# New Ontario TAX on electronics begins April 1st.



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

Starting April 1, 2009 under the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
(WEEE) Program Plan, many computer related products will be subject to a fee
when imported in to Ontario. Apple Canada Inc. is designated as a Steward
under this program. Program details can be found here:
Ontario Electronic Stewardship - Welcome to Ontario's Industry Funding Organization for Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment

Apple will be charging the following fees on all orders shipping to Ontario

D5002LL/A ON DISPOSAL FEE MINI/XSERVE $13.44
D5003LL/A ON DISPOSAL FEE- DISPLAY $12.03
D5004LL/A ON DISPOSAL FEE- PORTABLE $2.14
D5005LL/A ON DISPOSAL FEE- PRINTER $5.05
D5006LL/A ON DISPOSAL FEE- CPU BUILT IN MONITOR $26.11
D5007LL/A ON DISPOSAL FEE- PERIPHERALS $0.32
D5009LL/A ON DISPOSAL FEE- MACPRO $14.08

so here is the fair warning. - I hate it when Governments need more money for personal use, so they think of a new tax... where we all know it will not be used for what it is intended for.

all the same I just wanted to warn ehmac members.
steve


----------



## Principal (Nov 28, 2004)

*new tax*

- I hate it when Governments need more money for personal use, so they think of a new tax... where we all know it will not be used for what it is intended for.

I fully agree... but silly us, we just sit here and take it on the chin


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

While I appreciate your gesture of sharing this info, I must point out that this is _*not*_ a tax. 

The fees aren't being charged or collected by the province, but by the *manufacturer* (in this case Apple) to offset the costs of recycling old computer components so they don't wind up rotting in landfills. The FAQ states this quote clearly in item 11: 



> It is up to the individual companies and their retail customers to make their own decisions. Some companies will internalize the cost, while others may charge consumers an environmental handling fee at the point of purchase.


Seems pretty logical to me: since there's so much resistance to raising taxes--even to pay for keeping our landfills manageable--then the responsibility gets passed down the manufacturers who make the products and then on to consumers who buy them.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

(( p g )) said:


> While I appreciate your gesture of sharing this info, I must point out that this is _*not*_ a tax.
> 
> The fees aren't being charged or collected by the province, but by the *manufacturer* (in this case Apple) to offset the costs of recycling old computer components so they don't wind up rotting in landfills. The FAQ states this quote clearly in item 11:
> 
> ...


the fees are charged by Apple because they are being forced by the province..
hence the fees. 
this is no way an Apple Fee..... it is a Provincial tax - nothing else than that...Labelled a environmental fee

- I would like to hear from our friends in BC and Alberta.. since they have been collecting these fees for years 

- has it really made a difference to the landfills? lets be serious for one moment... $13 to get dispose of a mac mini..

I would love to see the actual costs when the system is 6 months in, unfortunately our landfills will be the same and these costs will be pocketed.

I am sorry if i do not believe my government LOL... 
5% tax to dispose of a mini seems high.. 

I rather they raise the PST then do this... but wait they will - Harmonization is about to happen.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

macintosh doctor said:


> the fees are charged by Apple because they are being forced by the province..
> hence the fees.
> this is no way an Apple Fee..... it is a Provincial tax - nothing else than that...Labelled a environmental fee


Um, no. The facts don't support what you're saying at all. 




macintosh doctor said:


> - I would like to hear from our friends in BC and Alberta.. since they have been collecting these fees for years


Don't forget California, Minnesota, Connecticut, Washington State, etc...
If anything, Ontario is late in doing something about this. But hey better late than never. 




macintosh doctor said:


> - has it really made a difference to the landfills? lets be serious for one moment... $13 to get dispose of a mac mini..


Respectfully, if you're going to form an opinion on something, it would be worth your while to do a little research first so you don't have to ask questions like that. But for what it's worth, yes, it's a significant problem. People keep buying more and more electronic goods and the lifecycle of most of these products is less than 10 years (in many cases, it's even half that sum). Ever wonder where Dad's old 486 PC went to after it was carted to the street curb in 1999? It's sitting in a landfill *not* decomposing, but leaking all kinds of yummy things like mercury, cadmium, chromium, beryllium, barium and arsenic, as well as brominated flame retardants in plastics. 

Also, for what it's worth, Apple seems to think it's a big enough of an issue that they made it the centrepiece of their marketing efforts on the new MacBook. :clap:




macintosh doctor said:


> I am sorry if i do not believe my government LOL...
> 5% tax to dispose of a mini seems high..


Again, this is not going to the government, it's being charged by the manufacturer and the fees applied directly to recycling and keeping these products out of landfills.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

Let see in 6 to 8 months - it if helped, if it did happy to part of it..
if not.. then i hope they cancel it..

I would like hear from BC, Alberta members and see if it is making a difference in their provinces.

I am hesitant, because i do not want this to become another 'carbon tax' idea
where it is charged to everything and nothing is done... other than raise prices.


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

How do these fees translate into how people can actually dispose of products for proper recycling then? They're charging us fees but are they offering services for recycling?

I have yet to see 1 guide or notice or anything of the sort that suggests how to properly dispose of products at designated recycling depots for used electronics.

They charge the tax/fees, but don't indicate or promote how to properly dispose of the goods. Unless I just happened to miss it.... it seems the taxes and fees get more attention than where we're supposed to drop stuff off. I still people put stuff at the curb for garbage pickup.. and the garbage men pick it up.

Oh, and don't even get me started on 'carbon tax'....


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

macintosh doctor said:


> I would like hear from BC, Alberta members and see if it is making a difference in their provinces.


Our recycle depot has a special bin in which to place old computers and TVs as well. They are then taken to a special facility to be recycled. It has been in place for a couple of years and is extremely successful as no computer or TV winds up in a landfill.

Apple has been doing this for quite some time themselves with FedEx and will even recycle PCs for switchers when they buy Apple equipment free of charge:

Apple - Environment - Recycle - Program


----------



## Jeepdude (Mar 3, 2005)

Don't feel warm and fuzzy too quickly about "recycling" that old 486 and CRT monitor.

Video: China's wasteland of toxic consumer electronics revealed

Despite sending to electronics recycling centres, the bulk of consumer electronics end up in cargo containers headed overseas. Mining consumer electronics for precious metals, etc. is so labour intensive that it's rarely done domestically.

There was a longer expose on the topic on the 5th Estate I believe. Pretty eye-opening.

So...despite being pro-recycling, unless this new tax pays for it to be done domestically, and done properly, I'd be on the side of saying it's another tax grab--or at a minimum, if it's paying for this stuff to be sent to recycling centres in China is funding an environmental and human exploitation nightmare somewhere else.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

Jeepdude said:


> Don't feel warm and fuzzy too quickly about "recycling" that old 486 and CRT monitor.
> 
> Video: China's wasteland of toxic consumer electronics revealed
> 
> ...


I am in complete agreement.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

If the onus is on the manufacturer to do something about product recycling/landfill diversion and are not given the money to cover the costs (i.e., via the fees discussed in this thread), then this is *exactly* what happens. Companies will look for the easiest way to cut their losses. 

Look, no one likes to pay fees like this, and yes it is a good thing to be a little sceptical. But if you agree that consumer electronics in landfills is a problem (something that's supported by facts not conjecture), then we all have to honest here and find solutions. Blithely calling it a tax or that it bound to fail because it's something unfamiliar to you...that just doesn't cut it. 

Let's hear your solutions.

Let's also be clear. If you're still opposed to the fee, or have doubts about how it's going to be spent, then direct it at Apple. They are the ones choosing to charge this. Given the amount of money they're spending on marketing their products as green friendly, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they have a rather substantive response to the sceptics.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

most of our clients donate to reboot canada or doctors without borders based on our suggestions..
i believe in only those two charities.. the others i do not trust.

so instead of imposing a fee at purchase... impose a fee at the end of life cycle...
example no fee to purchase but if you want to rid your computer, instead donation... then it will cost you to dispose..
just a thought - i believe that would be better and believe that the money will actually be used properly than lining pockets of governments before hand..

just my 2 cents.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

Friend, I encourage you to read more. 
It's not a tax. It's not money for the government.

Also, the problem user-pay at disposal time is that it tends to result in 

1) people dumping things illegally to avoid paying the fee
2) passing down the fees to those charities (or others) that take the equipment and use it until presumably it's at the end of its lifecycle. 

Somebody's gotta pay for this. Seems to me what you're really saying is that you just don't want that person to be you.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

(( p g )) said:


> Friend, I encourage you to read more.
> It's not a tax. It's not money for the government.



anything that is an extra fee to the price of a product is a tax...
:greedy: 
like i said earlier... lets follow the money in 6 months... to see where it went..


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

So by that definition then shipping and extended warrantees are a tax. Clearly you choose to see things as you wish, so I won't drag this out any further. But I'm just as keen as you are to see what Apple does with the fee they're charging to address the problem.


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

(( p g )) said:


> Friend, I encourage you to read more.
> It's not a tax. It's not money for the government.


Of course iut is - but rather indirectly.

This is triggered by government legislation, the waste diversion act, and instead of Apple paying it out of their own pocket they pass the "fees" on to the consumer.

Why do you think this applies specifically to Ontario if it was not a provincial specific fee.
Right now I'm already paying for every bag of garbage going to the land fill - good thing we have an excellent recycling program where I live and I only put out a bag of garbage once every three weeks.
With this new fee, I'm going to pay twice for the same item, once when I buy it and a second time when I dispose of it.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

krs said:


> Of course iut is - but rather indirectly.


Well, no. A tax is something levied by a government that gets collected by a government and gets added to the public ledger as revenue. How it is being framed in this discussion is more or less as follows: _if something gets added onto the price of a good I want to buy, then it is a nuisance and is therefore a tax._ Which of course, is a disingenuous way to dismiss something. 




krs said:


> Why do you think this applies specifically to Ontario if it was not a provincial specific fee.


For the same reasons why it's applied State-specifically in the US. This area of environmental activity is a provincial/state matter--not federal. Doing things to keep us safe from being poisoned by toxic waste and ensuring that landfills remain manageable--those aren't choices--it's the government's _job_...one of many. Further, something doesn't become a tax simply by virtue of a matter of legislation or administrative arrangement. 



krs said:


> Right now I'm already paying for every bag of garbage going to the land fill - good thing we have an excellent recycling program where I live and I only put out a bag of garbage once every three weeks.
> With this new fee, I'm going to pay twice for the same item, once when I buy it and a second time when I dispose of it.


That's because the recycling you are describing is for consumer waste. At issue here is electronics, which, due to their components, have to be treated as toxic waste. That's expensive, and someone has to pay for that. 

The trouble with simply raising taxes to address this problem is that it's not at all transparent. The money all goes into a big pile and then gets divided according to the whim of the state (this is where cynicism about government takes root). At least a fee is something you can see, you know it's being charged by whom and to what end. Should such fees be instead charged by the province/state so that at least there is direct accountability for how the money is spent? Maybe. But as this thread will attest, there's not much public appetite for direct government intervention. 

I really don't see a better solution here.


----------



## Paddy (Jul 13, 2004)

krs raises an interesting point - if Apple is now charging a fee with the sale of all NEW Macs, does this mean that anyone who has paid that fee can return the item to Apple for recycling at no additional cost _at any time_? Right now, if you check Apple's web site, they only discuss the _existing_ recycling program which charges $30 for each box of computer items or the free take-back option when buying a new Mac. 

https://www.recycleapc.com/apple/shipinfocreditc.asp
https://www.recycleapc.com/apple/Shipping.asp

The  free recycling/take back of any computer (any brand) for anyone buying a new Mac is great, but let's face it - those events don't always coincide, and someone who has already paid the additional fee shouldn't have to pay yet again to get rid of a Mac when not buying a new one. Granted, this isn't likely to be an issue for a while, as most people aren't going to simply recycle a 3-year old Mac (unless it's dead and out of warranty) but Apple should explain how this will work down the road. I don't think anyone should be happy about paying for disposal twice.

As for the issue of how recycling is handled and how it should be paid for, making the manufacturers responsible for it is far more effective in promoting the use of recyclable materials in the manufacturing process in the first place than any other method. Making the end-user responsible does little to encourage this and as has been pointed out, only makes illegal dumping more prevalent. In Europe, this concept is embodied in the Green Dot program (Germany) which has been adopted by quite a few other EU nations. Germany's recycling rates far exceed those in Canada and the US.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

(( p g )) said:


> So by that definition then shipping and extended warrantees are a tax. Clearly you choose to see things as you wish, so I won't drag this out any further. But I'm just as keen as you are to see what Apple does with the fee they're charging to address the problem.


You are one confused individual.. Extended warranty is a optional Product.. you have the choice to purchase it or not... so is shipping - have it shipped or pick it up...

Tax is imposed whether you like it or not. get your facts right...

also This is not an Apple fee it is a government tax, if it was a Apple Fee than all of Canada should be paying it.. but it is selective based on which Provincial Government imposes it...

also if it was an Apple fee they would not have to collect it and submit it.
as they do with this new tax.

they called us up and asked.. would you like to collect and submit, i responded no... charge us and we will charge client.


----------



## (( p g )) (Aug 17, 2002)

I've simply tried to illustrate to you the flaws in logic, but hey you're more interested in what you _feel_ to be true than what is support by fact. That's you prerogative. But don't expect to post inaccuracies and then act surprised or confused when people call you on it.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

(( p g )) said:


> Friend, I encourage you to read more.
> It's not a tax. It's not money for the government.


Very naive - any money that Government collect inevitably go to the only known expenditures: graft, corruption, influence peddling, payola, vote buying, white elephants or "waste".

The Province increased the PST by 1% some years ago - the money was for "health care", but again, ended up in the usual expeditures of: graft, corruption, influence peddling, payola, vote buying, white elephants and "waste". It wasn't even enough cash to bail out the bankrupcy of Onario Hydro - of which every citizen is still paying for, perhaps for two more generations (especially after they wasted $1.6 Billion on yet another White Elephant project in Niagara Falls).

This "fee" is just another useless scam. If the Government wanted to get hard core about recycling - they could easily implement legislation that would guarantee servicability and long lifespan of any equipment, with severe fines for producing low quality lemons. We know that will not happen, just like all other "problems" end up being mismanaged. They end up collecting a ton of extra cash on all equipment, and those that buy something that is actually good and will have a long service lifespan, will get ripped off even more.

Of course, once they add this fee as well as all of the extra cash they are going to pocket when they add HST to PST and GST - no one will be able to afford the goods in question, and the recession will end up lasting twenty years (just like the recession they created with GST).

There is no excuse at all for having to "scrap" computers - since for the most part, all that ever needs to be changed out is the motherboard and processor, well, if the industry had any kinds of standards for such interchangability.


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

EvanPItts - i agree with your 100% but (( p g )) is not getting it or understanding it


----------



## TheBat (Feb 11, 2005)

The one obvious way to reduce the quantity of electronic waste, _is to just use them for longer!_ Which of us has not updated our cell phones, iPods, computers, TV's etc. _just to have the newer gadget?_

We're all victims of the culture of consumerism. The economic woe of present is only making a dent in this culture. And to think that the economy has come to _*rely*_ on consumerism. We are being encouraged to spend, spend and spend! To save the economy.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Yeah, he just can't remember the "Tire Tax" that was supposed to be used to recycle tires, but instead, lead to one of the biggest refuse infernos of all time in Hagersville. Not one cent of that tax was ever used to recycling, all of it went into various white elephants. It is best to keep all money away from politicians - because they will simply waste it beyond all beliefs.

Besides, this "tax" or "fee" does not address the real problems that can be fixed, that of computers that are entirely proprietary, and even if all of the other components are entirely usable (or even better than is what is currently being made) - if one wants to "upgrade", it's all about scrap. It was different in the old days, where one could swap out boards from an XT, and go with a 286, 386, 486, and even the early Pentium stuff, while changing out just what needed changing, and keeping the rest.

Apple could easily do this by returning to the "universal" style boards that the once had (but never did exploit), and making those boards affordable. Many people need a newer processor to run newer software - but may not like things like webcams or the cheap chicklet keyboards, or whatever. A universal style board would also be a very good thing on Mac Pros (or whatever), since one could keep all of the other things in place, while replacing a board or a processor if needed...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

TheBat said:


> The one obvious way to reduce the quantity of electronic waste, _is to just use them for longer!_ Which of us has not updated our cell phones, iPods, computers, TV's etc. _just to have the newer gadget?_
> 
> We're all victims of the culture of consumerism. The economic woe of present is only making a dent in this culture. And to think that the economy has come to _*rely*_ on consumerism. We are being encouraged to spend, spend and spend! To save the economy.


I do just that. I still have (and occassionally use) my 486, mostly because I can not get an EPROM burner for the Mac, and partly because there is some software that has never been reissued for newer system. And it is fortunate, since I have a need to create and edit ASCII text files for CNC machines, a format that Mac does not support at all (and file naming is a real issue when it comes to newer versions of Windoze, at least when it is installed incorrectly, ie. 99.992% of installations).

But I do see the "pressure" that they put on manufacturers, and even though my Macs are entirely usable for the tasks I toss at it, it is getting harder and harder to find software for it, and Apple's idea of "upgrades" is to plunk even more mandatory and resource eating bloat into their OS. And this is all over the place these days, from iPods that no longer connect to Macs, to software that needs specialized versions of an OS for no reason other than developer laziness.


----------



## Chris (Feb 8, 2001)

The "fee" or "tax" is being imposed by Stewardship Ontario, and being administered by Waste Diversion Ontario. This is how they brought in the same "fees" or "taxes" any time you buy paint or oil. And make no mistake, this is being directed by the Ministry of Environment.

However, Evan is mistaken about the Hagersville tire fire. That happened _before_ the tire tax was brought in. In fact, it was brought in as a response to that event. I note that, even after it was dropped, tire retailers still charge it!


----------



## krs (Mar 18, 2005)

(( p g )) said:


> That's because the recycling you are describing is for consumer waste. At issue here is electronics, which, due to their components, have to be treated as toxic waste. That's expensive, and someone has to pay for that.


Maybe my post wasn't clear enough.
I'm paying a bag fee now for GARBAGE, not for recycling.

In any case - claiming that all "electronics" are considered toxic waste is a gross oversimplification.
If you look at the Toronto program as an example:



> Important Information - Safe Disposal of Toxic Materials
> 
> Toxic materials found in a few common items does require us to charge for the safe disposal of Lead, Mercury, Phosphorus Cadmium and Barium, These items can be found in Monitors, laptops, cell phones and backup batteries, our charges are $15 Per Monitor, $10 per laptop displays and $20/battery for UPS (backup batteries).


Wouldn't include the mac Mini for instance - and on the laptops I get charged twice.

This sounds more and more like another "hidden" money grab - doesn't really matter if it's called a tax or fee - no point arguing semantics.
But now the consumer is expected to pay twice.


----------



## ertman (Jan 15, 2008)

kloan said:


> How do these fees translate into how people can actually dispose of products for proper recycling then? They're charging us fees but are they offering services for recycling?
> 
> I have yet to see 1 guide or notice or anything of the sort that suggests how to properly dispose of products at designated recycling depots for used electronics.
> 
> ...




I agree 100%. 

I would have no problems paying the fees if I can go to a dump and get my old stuff properly disposed of. This is a shameless tax grab.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

I've been reminded again just how much I hate that McGuinty retard.

If this is an honest attempt to start a recycling program, it is seriously misguided and poorly planned. Imposing an unrecoverable charge on computer hardware will not work because it provides no incentives to recycle. It is a sunk cost, pure and simple, and consumers just see it as another cost added on top of their purchase. It would be far more efficient to put a _deposit_ on the electronics- much like the one we have for liquour bottles- so that consumers can recoup some of the cost when returning it to the recycling depot. It provides an incentive and has been proven successful in the past. This, on the other hand, has nothing to suggest it will divert computers away from landfills. 

But I don't think this is an honest attempt to start a recycling program. I think it is another attempt by that lying, deceitful bastard to get his hands on our money to spend on his various wasteful programs. Does anyone remember him *promising* that he would not raise taxes? I do. He lied again. And during a recession, the last thing you want to do is increase taxes- that destroys the aggregate demand and hampers economic recovery. McGuinty complains to the feds about not doing enough to help the economy, but this tax is about the most destructive thing I can think about!

And before anyone accuses me of killing little third-world children by being so "opposed" to "recycling", consider this: I have *NEVER* thrown away a computer. Not once in my life. I still have the complete set for my first computer: IBM machine running Windows 3.1, CRT monitor, Model M keyboard, even the stupid little mouse. Yeah, I still have the monitor that came with my Beige G3, even though I replaced it 6 years ago with an LCD one. I still have pretty much everything I ever bought; just the other day I found a copy of A/UX lying around, along with the 32-someodd diskettes that were OS/2 Warp. Both with their manuals. Try and find that somewhere else.


----------



## hhk (May 31, 2006)

Anyone know how this fee will be charged? Is it an additional line item or is it buried in the price of the product?


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

broken_g3 said:


> I think it is another attempt by that lying, deceitful bastard to get his hands on our money to spend on his various wasteful programs. Does anyone remember him *promising* that he would not raise taxes? I do. He lied again.


You do have to give him credit for being so very consistent - consistent in breaking all promises. But on this one, I have to call you out, since he is not _raising_ taxes, but rather, creating new ones, just like his scheme with the Harmonized Goods And Services Tax...



> And during a recession, the last thing you want to do is increase taxes- that destroys the aggregate demand and hampers economic recovery.


Who said these lamers want "economic recovery"? So long as they can grab fast cash, eat lots of free steak, and retire with a fat pension - their world is perfectly fine. People who have steady income and good jobs are a liability, and can only impede the diabolical plots of the Dolt and his too whack crew.

As for this tax being used for recycling - yeah, perhaps a week or two after hell has frozen over. Until then, it is just more revenue to spend on their current and future white elephants, plus the innumerable "studies" and "committees"...


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

EvanPitts said:


> You do have to give him credit for being so very consistent - consistent in breaking all promises. But on this one, I have to call you out, since he is not _raising_ taxes, but rather, creating new ones, just like his scheme with the Harmonized Goods And Services Tax...


I stand corrected :lmao:

Good God, why can't Ontarians see him for who he is? Why does everyone still love him so much? He taxes the hell out of everything, steals our money, and yet everyone still licks his boots.


----------



## Jeepdude (Mar 3, 2005)

I would gladly pay a "recycling fee" for a program that:

- funds a process that brings the electronics we no longer want (after all, much of the stuff thrown out may very well work, but not be as "sexy" as the new stuff on the shelf) with young people, students or folks who can't afford these items

- funds domestic, regulated recycling centres that draw revenue from the recycling fee and the sale of salvageable materials, while disposing the hazardous, toxic waste properly

Much of the stuff we toss would still be useful to someone. I've noticed on a few occasions, members on this board posting requests for donations of used hardware for student computer labs--a wonderfully kind act that supports kids who may never have the chance to learn on a computer. Hmmm...sounds like a great ehMac! back to school or holiday charity drive...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

broken_g3 said:


> I stand corrected :lmao:
> 
> Good God, why can't Ontarians see him for who he is? Why does everyone still love him so much? He taxes the hell out of everything, steals our money, and yet everyone still licks his boots.


No one loves him - they put him back in because they had little alternative since the other picks were duds like Hampton (who was a Rae cabinet minister), or Tory (who decided to run on the bigotry platform).

The old benchmark was Bob Rae, who singlehandedly destroyed the economy of this province and who so soundly raped the working class with his hate-packed legislation - but with this "budget", McGuilty should be able to break all of Rae's old records, escpecially if he goes to town on what is left with a "Social Contract", which was nothing more than a sham that cloaked legislated slavery. McGuilty should also be able to milk Caledonia for a few more years, since that is pretty much the only growth industry left in the province, and a good place for his buddies David Peterson and Jane Stewart to collect their $1000 per hour "consultant's fee"...


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

(( p g )) said:


> While I appreciate your gesture of sharing this info, I must point out that this is _*not*_ a tax.


It most certainly IS a tax by any definition of the word. A mandatory fee imposed by the provincial government that is not directly tied to the usage of a specific service. For it to not be a tax, the fee would only be imposed when you went to recycle the electronic device. The way it is now, you pay it up front whether you ever recycle the item or not. That's a tax.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

Why does it matter whether it's a tax or not? Does it really matter? It's not like hammering down a definition is going to make it go away.

Best thing you can do is once it's in place take advantage. Most Return It depots in BC now take back electronics, as do some of the bigger retailers (London Drugs, for example) so it's not hard. In fact, if you're already recycling it should be pretty easy.

And while it might not help as much as we'd like (a lot of people in BC didn't know the recycle program was in place even 6 months after it was implemented, and I still meet the odd one who hasn't heard yet), any help is better than no help at all.


----------



## bsenka (Jan 27, 2009)

PosterBoy said:


> Best thing you can do is once it's in place take advantage. Most Return It depots in BC now take back electronics, as do some of the bigger retailers (London Drugs, for example) so it's not hard. In fact, if you're already recycling it should be pretty easy.


That doesn't sound easy. I have to find one of these authorized depots and drive the item there for disposal? 

I have a dead 21" CRT that I'm getting rid of this weekend. It's going out to the curb with the garbage. If the city takes it, great. If they don't, somebody else will come by and take it. Either way it's gone, and I'm not driving around or paying any extra fees.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

bsenka said:


> That doesn't sound easy. I have to find one of these authorized depots and drive the item there for disposal?
> 
> I have a dead 21" CRT that I'm getting rid of this weekend. It's going out to the curb with the garbage. If the city takes it, great. If they don't, somebody else will come by and take it. Either way it's gone, and I'm not driving around or paying any extra fees.


I'm sorry, does Ontario not have Return It! depots? Does it not have retailers than are going to take back the electronics?

Heaven forbid we actually make some effort.


----------



## TheBat (Feb 11, 2005)

bsenka said:


> That doesn't sound easy.


Much easier to destroy the planet, than to try and save it.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

PosterBoy said:


> I'm sorry, does Ontario not have Return It! depots? Does it not have retailers than are going to take back the electronics?
> 
> Heaven forbid we actually make some effort.


No, Ontario has Craigslist and the crubside. There is always someone who is interested in something that you have, even if it is not working. Why, I picked up my first (and only) PowerBook off the sidewalk near Kensington Market. Sure, it gives me the sad mac on boot up, but I still picked it up, and it still headed for my house instead of the landfill. Stuff like this happens literally thousands of times a day, not just by collectors, but people who actually make money recycling them.

Already, the problem is a lot less pronounced than the meddlers at Queen's Park perceive it to be. And, as we said before, this new *TAX* will not offer any form of improvement whatsoever. Yes, heaven forbid our government actually does something constructive.


----------



## PosterBoy (Jan 22, 2002)

broken_g3 said:


> No, Ontario has Craigslist and the crubside. There is always someone who is interested in something that you have, even if it is not working. Why, I picked up my first (and only) PowerBook off the sidewalk near Kensington Market. Sure, it gives me the sad mac on boot up, but I still picked it up, and it still headed for my house instead of the landfill. Stuff like this happens literally thousands of times a day, not just by collectors, but people who actually make money recycling them.
> 
> Already, the problem is a lot less pronounced than the meddlers at Queen's Park perceive it to be. And, as we said before, this new *TAX* will not offer any form of improvement whatsoever. Yes, heaven forbid our government actually does something constructive.


The fact of the matter is that whether you like it or not, there is a new tax, you are going to pay it when you get a new machine, and the recycling system will be in place for you to use it when you finally want to get rid of the busted laptop you picked up off the street.

If you want to keep rallying against it go right ahead, but how about start offering up some other solutions that might actually work. And no, curb side and craigslist don't count because most people are lazy, don't care, or both.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

PosterBoy said:


> The fact of the matter is that whether you like it or not, there is a new tax, you are going to pay it when you get a new machine, and the recycling system will be in place for you to use it when you finally want to get rid of the busted laptop you picked up off the street.


That's the point we are trying to make- there is not actually going to be a coherant and effective recycling program! This is not designed to help the environment, it is designed as a tax grab by spendthrift McGuinty. And my laptop is not completely busted, it can probably be fixed quite easily, but I don't have the time to go figuring out which part has failed and where I can get a replacement. So its cleaned off and makes a nice platform for my cat to sit on.



PosterBoy said:


> If you want to keep rallying against it go right ahead, but how about start offering up some other solutions that might actually work. And no, curb side and craigslist don't count because most people are lazy, don't care, or both.


If you looked further back in the thread, you can see that I already offered a more useful solution- placing a _deposit_ on new computer equipment in much the same way that we have a _deposit_ on liquor bottles. That way, people will be given an incentive to take their equipment to be recycled and get their money back. If people are as lazy as you think they are, I can guarantee you they will _not_ bring their stuff in when a flat, sunk cost is applied and they have no way of recovering it. This tax, when it comes to increasing recycling, will do *absolutely nothing.* In the end, I will rally against this tax, because we live in a goddamn democracy, and because it is my right to speak out against foolish and misguided government policy.


----------

