Could be progressive potential out of gratuitous great waste

[FrankGSterleJr]

"British Columbians have every right to be proud of our world-leading recycling program," stated Canadian newspaper representative and Sechelt community paper publisher Peter Kvarnstrom.
First, I had always thought that Germany was at or near the head of that long world-leading-recycling-program line.
However, assuming that Kvarnstrom is right, perhaps we do, though in a jingoistic ‘we’re-number-one’ sense. But that still only makes us the smallest landfill in a very large lot of sky-high wasters.
Budgetary red ink, however little or much, is conveniently utilized by our governments as an excuse to not recycle the vast majority, if not the virtual entirety, of materials circulating throughout society—including broken vacuum cleaners, cappuccino machines, etcetera.
Instead, they allow the essentially gratuitous dumping of such materials into landfills or the pollution production from their burning.
If need be, any red-ink monetary losses should be recouped by placing recycling fees upon all purchasible non-biodegradable items—not just the current relatively meager few.
Perhaps if enough people already inclined to recycle as much as is currently allowed by recycling-box rules begin to place many more non-accepted solids into such boxes, the powers that be might feel adequately more compelled to adapt/equip the recycling plants to enable the recycling of such solids, if not even others.
We’ve already wasted way too much material and especially ecologically limited time.