old man emu Posted January 2, 2018 Author Share Posted January 2, 2018 Marty, That's only in Melbourne, where the rivers run upside-down. You should have come through Sydney. We've go a harbour full of clean water, plus a river to the north and two to the south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomadpete Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 Don, none of that's much help when you'resitting in an airport, and you're thirsty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 OME, .If the harbor had clean water then Sydney Rock oysters would be safe to eat. Alas this is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted January 2, 2018 Author Share Posted January 2, 2018 It's not the water, it's a parasite that has come from Queensland. QX is a disease of Sydney rock oysters (Saccostrea glomerata) caused by a protozoan (i.e. 'single-celled') parasite (Marteilia sydneyi). QX disease historically occurred repeatedly in the estuaries of southeast Queensland and northern New South Wales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 I still think that you should reconsider that unconscionable slur against the Pearl of the South! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 OK, I stand corrected. Here's silly me thinking of how every leaking sewer pipe near the harbor was putting stuff into the water and how some of the pathogens would finish up in the oysters. How about some oysters from the west coast of SA? The cleanest water in the world there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted January 2, 2018 Author Share Posted January 2, 2018 I still think that you should reconsider that unconscionable slur against the Pearl of the South! Natural Pearls form when an irritant - usually a parasite and not the proverbial grain of sand - works its way into an oyster. quod erat demonstrandum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted January 2, 2018 Share Posted January 2, 2018 But an indescribably beautiful example of nature's wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 ...and talking about water... ‘Almost everything that makes you sick can be found in water’ Now that's just funny. Rich idiots paying obscene amounts for plain water which has the potential to make them sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryon Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 Money breeds stupidity........lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted January 5, 2018 Share Posted January 5, 2018 People are eternally gullible. Snake oil salespersons milk them constantly. A fool and his/her money are soon parted. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted February 14, 2018 Author Share Posted February 14, 2018 $100 million collected in drink container deposits. $8 million refunded. Who has scored a nice windfall, then? And it ain't the drink manufacturers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_Atrick Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 I think it is called a stealth tax... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 How does that work OME? I thought that the deposit was paid by the consumer at the point of sale and then collected by the consumer when returning the bottle. Do you mean to say that only a small percentage of bottles are returned? Or have I got it all wrong? If only a small fraction of bottles are returned, that says to me that the deposit is too small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_Atrick Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 From what I understand, there is a bit of both the consumer not being bothered to return it (or kids like I was wanting to collect them for returnign and make a bit more pocket money) and from what I recall the difficult conditions to do with returning. But just a guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 Perhaps the difference is those not returned YET. Amatil and such always oppose deposits when people try to have them applied. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 Just re-stating the information in my original post: "I picked up a brochure from my local Woolworths, "What you need to know about the NSW Government's Return & Earn Initiative". The brochure gives an example of why a 24-pack of soft drink cans has gone up in price. 1. Original recommended retail price = $20.00 ( incl GST $2.00) (This price is subject to retail market forces) 2. Cost of providing for refund** = $2.40 (24 x 10 cents per can) 3. Return & Earn Admin fee = $1.18 (24 x $03.54) + GST (Admin fee will vary over time) 4. New Price (incl GST) = $23.58 Now they are saying that the Admin fee has changed, so that the additional amount is $4.00. The admin fee was never set in stone. Early information, as provided in this brochure, was an estimate only. The problems with returning containers are: 1. Insufficient refund sites. 2. Too many containers disposed of away from consumer's homes. Would you buy a drink near your workplace, then carry the empty home at the end of the day? No. It would go in the garbage can at work. 3. Inconvenience of obtaining the refunded money. You have to take the docket to a shop to get the refund. 4. Kids are not allowed out of the house to roam the streets so they can collect cans. (Leaves them for us old codgers!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 Well, the seller (and manufacturer) should be responsible for the results. They like, (and take) the profits they can cover the damages. Sound fair.? Chuck something out of a car window and you can expect to be fined if caught. Bring it on. Look after the only planet around that's habitable and accessible, and appreciate it's wonders. Stop turning it into a sewer and garbage dump. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 Well, the seller (and manufacturer) should be responsible for the results. They like, (and take) the profits they can cover the damages. Sound fair.? Chuck something out of a car window and you can expect to be fined if caught. Bring it on. Look after the only planet around that's habitable and accessible, and appreciate it's wonders. Stop turning it into a sewer and garbage dump. Nev That's a bit off track! I want a liquid refreshment. The manufacturer makes a liquid refreshment. I can't get that liquid refreshment without its being put in a container. I obtain the liquid refreshment and the container. Once I have consumed the liquid refreshment, it becomes my responsibility to deal with the container in a way that minimizes its environmental impact. Since I am aware of environmental impacts, I'll try to ensure that the container is recycled. Not everyone is as aware of environmental impacts as I am, so many will just abandon the container in the environment. How is that behaviour the responsibility of the manufacturer or seller? What I am objecting to is that the manufacturer is initially pouring money into government coffers in amounts well in excess of the amount of money the government is returning to the purchaser, who has already reimbursed the manufacturer at point of sale. What government junkets is the consumer paying for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 The modern view is that the disposal of stuff is (at least in part) a responsibility of the production and marketing section. Consider a nuclear Power station as an example, admittedly a large one but the principle is the same for all articles. Cigarette butts and plastic also are becoming a serious problem. The type of plastic and the amount used is in the control of the above mentioned groups. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 Last time I bought a new battery for the car, it was over $100. The guy said that this was because of the world price of lead. When I replied that there was just as much lead in the old battery, so that should be worth a lot too, he looked at me incredulously and said no way. To dispose of it, I went to the recycling place to find that there was a half-hour queue and the amount would be $2. So I gave the battery to the guy in the car behind me and came home sadder but wiser. That was the last lead-acid I have bought... they are about $160 now for the old Falcon. This time it was some chemicals and capacitors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted February 16, 2018 Author Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just got back from the cash-for-cans pick up. I put in 115 containers and got $11.50. Only need to pitch in another $3.50 to recharge my mobile phone. I paid more than that in refund and admin fees, but at leeast I got some money back, which I wasn't getting before the scheme came in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty_d Posted February 18, 2018 Share Posted February 18, 2018 Would you buy a drink near your workplace, then carry the empty home at the end of the day? No. Well, yes. I'd quite happily stomp on my Diet Coke can, throw it in a bag under my desk and take it to recycling when full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted February 18, 2018 Author Share Posted February 18, 2018 Don't stomp on it, or the recycling bin can't read the barcode and will throw the can back at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Posted February 18, 2018 Share Posted February 18, 2018 I know a woman in Alice Springs who paid for a trip to Europe by collecting litter first thing in the morning from the streets. OME, that Woollies stuff was just puffery. Competition is all that makes them curb prices at all. I'm proud of SA for being the only state with any deposits for years. But its too little and not on enough things. Fast food packaging is the worst litter. I bet that if deposits were put to a fair referendum they would get voted in easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now