I guess I just don't understand the bottle refund procedure, and I hope someone can explain it.
We pay six cents per container of which five cents is refundable when we take it to a collection/refund center. I understand that the one cent was added on for "program administrative costs (?to pay the people that do the refunding?)."
Well, this is where it becomes hazy to me. Before we had the "container law" we could take our recyclables to a collection site and receive a sum of money based upon the weight of the type of item (lets just concentrate on tin cans - soda, beer, other beverage, etc). Now we do the same thing and receive the five cents per container that we have already paid, but nothing for the container's weight. That container still has the same recycle value doesn't it? Who gets that value?
Seems that the recycle people are getting both the value of the material in the can as well as the one cent per can that the government gives them. Wasn't the whole effort meant to get the average citizen to begin recycling items rather than filling the dumps and transfer stations?
Doesn't it appear that we pay to have certain items recycled (the one cent) (and WE have to deliver those items), we are refunded our own money (the five cents - that, by the way, some government people are hoping that we won't bother to return then so the government will be able to keep the entire six cents), and we are no longer entitled to receive the value of the item that will be reused after the recycling process. Certainly the recyclers were making money the way it was - why now is the consumer/tax payer expected to fatten their pockets as well?
If the answers to my questions (which should be fairly obvious) are true then I am inclined to want to take my recyclables to the offices of the legislators/council members/government officials, leave them there, and let them take them to the collection stations (at least that way they will find out what a mess there is in turning in the collectables and how inconvenient it has been so far).
On the more serious side - perhaps the program should be held in abeyance until all of the problems have been worked out and the recycle people do no longer become the beneficiaries of the "windfall" that has been handed to them. There is nothing wrong with the idea of recycling - I support a good fair system without question. I just don't believe that the entire cost of the system, and the lack of benefits thereof, should be placed solely on the consumer.