Because they are lazy and have cups in their car left over from either earlier in the day or previous days, and since theres no garbage there they toss them out.

The argument some people have here, "they used to have garbages, but have removed them, so litter away! " seeminlgy justifying this behvaiour in an odd pro-litter protest is crazy.

Almost every other fast-food restaurant with take out windows has 0 garbage bins, but you don't see their trash at the order kiosk.

Most drive thru's for every other fast food business don't have garbages. You don't see trash around their order windows.

the coffee is terrible

I hear that a lot. I’m pretty into coffee myself; buy different beans, roast my own beans etc., and honestly their dark roast (when it’s fresh), is actually decent

I get people have issues with the brand overall, but the coffee itself isn’t nearly as bad as people make it out to be.

Everything else you said I agree with.

I’m not defending companies removing bins, they should absolutely take responsibility for waste they generate. But that doesn’t justify littering. Both things can be true: companies should do better, and individuals should still take responsibility for their own garbage.

You can throw your cups out at the house when you arrive home directly into your blue bins.

Disgusting culture / people who do this.

If you every have the opportunity to visit Japan you’ll notice they don’t have garbage bins anywhere and there’s trash nowhere to be found.

I think it’s a cultural/societal problem. Not a lack of trash bin problem.

They aren't in the Top20 for World unaffordability.

You must not drive on this street very much if that's your opinion on EMP. Vehicle operators don't seem to understand the speed of the street is 70 km/hr. It’s a 3-lane wide road that everyone seems to go 50-60km/hr on when the speed limit is posted to 70. It comes down to an awareness issue, which is evident as many drivers in this City don't seem to have any.

The War on Drugs absolutely caused serious harm and disproportionately impacted minority communities. That’s widely documented. But acknowledging that doesn’t make it equivalent to governments intentionally killing civilians. Harmful policy and discriminatory enforcement are not the same thing as deliberate mass slaughter. Conflating those two things is exactly the kind of false equivalence that derails serious discussion.

Are you actually arguing that the War on Drugs is equivalent to governments intentionally slaughtering their own civilians?

Because acknowledging that the policy caused harm and was discriminatory doesn’t make it the same category of wrongdoing as deliberate mass killing.

Harmful policy and deliberate mass killing are not the same thing.

The War on Drugs has caused real damage, but comparing incarceration and social harm to governments intentionally slaughtering civilians is exactly the kind of false equivalence that makes serious discussions impossible.

You’re putting words in people’s mouths. No one said they’re “fine with” deaths in the U.S. Those are serious issues and they absolutely deserve attention and policy solutions.

The point being made was simply that domestic social problems and state-directed violence or terrorism are different categories under international law. Acknowledging that distinction doesn’t mean someone doesn’t care about both.

Both can be bad at the same time. Recognizing that isn’t controversial.

Those are serious domestic policy failures and they absolutely deserve criticism. But they’re still not the same thing as a government deliberately carrying out mass violence against civilians or supporting armed groups abroad.

Recognizing that distinction isn’t “normalizing” loss of life, it’s acknowledging that different problems require different responses.