That is the solution even though you pointed out how hard it is.
On the flip side, getting millions of people to act when everything the politicians and companies are doing is even less realistic. How can people achieve zero waste when they don’t get to choose how anything is packaged?
How can people achieve zero waste when they don’t get to choose how anything is packaged?
Waste is an unwanted by-product of production, that is, it’s composed of materials that they has purchased but hasn’t been able to transform them into the desired final good. This means it’s an expense.
The end of every entrepreneur is to reduce expenses and increase income to have a greater profit. But if they have to face multiple costs in the form of regulations and taxes, reducing pollution will no longer be a priority to them.
In a free-market society, when they don’t have to face these bureaucratic expenses and “common goods” don’t exist, producers will strive to reduce the amount of product paid for but not used, that is, pollution; AND they will have to respect the property rights of the others who would have the “ex-common goods”.
Why? Because all issues concerning the environment involve conflicts over ownership. So long as there is private ownership, owners themselves solve these conflicts by forbidding and punishing trespass (Coase theorem).
The goal of economical management will always be elusive if “common ownership” exists.
Forced by who? By an oligarchy of politicians that are being influenced by those companies, and viceversa?
That is the solution even though you pointed out how hard it is.
On the flip side, getting millions of people to act when everything the politicians and companies are doing is even less realistic. How can people achieve zero waste when they don’t get to choose how anything is packaged?
Waste is an unwanted by-product of production, that is, it’s composed of materials that they has purchased but hasn’t been able to transform them into the desired final good. This means it’s an expense.
The end of every entrepreneur is to reduce expenses and increase income to have a greater profit. But if they have to face multiple costs in the form of regulations and taxes, reducing pollution will no longer be a priority to them.
In a free-market society, when they don’t have to face these bureaucratic expenses and “common goods” don’t exist, producers will strive to reduce the amount of product paid for but not used, that is, pollution; AND they will have to respect the property rights of the others who would have the “ex-common goods”.
Why? Because all issues concerning the environment involve conflicts over ownership. So long as there is private ownership, owners themselves solve these conflicts by forbidding and punishing trespass (Coase theorem).
The goal of economical management will always be elusive if “common ownership” exists.