you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 2 days ago (25 children)

That's different because it's a liability thing. Some asshole would sue over bad food which means nobody gets the food.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 days ago (14 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago* (8 children)

    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(c)(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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (7 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    Don't you have to pay for waste disposal?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    If you don't fill the bin with food, it takes longer to fill up. So you pay less.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago (3 children)

    Because the US is only a small handful of people with the same worldview...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago* (2 children)

    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%

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)