> one can even, if one jeers loudly enough, send some
worn-out and useless phrase ... into the dustbin,
where it belongs.
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=dustbin%2Cwast...
However, it has be losing in relative rank to 'trash can'. I believe dustbin is far more common in British English than North American English.
The coal scuttle was a de-facto bin, anything that accumulated in there during the day went on the fire. This would also include the newspaper, which would be scrunched up to make a bed for the fire to be lit with.
It was perfectly reasonable to put things like vegetable peelings on the fire too. They might sizzle but they would still be gone.
Milk came in glass bottles that were washed out and collected by the milk man, very few other bottles were used, certainly no sugar drinks in aluminium cans. Tea ruled in England until relatively recently.
There was also the compost heap. So organic matter would go on there, not out of save the world principle, it was just the done thing. You would obviously eat everything you were given so it wasn't as if there were table scraps in the bin.
I don't believe consumers demanded more and more elaborate packaging. Since forever people have complained about excess packaging. It is actually all about cost. Take for example the recycled 'deposit paid' bottles of yesteryear. The glass was quite thick and they weighed quite a bit. Today glass is different, very thin, lightweight and hence cheaper to distribute. I would argue that packaging has became less elaborate - quality bottles of yesteryear have gone, as have proper biscuit tins to take two examples.
So, the dustbin, it wasn't random dust, it was whatever was left over from the fireplace, mostly ash from coal. Britain was an island of coal in a sea of fish in previous times.