"The EPA does not see the bags as a big' problem in the United States. "While the EPA would like to see plastics as a whole recycled at a higher rate, plastic bags as a specific commodity haven't been a huge issue," says an agency official. He adds that the problems in Ireland and Bangladesh occurred in part because those countries' waste disposal infrastructures are not as advanced as that of the United States."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYP/is_4_111/ai_102102851/
If there ever was a failed polly who whiles his precious time thinking up harebrained schemes rather than uplifting the socio-economic status of his polity, then Lim Guan Eng aka Guan0 aka DA Pig must be it. Instead of exploring ways to uplift FDI inflows, increase GDP growth or stanch the bleeding of public enterprises for partisan interests, the filthy pig vomits a proposal that is bound to increase retail costs, curb retail activity and lead to a misallocation of natural resources fr puerile purposes.
Fact of the matter is plastic bans have no beneficial effect on the economy much less the environment. Rather they cause a regressive shift to more costly alternatives:
"According to the American Plastics Council, producing a plastic bag uses about 30% less energy than making a paper bag."
And nor are such bans wholly successful : http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=does-banning-plastic-bags-work-09-08-13
Rather the ban is symptomatic of the State's poor waste management policies as implemented by the MPPP and the MPSP. Instead of implementing a sophisticated disposal system backed by mandatory proper disposal of rubbish using surplus plastic bags by consumers, the pig takes the easy way out by banning plastics altogether. Methinks this is designed to benefit, the huge retailers who can make an extra 20 sen at the consumers' expense. 2 questions spring to mind:
a. Is this a ploy to siphon money off the consumer to fund nonsensical schemes like the Senior Citizens' Fund?
b.Has the equivalent of 20 sen factored into purchase costs in the form of discounts for those uninterested in the plastic bags?
Instead of accruing extra income through enforcement of a levy on those who throw plastic indiscriminately rather than tying up their garbage in those selfsame plastic bags, Guano resorts to the only stuff the idiot in him knows: ban. And that puts paid to the development of a first world rubbish disposal infrastructure while foisting more sloth on an already underworked MPPP and MPSP staff.
In the end, Guano's cheapskate action amounts to nothing more than empty, publicity seeking grandstanding> and hypocritical too as a PBA subsidiary is involved in the manufacture of plastic bottled water : http://www.thenutgraph.com/pba-holdings-to-market-bottled-drinking-water/
Buffalo: The shitball is trying to con everyone, the same way he fiddled with the FDI figures and the PBA accounts. What a pig!!
Revert: I am gonna expose him on those 2 as well, Kerbau. Patience, ok.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYP/is_4_111/ai_102102851/
If there ever was a failed polly who whiles his precious time thinking up harebrained schemes rather than uplifting the socio-economic status of his polity, then Lim Guan Eng aka Guan0 aka DA Pig must be it. Instead of exploring ways to uplift FDI inflows, increase GDP growth or stanch the bleeding of public enterprises for partisan interests, the filthy pig vomits a proposal that is bound to increase retail costs, curb retail activity and lead to a misallocation of natural resources fr puerile purposes.
Fact of the matter is plastic bans have no beneficial effect on the economy much less the environment. Rather they cause a regressive shift to more costly alternatives:
"According to the American Plastics Council, producing a plastic bag uses about 30% less energy than making a paper bag."
And nor are such bans wholly successful : http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=does-banning-plastic-bags-work-09-08-13
Rather the ban is symptomatic of the State's poor waste management policies as implemented by the MPPP and the MPSP. Instead of implementing a sophisticated disposal system backed by mandatory proper disposal of rubbish using surplus plastic bags by consumers, the pig takes the easy way out by banning plastics altogether. Methinks this is designed to benefit, the huge retailers who can make an extra 20 sen at the consumers' expense. 2 questions spring to mind:
a. Is this a ploy to siphon money off the consumer to fund nonsensical schemes like the Senior Citizens' Fund?
b.Has the equivalent of 20 sen factored into purchase costs in the form of discounts for those uninterested in the plastic bags?
Instead of accruing extra income through enforcement of a levy on those who throw plastic indiscriminately rather than tying up their garbage in those selfsame plastic bags, Guano resorts to the only stuff the idiot in him knows: ban. And that puts paid to the development of a first world rubbish disposal infrastructure while foisting more sloth on an already underworked MPPP and MPSP staff.
In the end, Guano's cheapskate action amounts to nothing more than empty, publicity seeking grandstanding> and hypocritical too as a PBA subsidiary is involved in the manufacture of plastic bottled water : http://www.thenutgraph.com/pba-holdings-to-market-bottled-drinking-water/
Buffalo: The shitball is trying to con everyone, the same way he fiddled with the FDI figures and the PBA accounts. What a pig!!
Revert: I am gonna expose him on those 2 as well, Kerbau. Patience, ok.
No comments:
Post a Comment