It’s not a liability thing there’s laws to protect businesses donating food in good faith. They would literally just throw it away than give it away because how dare anyone get anything for free.
Americans would rather chuck perfectly good food into a dumpster than entertain the possibility of summoning the collective fucking will to fix a VERY straightforward problem. The idea that they could just legislate some reasonable liability protections and make sure edible food gets to hungry people apparently requires a level of imagination and civic competence beyond anyone’s wildest dream. So much easier to blame “some asshole” for creating what is surely an insurmountable legal paradox. The food rots, needy people go hungry, and the US gets to pretend the problem is some unavoidable fact of life rather than admit they just couldn’t be arsed to try.
Easier & cheaper to just throw it away, so most businesses probably don’t bother. We would need to mandate and/or subsidize this behavior if we wanted people to actually do it.
Sure, but they have stuff to throw away other than food, too, so they’re paying for it regardless. Some places in the US make property owners pay for waste disposal separately, but even then it could be a flat fee so the business wouldn’t gain anything by throwing less stuff away. Some places just include it in property taxes, in which case, again, the business wouldn’t gain anything.
Collection is often on a schedule so it gets emptied regardless.
It may very well be the case that most American businesses pay by the pound, ton, or bin. I don’t know. I do know that in some cases it’s a fixed cost, up to the size of a bin within a certain time period, anyway.
They could donate the food to a food bank and be completely shielded from liability by Good Samaritan Act
They don’t want to because it means that poor people can eat for free (gasp) which might slightly impact the restaurant industry and indirectly reduce their profit margin by 0.1%
You are disregarding the storage and transportation of food that has a very limited shelf life along with requiring strict temperature control. It’s not as simple as tossing it all into a bag at the end of the night. It’s a significant logistical overhead.
That’s different because it’s a liability thing. Some asshole would sue over bad food which means nobody gets the food.
It’s not a liability thing there’s laws to protect businesses donating food in good faith. They would literally just throw it away than give it away because how dare anyone get anything for free.
this… people were gaslit to believe it’s a liability thing.
Americans would rather chuck perfectly good food into a dumpster than entertain the possibility of summoning the collective fucking will to fix a VERY straightforward problem. The idea that they could just legislate some reasonable liability protections and make sure edible food gets to hungry people apparently requires a level of imagination and civic competence beyond anyone’s wildest dream. So much easier to blame “some asshole” for creating what is surely an insurmountable legal paradox. The food rots, needy people go hungry, and the US gets to pretend the problem is some unavoidable fact of life rather than admit they just couldn’t be arsed to try.
Most stabilized countries have laws in place for food and protections for donations.
I’m guessing there’s rules behind this one but in the US:
The Food Donation Improvement Act: This act expands those protections. It allows qualified businesses (like restaurants, supermarkets, and schools) to donate food directly to individuals in need rather than having to route it through a registered 501©(3) nonprofit intermediary. It also allows nonprofits to charge a nominal “Good Samaritan” fee just to cover the logistics and handling costs of distributing the food.
I don’t know the specifics of that one though.
Easier & cheaper to just throw it away, so most businesses probably don’t bother. We would need to mandate and/or subsidize this behavior if we wanted people to actually do it.
13% of food waste is redistributed the rest is used as compost or sent to a landfill.
Does that include food left on the vine so it can fertilize the soil or just the stuff left on because it couldn’t sell
Don’t you have to pay for waste disposal?
Sure, but they have stuff to throw away other than food, too, so they’re paying for it regardless. Some places in the US make property owners pay for waste disposal separately, but even then it could be a flat fee so the business wouldn’t gain anything by throwing less stuff away. Some places just include it in property taxes, in which case, again, the business wouldn’t gain anything.
If you don’t fill the bin with food, it takes longer to fill up. So you pay less.
Collection is often on a schedule so it gets emptied regardless.
It may very well be the case that most American businesses pay by the pound, ton, or bin. I don’t know. I do know that in some cases it’s a fixed cost, up to the size of a bin within a certain time period, anyway.
In one of my brother’s town, the residential pickup is scheduled weekly but if you use all of the bins they charge you more.
No, actually, most Americans are not happy about it, but you probably don’t care about nuance and just want to throw a fit
Because the US is only a small handful of people with the same worldview…
Maybe only one of you has internet access and is frantically posting across media platforms.
You sure do always seem to post the same responses
? I don’t think that is the case. My fault for posting. Bye
They could donate the food to a food bank and be completely shielded from liability by Good Samaritan Act
They don’t want to because it means that poor people can eat for free (gasp) which might slightly impact the restaurant industry and indirectly reduce their profit margin by 0.1%
You are disregarding the storage and transportation of food that has a very limited shelf life along with requiring strict temperature control. It’s not as simple as tossing it all into a bag at the end of the night. It’s a significant logistical overhead.
Looks like that act covers donations to places that aren’t going to be open at the end of the evening shift.
That’s the excuse, yes
the alternative is the trash that will never sue you ever.
The dumpster would also never place an order, not pick it up, then ask for said order for free since it’s going into the trash anyway.
Couldn’t you just sign a waiver to say you accept the risks?
unfortunately not really, there is a limit to how much liability you can waive and it’s not knowable before it’s tried in court.