Recycling companies, sift through the trash and separate out valuable materials that can, well, be recycled. They sell those materials, in bulk, and make very hefty profits, that should more than cover their costs, as industry can buy from them cheaper than buying new, raw material. Now, the taxpayer is to pick up the operating costs so they can make more profits? I know several recycling plant owners and they are extremely wealthy, which is fine. Wish I were. But I don’t see why the taxpayer should subsidize their expenses.
——and make very hefty profits-—
The thrust of the article belies that statement
they actually incur very hefty losses. Those losses, the economic reason for not recycling, clearly show there is no valid reason for recycling everything on a grand scale
I worked in electronics recycling and whatnot. Granted I was supposed to be more of a technical person and refurb/Ebay person but that sort of finally happened. The guy in charge of it told me he set me up to fail. There were witnesses too. He succeeded.
Just about everyone with a couple of exceptions in management were deranged. I couldn’t make them up.
I’ll never forget that he told me to press down capacitors and marked them fixed.
I quit twice actually. The second time I took a leap of faith and took on contract work which in most respects I liked a lot better which led to a good job finally.
Taking a look at CL jobs and gigs for the first time in years, I saw it open again after so many years. Guess its still a revolving door.
I would rather pick up cans on the side of the road and live in a cardboard box before having anything to do with that bunch.
good points and it shows that there is plenty of profit not just “waste”. Many small “second hand steel” products like garden items, knives etc could be made in America but 90% + of the second hand steel is in China...making those items instead of American jobs.