pay their taxes. In all honesty it's going to cause more Liam Lawlors to emerge and make the problem worse.

The offenders need to be hit with the costs and not everyone.

bonkey

Originally posted by Imposter
The offenders need to be hit with the costs and not everyone.

At which point the offenders start complaining about double-taxation, because they are now being charged for something which previously was paid for through other means (meaning it must have been their money), and we end up right back where we started.

<shrug>

jc

Villain

Well these taxes are probably meant to generate money that will fund the cleaning of our streets.

People already do that, so we'r already paying for this service??

Syth

I support the principal behind these taxes, and as bonkey said :I'm undecided as to whether - in a case like this - making the polluter pay should mean the consumer or the provider. I think that if the company only provides one non-recyclable/wasteful packagaing option, then the company should pay, but if it provides more than one, with at least one environmentally friendly, then the customer should pay for choosing a dirty option when green options are available.

As for Pass machine reciepts, if you wan to keep a record, then you can just get the balance on screen and write it on a bit of paper! It's not that hard.

Clearly the idea of taxing for excess waste works, as demonstrated by the plastic bag tax.

bonkey

Originally posted by Syth
f you wan to keep a record, then you can just get the balance on screen and write it on a bit of paper! It's not that hard.

An official receipt has some usefulness if ever a dispute arises. A hand-written transcription of what you say you read on the screen doesn't.

jc

therecklessone

Originally posted by Syth


As for Pass machine reciepts, if you wan to keep a record, then you can just get the balance on screen and write it on a bit of paper! It's not that hard.

Clearly the idea of taxing for excess waste works, as demonstrated by the plastic bag tax.

See what Bonkey said.

I've just checked my 24 hour banking with AIB and my credit card is showing a payment to Komplett that I know shouldn't be there...more than likely its a pyment to Play.com that they've messed up, but it needs sorting. My bnak have made a number of mistakes over the years, and I had to do the work to resolve them.

Official receipts can be very useful...

Qadhafi

Well these taxes are probably meant to generate money that will fund the cleaning of our streets.

People already do that, so we'r already paying for this service??

Yeah but they dont have the specialist gear for lifting up chewing gum! Its time we started cleaning up this country:cool:

Villain

Originally posted by Qadhafi
Yeah but they dont have the specialist gear for lifting up chewing gum! Its time we started cleaning up this country:cool:

That "1" of the 3 proposed taxs what about the other 2???

dumb larry

Originally posted by Imposter
I sort of agree with you here but lets look at it another way. Is this tax going to stop the problem? Probably not.

The offenders need to be hit with the costs and not everyone.

Yeah, that's true. Can litter wardens give spot fines? More litter wardens and stricter enforcing of current laws is what's needed.

gom

its not a TAX. Not even a DOuble-TAX. Its a levy...

Cork

Originally posted by dumb larry
Yeah, that's true. Can litter wardens give spot fines? More litter wardens and stricter enforcing of current laws is what's needed.

I agree. But, you don't really need receipts from your ATM. Fast Food containers are not the best from an environmental view. Chewing gum is all over the pavements.

We can't leave it all to enforcement. Atitudes toward fast food conrainers, atm receipts and chewing gum need to change.

ATM receipts is a little dubious. I go to my bank on say a bus. I get a bus ticket. (many of these are trown on the street). If I go into the bank and withdraw some money. they would not be a levy on the inhouse receipt.

It is crazy in one way that everybody will to forced to pay levys because of the actions of the actions of others.

But, I surpose, if it helps to clean up the mess that streets have become - it may be worthwhile.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
I agree. But, you don't really need receipts from your ATM.

Yes, you do. It is the only thing which has any legal standing that allows you to verify and/or challenge your statement.

If I go into the bank and withdraw some money. they would not be a levy on the inhouse receipt.

Inhouse bank receipts are not a litter problem right now. Also, you will find that the banks will once again get draconian on applying "teller charges" for using the in-bank service if people started doing this in bulk.

It is crazy in one way that everybody will to forced to pay levys because of the actions of the actions of others.

Why? Do you think its crazy that your taxes go to pay for prisons?

jc

Cork

Originally posted by bonkey

Why? Do you think its crazy that your taxes go to pay for prisons?
jc

No, not at all.
In a perfect world – everybody would dispose of their ATM receipts and chewing gum correctly.

This has not been happening.

If you can do without the receipt – you can specify that you don’t want one.

But, I can see where pressure is coming from. Fast Food wrappings are a big source of litter. Chew gum stuck into our pavements & ATM receipts all around banks.