Trash cans at the mailboxes used as reycling bin

[MikeV]

I seem to remember reading somewhere years ago that the trash cans at the mailboxes were not to be used as recycling bins. I see people using them to dispose of flyers and junk mail every time I go to the mailbox. Also why would they even have a trash can at the mailboxes? They do have a no feces sign on some of them.

[spring_chicken]

I dispose of my unwanted mail as I stand over the trash can. There is no rule against that. If I choose not to bring it home to throw it in the recycle can, it's my decision.
Why would they have trash cans at the mailboxes? Same reason they have them thousands of places all over the villages. So people can dispose of trash.

[Shimpy]

I throw mine in that trash can at the mailboxes. I could take it home and throw it in my trash can but it all ends up at the same place anyway.

[photo1902]

I dispose of my unwanted mail as I stand over the trash can. There is no rule against that. If I choose not to bring it home to throw it in the recycle can, it's my decision.
Why would they have trash cans at the mailboxes? Same reason they have them thousands of places all over the villages. So people can dispose of trash.

Same here. I get tons of trash mail. I dump it at the mail station.

[dewilson58]

I seem to remember reading somewhere years ago that the trash cans at the mailboxes were not to be used as recycling bins. I see people using them to dispose of flyers and junk mail every time I go to the mailbox. Also why would they even have a trash can at the mailboxes? They do have a no feces sign on some of them.

Some people just don't recycle.

:shocked:

[Opmoochler]

I dispose of my unwanted mail as I stand over the trash can. There is no rule against that. If I choose not to bring it home to throw it in the recycle can, it's my decision.
Why would they have trash cans at the mailboxes? Same reason they have them thousands of places all over the villages. So people can dispose of trash.

Cigarette butts, chewing gum, candy wrappers, tissues etc are trash, hence the trash cans everywhere. Most junk mail is recyclable. Why not keep it out of the landfill?

[Allegiance]

Trump will pass an executive order allowing people to opt out of junk mail, displaced postal employees will be promoted to border patrol.

I saw it on Facebook, must be true.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920AZ using Tapatalk

[Bogie Shooter]

Cigarette butts, chewing gum, candy wrappers, tissues etc are trash, hence the trash cans everywhere. Most junk mail is recyclable. Why not keep it out of the landfill?

That would require effort........

[shumbapie]

I seem to remember reading somewhere years ago that the trash cans at the mailboxes were not to be used as recycling bins. I see people using them to dispose of flyers and junk mail every time I go to the mailbox. Also why would they even have a trash can at the mailboxes? They do have a no feces sign on some of them.

Really, this is what you have to beef about? Just be happy that the garbage cans are there and that people use them. The next thing you know people will be dissing truck stop sushi...

[MikeV]

I was just asking, and yes this all I have to worry about because my life is just so wonderful. If you don't want to recycle then don't it's nothing I worry about. So moderator you can close this thread because like so many a simple questions on this forum it brings negativity.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[retiredguy123]

I think recycling is a scam. I don't believe that most of what people try to recycle actually gets recycled. If recycling is so important, why have a trash can at the mailbox with no recycling instructions? Why not hire people who don't have jobs to separate the trash so people with jobs don't need to do it? Maybe this could reduce the welfare and food stamp programs.

[Nucky]

I was just asking, and yes this all I have to worry about because my life is just so wonderful. If you don't want to recycle then don't it's nothing I worry about. So moderator you can close this thread because like so many a simple questions on this forum it brings negativity.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Nah, you've been on TOTV a whole lot longer than I have been without a bad word for anyone ever. Don't let the negativity get you down, I just learned that lesson with that NFL Kneeling thing...I don't even want to glorify it.
Truth be told I was a bit of a litter bug in NJ but broke the habit the moment I crossed into Florida. The clock is ticking we're in the 4th quarter it's time to clean up our act...thank's for pointing this out to me paisano.

[Barefoot]

I seem to remember reading somewhere years ago that the trash cans at the mailboxes were not to be used as recycling bins. I see people using them to dispose of flyers and junk mail every time I go to the mailbox.
They have trash cans at the mailboxes for people that want to toss their junk mail and who don't worry about recycling.
People who recycle don't like the availability of the trash cans.
However it's a fact of life that not everyone worries about the environment.

[Villager Joyce]

Why not put one recycle can and one can for tissues and gum wrappers? Seems like an easy fix.

[Blessed2BNTV]

I was just asking, and yes this all I have to worry about because my life is just so wonderful. If you don't want to recycle then don't it's nothing I worry about. So moderator you can close this thread because like so many a simple questions on this forum it brings negativity.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hi MikeV, we take the junk mail home to recycle. Maybe, just maybe, you would have changed one person's mind about recycling, and that's a good thing!

So moderator, don't close the thread. It's ok to have respectful debate.

[fred53]

I throw mine in that trash can at the mailboxes. I could take it home and throw it in my trash can but it all ends up at the same place anyway.

but if you think it ends up in the same place you are incorrect. The recycles at home are picked up by a different truck than the garbage. It goes to a recycle center in lieu of a land fill.

[Two Bills]

Why not put one recycle can and one can for tissues and gum wrappers? Seems like an easy fix.

Whoaaa! That is far to sensible.

[Bogie Shooter]

Why not put one recycle can and one can for tissues and gum wrappers? Seems like an easy fix.

Whoaaa! That is far to sensible.

But, where will the training classes be held??:D

[Two Bills]

But, where will the training classes be held??:D

The venue has yet to be arranged, but class is after the very informative lecture 'How to find and work your car direction indicator' :D

[Hancle704]

Some folks just don't care or, are unable to read. Case in point, signs posted to not leave old telephone books at mail stops, they are to be put our for recycling. What happens some just leave their old books next to the signs. The Lions Club picks up aluminum cans from specially marked barrels at mail stops. What happens, a few folks leave their old beer bottles there instead of leaving them in driveway for recycling trucks.

[NYGUY]

I think recycling is a scam. I don't believe that most of what people try to recycle actually gets recycled....

Yah, just like global warming the Holocaust and the Sandy Hook massacre never happened....you must be on to something..:rolleyes:

[shumbapie]

Yah, just like global warming the Holocaust and the Sandy Hook massacre never happened....you must be on to something..:rolleyes:

Man caused global warning is an unproven theory. The earth has warmed and cooled since the beginning of time, way before being occupied by human beings. If it's getting warmer or colder there could be a myriad of factors causing it. I know you did not specify that it was man caused global warming but if that is your implication, let's be clear, it's just a theory.

[stan the man]

Yah, just like global warming the Holocaust and the Sandy Hook massacre never happened....you must be on to something..:rolleyes:

Ride on NYGUY

[tuccillo]

This is definitely off topic but does deserve a response. Anthropogenic global warming is more than a theory. The real question, in my opinion, is how much of a perturbation on the longer term climatic trends has it caused and will it non-linearly send us into a regime that would not have existed otherwise. As such, it remains an area of active research. To deny that there is an impact goes against well established science.

Full disclosure: undergraduate and graduate degrees in Atmospheric Science and developer of numerical atmospheric models for NASA and the National Weather Service.

Man caused global warning is an unproven theory. The earth has warmed and cooled since the beginning of time, way before being occupied by human beings. If it's getting warmer or colder there could be a myriad of factors causing it. I know you did not specify that it was man caused global warming but if that is your implication, let's be clear, it's just a theory.

[ColdNoMore]

This is definitely off topic but does deserve a response. Anthropogenic global warming is more than a theory. The real question, in my opinion, is how much of a perturbation on the longer term climatic trends has it caused and will it non-linearly send us into a regime that would not have existed otherwise. As such, it remains an area of active research. To deny that there is an impact goes against well established science.

Full disclosure: undergraduate and graduate degrees in Atmospheric Science and developer of numerical atmospheric models for NASA and the National Weather Service.

Good post. :thumbup:

[ldj1938]

I tried to bring this up before with little support. Even tried to work with the district office to put recycling cans at the post office. Who's going to collect them was the answer. I have tried to tell people that they can use a paper bag for their newspapers and junk mail for recycling and that you don't need a special bag. You just can't fix some things. Depends on your upbringing I guess. Consideration for others, and the environment, blah, blah, blah.....

[shumbapie]

This is definitely off topic but does deserve a response. Anthropogenic global warming is more than a theory. The real question, in my opinion, is how much of a perturbation on the longer term climatic trends has it caused and will it non-linearly send us into a regime that would not have existed otherwise. As such, it remains an area of active research. To deny that there is an impact goes against well established science.

Full disclosure: undergraduate and graduate degrees in Atmospheric Science and developer of numerical atmospheric models for NASA and the National Weather Service.

I agree with you (BTW, nice pedigree). My point is that some people assume that man caused global warming is a fact (the term "settled science" is used a lot). Man may or may not have an impact. I'm just saying it has not been proven, therefore, it is still a theory "that it is caused by man".

[Fredman]

It is fact that global warming is caused by snowbirds,just like all the other problems

[CFrance]

The venue has yet to be arranged, but class is after the very informative lecture 'How to find and work your car direction indicator' :D
Our cars are from Michigan, and they don't have one.:p

[tuccillo]

The only thing that is open to debate is the magnitude of the impact. To say that the increase in CO2 has had no impact is simply not correct. The physics are well understood. Think of it this way: there are longer term climatic trends (some are caused by changes in the earth's orbit). Increases in CO2 will cause a perturbations on those trends. The magnitude is what is open for debate. I personally don't buy into the doomsday scenarios but the increases in CO2 do have an impact.

I agree with you (BTW, nice pedigree). My point is that some people assume that man caused global warming is a fact (the term "settled science" is used a lot). Man may or may not have an impact. I'm just saying it has not been proven, therefore, it is still a theory "that it is caused by man".

[shumbapie]

The only thing that is open to debate is the magnitude of the impact. To say that the increase in CO2 has had no impact is simply not correct. The physics are well understood. Think of it this way: there are longer term climatic trends (some are caused by changes in the earth's orbit). Increases in CO2 will cause a perturbations on those trends. The magnitude is what is open for debate. I personally don't buy into the doomsday scenarios but the increases in CO2 do have an impact.

Yes, CO2 has an impact as any chemical that is not inert would. The effect of that impact is up for discussion. It's not "settled science" as to how much of an impact it has. Thank you for not promoting a doomsday scenario. Unfortunately many do and I'm not buying it.

[golfing eagles]

The only thing that is open to debate is the magnitude of the impact. To say that the increase in CO2 has had no impact is simply not correct. The physics are well understood. Think of it this way: there are longer term climatic trends (some are caused by changes in the earth's orbit). Increases in CO2 will cause a perturbations on those trends. The magnitude is what is open for debate. I personally don't buy into the doomsday scenarios but the increases in CO2 do have an impact.

There probably is some impact from CO2, and there are other sources of CO2 besides the last 200 years of burning fossil fuels.

Given your degrees, you are already well aware that

1) CO2 is not the main greenhouse gas, water vapor is
2) We are, by definition, currently in an ice age for at least the last 3 1/2 million years, with periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws that have been running in cycles of about 60,000 years. That means about 50 glaciations , all of which humans or their ancestors survived
3) Earth is much cooler than say 80 million years ago. The main cooling factor is the rise of the Himalayan and Rocky Mountain plateaus, which act as a heat sink by removing water vapor from the atmosphere

So I agree with your assessment--no doomsday scenario. Unfortunately the political left has stirred up fear for economic and sociopolitical goals, and researchers who depend on grant money have , for the most part, towed the line.

[tuccillo]

The issue is what will happen over much shorter time scales - say a 100 years or a few hundred years. Regional climate changes can have severe political impacts. Also, there are secondary impacts that most people don't consider: CO2 driven temperature changes can results in increased water vapor content and increased cloud cover. This can lead to non-linear effects that are hard to quantify. Your assertion that researchers "tow the political line" is a pretty tired conspiracy theory from people who don't understand the science. The people doing the work are trying to quantify a difficult problem. While some may politicize the issue the folks doing the work are looking for answers.

There probably is some impact from CO2, and there are other sources of CO2 besides the last 200 years of burning fossil fuels.

Given your degrees, you are already well aware that

1) CO2 is not the main greenhouse gas, water vapor is
2) We are, by definition, currently in an ice age for at least the last 3 1/2 million years, with periods of glaciation and interglacial thaws that have been running in cycles of about 60,000 years. That means about 50 glaciations , all of which humans or their ancestors survived
3) Earth is much cooler than say 80 million years ago. The main cooling factor is the rise of the Himalayan and Rocky Mountain plateaus, which act as a heat sink by removing water vapor from the atmosphere

So I agree with your assessment--no doomsday scenario. Unfortunately the political left has stirred up fear for economic and sociopolitical goals, and researchers who depend on grant money have , for the most part, towed the line.

[Moderator]

This thread is being closed. It contains a worthwhile discussion of climate changes and the work being done in that area, but the discussion is hidden from members who see the thread title about trash cans at the mail stations. You are encouraged to start a new thread on the topic of climate change where the discussion may be seen by more members.

Moderator