Quote:
Originally Posted by desertgrandma
What I'm objecting to, would be the even more intrusive, searching thru the trash crap. Can't wait to see the people who line up for THAT job.
Doesn't that seem just a little bit.............oh, I don't know.........authoritarian?
|
Nope, because collecting any information from that effort would be redundant and pointless. The only additional thing they're likely to learn, that they can't already get from my initial purchases and private records, is whether I use a pair of scissors or my teeth to open cellophane bags.
It would also be an incredibly inefficient use of their limited resources. Conspiracy theories aside, I don't honestly expect any agency that is trying to monitor the type (or safety) of discarded goods is going to take the extra effort to examine those goods for other information. They'll be lucky if they have enough money and resources to do the job they're mandated with, much less taking on additional duties like determining whether your chicken bones are from Popeyes or KFC.
How 'bout it, Harry? Any evidence that that goes on in Europe through existing recycling-filtering methods?
What you're going to get, realistically, are people (or machines) that will separate individual pieces of trash, based on recyclability, and record an "instance" of each type to create a charge based on X plastic bags, Y pounds of cardboard, Z pounds of glass, etc. That's the most they'd have the time or resources to keep track of... don't expect itemized lists that show X bottles of Perrier, and Y bottles of Pabst Blue Ribbon, that you'll someday have to justify to a prospective employer somewhere.
That's just a little bit.............oh, I don't know.........paranoid? (And trust me,
I know paranoid.)
And by the way: It might not be a Trump apprenticeship, but at least it would
be a job.