Home › Forums › Open Discussion › 20-cent bag fee will not take effect Jan 1
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 17, 2008 at 11:56 pm #639197
beachdrivegirlParticipantIts interesting to me to that people dont address other things that might be a better item to tax. For example,I thought about this a few weeks back while @ the farmers market when I saw the westside baby collecting diapers and then again today when i sa on the homepage that diapers were needed once again. Why not tax diapers at a higher rate for recylcling needs? or better yet why not give tax credits that use cloth reusable diapers? or why not have a service where people can sign up for discounted or free reusable diaper service? Do you realize that Americans create over 3.6 million tons of diaper waste…imo this seems signifcantly more than the plastic bags that are collected and reused by families…just a thought.
September 18, 2008 at 1:36 am #639198
JoBParticipantJT..
i did the same. I collected lots of bags.
i donated my extra bags to the food bank. they can use them…
then i got my envirosaxs.. they roll up and go right into my purse.. and they don’t add much weight. 2 carry all the groceries i buy at a time even if i buy lots of impulse purchases.
and if i plan to do a major grocery shopping. i put one of those nice big costco bags into the car and load it from my cart.. one pretty much contains a full cart.
they also are great for carrying yard waste.. or clothing to the be donated or containing plastic containers you want to give away or…
i don’t think i have found all their uses yet. And they wash out with a garden hose. great product!
it took me a while but i found a solution that worked for me.. and in the meantime someone else got free bags.. they didn’t go to waste.
If you read the material that went with the bag fee, it said very clearly that part of the money was to go to offset increased costs for plastic bag recycling to make an increase in garbage rates unnecessary.
If you read the insert that came in your garbage bill at about the same time, it explained why they were incurring increased costs for plastic bag recycling.. single bags jam the machine.. and people are not being conscientious and bagging them together.
I am not going to go back and look at the poll to verify who put it together… i don’t care enough.
and i am not going to go back to see if this organization has added to their position paper since i read it last. The bias was pretty obvious going in. They picked a position and defended the position instead of exploring the subject and coming to conclusions… and they had to stretch to do so.
of course people would prefer plastic bag collection sites at stores to paying a 20 cent fee…
and the question if they would prefer a 20 cent fee that they could avoid or an increase in garbage rates wasn’t asked.
the issues with plastic bags are clear and have been from the start.
free plastic shopping bags create a waste problem, a recycling problem when they are not bagged together and an environmental problem when they blow from our streets into the sound and marine animals try to ingest them. Not to mention the problem of chemical seepage from the bags in landfills.
I am not sure what part of that you actually refute.. but labeling the opposition condescending doesn’t really make much of an argument..
beachdrivegirl…
nor does the tactic of naming all the other environmental problems that could be addressed… and which will not change in the least if the bag fee is defeated.
***
so here is some of that condescending stuff…
Neither one of you are defending a position.. you are defending an argument.. and a poorly thought out one at that.
September 18, 2008 at 2:07 am #639199
AnonymousInactive“Neither one of you are defending a position.. you are defending an argument.. and a poorly thought out one at that.” – JoB
Jeez, JoB, you seem to be getting better and better at putting people down.
So, if someone disagrees with your opinions, they are uninformed, lack experience, naive, taken by biased research, etc.. I truly believe that you have come up with every single excuse for WHY a person doesn’t agree with you.
Have you ever considered that maybe there are, simply, 2 (if not more) sides to an argument? People who feel differently than you do have intelligence, value and strong points to offer.
I, for one, am interested in everyone’s opinion and would never discredit someone’s personal thoughts for the sole reason that it didn’t match mine.
What if this were turned around and it was a Republican idea that was going to be passed into law? Would you be so confident that our elected officials should make that decision without the opportunity of a vote?
September 18, 2008 at 2:22 am #639200
AnonymousInactive“They picked a position and defended the position instead of exploring the subject and coming to conclusions.”
NEPS provides 62 links under their references tab, including information from 6 countries and 3 other states.
This thread references a garbage bill insert.
I encourage people to research for themselves.
September 18, 2008 at 2:33 am #639201
beachdrivegirlParticipant“Neither one of you are defending a position.. you are defending an argument.. and a poorly thought out one at that.”
Actually I think I am defending the position that I am smart enough to look for real solutions rather than band aids solutions. I do this by facts rather than my neighbor’s opinion. ALso, I don’t need a band aid solution just so I can high five my neighbor over.
Secondly, I think that if people took the time to research a topic and use facts rather than opinions to position their argument than they would realize just how poorly thought out this bag tax is. And actually look for REAL solutions.
And my argument about diapers is pretty thought out. Have people not realized plastic bags are recyclable? Diapers are not! And this bag tax is also taxing PAPER bags. Paper bags are not part of the problem.
September 18, 2008 at 4:25 am #639202
JoBParticipantJT..
i referenced the garbage bill insert because it was educational material that was delivered to your home and therefore was information you had access to.
as was the “news” that the fee would partially offset garbage bills.
Defending this argument that way doesn’t become you.
September 18, 2008 at 4:26 am #639203
JoBParticipantSeptember 18, 2008 at 4:34 am #639204
FullTiltParticipantI agree that the bag tax isn’t perfect. They should be banded completely. Sitting on our hands though and waiting for the magic bullet to all our problems will not get us any where, therefor I think the bag tax is a good idea. I spent some time in France and if you do not have your own grocery bag, you can buy one there. They had no disposable bags anywhere I went except for high end clothing stores.
September 18, 2008 at 3:18 pm #639205
beachdrivegirlParticipanti myself just think people dont look enough at what these “solutions” (if you can call them that) are doing to other areas of the environment. Do people realize that it uses 70 times as much energy to create reusable plates, glasses etc??? and that altough it is deiffiuclt styrofoam is recycalbe?? Lets also go a bit further and look @ the water that JoB is using to wash her bags out?? How would you feel if you were living in the drought ridden area of Calfifornia? Just b/c plastic bags, which are recycable, can cause some harm does not mean that banning them is a solution. Maybe we should reward those that do recycle them.
September 18, 2008 at 7:45 pm #639206
datamuseParticipantI’ve heard what beachdrivegirl is talking about called cradle-to-grave, or sometimes (more in line with the concept of sustainability) cradle-to-cradle–the idea being that in order to figure out the real environmental impact of something, you have to look at its entire lifecycle, from raw materials to manufacture to transport to use to disposal.
The problem is that it’s very difficult to measure this; some of the information is out there but can be tricky to locate because (so far) there are no easily accessible information resources (at least, that I know of, and I’m a professional librarian) that consumers can use to determine the real impact of our choices.
I use reusable bags that I happen to have acquired at professional conferences; the bags we get at American Library Association meetings are beach bag-sized and durable, and I can carry my groceries over my shoulder and fit a week’s worth into a single bag.
It’s not actually a great environmental move, though, because to get those bags I fly across the country twice a year, and air travel is one of the most polluting things an individual can do.
I recycle plastic bags when I do get them. It’s not hard.
September 19, 2008 at 7:04 pm #639207
beachdrivegirlParticipantI had actually heard of it as LCA (life cycle assesment). LCA is currently being used by some people at the EPA. One interesting piece I have found in the current article I am reading on it suggests that like my idea to tax diapers or urge people to use cloth diapers it is worse off for the environment. For example a disposable diaper uses half as much energy, one quarter the amount of water, and produces half as much pollution as cloth diapers. i cant wait until my 175 page study gets to plastic vs reusable vs paper bags. Sure is interesting. and I will have to try to do more research on this cradle to grave information.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
