381
submitted 11 months ago by NightOwl@lemm.ee to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I suppose that instead of destroying them, they’d need to be sold in a second hand clothes store or to be refurbished, and not just dumped into Africa or China… right?

Isn't that, like, better than just destroying them tho? I get it this is a pretty mild and inconsequantial reform in the grand scheme of things but it feels like you're just being contrarian for the sake of it.

[-] corvid_of_the_night@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

I have owned up to my mistake and noted that I did not think of my argument thoroughly here, as noted by how Adriaan said this.

However, all I was attempting to say was that I was concerned over what the implication of this law was, and another comment did raise the concern that, instead of destroying the clothes altogether, they would still be dumped. At least not destroyed anymore, just left there to rot.

this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
381 points (99.2% liked)

World News

32352 readers
411 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS