<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cash for Trash? Tories offer a recycling sweetner</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2009/11/25/cash-for-trash-tories-offer-a-recycling-sweetner/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2009/11/25/cash-for-trash-tories-offer-a-recycling-sweetner/</link>
	<description>Insights from the UK and beyond</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 19:49:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: bill</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2009/11/25/cash-for-trash-tories-offer-a-recycling-sweetner/comment-page-1/#comment-13773</link>
		<dc:creator>bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 09:07:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/?p=5010#comment-13773</guid>
		<description>As with the current rubbish collections, each council will do their own thing – some collect weekly, some every two weeks: some collect plastic, others don’t: some collect glass, others don’t: and so on.The only certainty is that a vast new army of bureaucrats will arise to administer the many schemes, and taxes will rise to pay for it all.Pity there is no party that stands for ‘less government’.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As with the current rubbish collections, each council will do their own thing – some collect weekly, some every two weeks: some collect plastic, others don’t: some collect glass, others don’t: and so on.The only certainty is that a vast new army of bureaucrats will arise to administer the many schemes, and taxes will rise to pay for it all.Pity there is no party that stands for ‘less government’.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Elphinstone-Walker</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2009/11/25/cash-for-trash-tories-offer-a-recycling-sweetner/comment-page-1/#comment-13772</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Elphinstone-Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:49:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/?p=5010#comment-13772</guid>
		<description>At last a benefit to all the homes who are recycling! role on June!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At last a benefit to all the homes who are recycling! role on June!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Kemmish</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2009/11/25/cash-for-trash-tories-offer-a-recycling-sweetner/comment-page-1/#comment-13740</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Kemmish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:59:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/?p=5010#comment-13740</guid>
		<description>What we&#039;re comparing is a) households which don&#039;t recycle paying landfill tax, and b) everyone paying landfill tax, and households which do recycle getting a rebate.1) b) is always going to be more expensive than a), and it&#039;s the taxpayer who pays.2) if the rebate is in the form of shopping vouchers, parts of it will always remain unspent, pushing up the cost to taxpayers still further.  Plus, from personal experience with mobile phones, I know that an inappropriate &quot;reward&quot; can make people less inclined to recycle than no reward at all.3) what about single people?  If I live next to a family of six, do I have to recycle six times as much by weight/volume as any of them in order to get the same rebate?  That&#039;s neither fair nor an incentive to consume less.4) It&#039;s voluntary.  So the people who don&#039;t care, whom you really need to target, are presumably not even taking part.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What we&#8217;re comparing is a) households which don&#8217;t recycle paying landfill tax, and b) everyone paying landfill tax, and households which do recycle getting a rebate.1) b) is always going to be more expensive than a), and it&#8217;s the taxpayer who pays.2) if the rebate is in the form of shopping vouchers, parts of it will always remain unspent, pushing up the cost to taxpayers still further.  Plus, from personal experience with mobile phones, I know that an inappropriate &#8220;reward&#8221; can make people less inclined to recycle than no reward at all.3) what about single people?  If I live next to a family of six, do I have to recycle six times as much by weight/volume as any of them in order to get the same rebate?  That&#8217;s neither fair nor an incentive to consume less.4) It&#8217;s voluntary.  So the people who don&#8217;t care, whom you really need to target, are presumably not even taking part.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
