Independent Discussion Guidelines
I would prefer an outright ban similar to what LA County and the City of Calabasas just did:
If you live in Calabasas and need some grocery bags, just stock up on a bunch of the free reusable ones they're giving away. Stores are also giving away reusable bags in promotions (I snagged a bunch of really nice bags from Staples for free last month).
If you need trash bags or bags to pick up after your pooch, I'd suggest buying them yourself - its your personal need and your personal responsibility, not that of the grocery stores. Lord, am I becoming a Libertarian? :)
And by the way, plastic bag bans can be put in place by municipalities per this recent CA Supreme Court decision:
But I do smell an impending lobbying campaign by the American petrochemical industry ... try Googling about plastic grocery bags, most of the first hits will be stealth websites funded by the plastics industry.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)July 18, 2011 at 3:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I selected Yes but I don't think it should not be a tax but rather the consumer should pay for the costs for the bag/bags used so that I do not end up subsidizing someones bag addiction through my purchase.
I am also in favor of an outright ban; when we all grow up or when all the tea bagger anti-environment types all die off. Unfortunately I'll be gone too.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)July 19, 2011 at 6:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Just another excuse to raise taxes. No. Personal responsibility (reusable bags, etc.) is better.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)July 19, 2011 at 8:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If people were personally responsible there would be no plastic bags in use.
tabatha (anonymous profile)July 19, 2011 at 11:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Why don't you rich folk just hire the help to carry your groceries home for you? The rest of us real people need FREE bags, paper or plastic, to carry the little groceries we can still purchase with the meager wages we earn. Don't worry about our environment, the way things are going we aren't going to be consuming too much more, because we won't be able to afford it.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)July 20, 2011 at 12:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Let's not make this a class conflict. I've seen reusable bags sold for $1.99 and they can often be found for *free*. As I mentioned above, the City of Calabasas gave *free* reusable bags to residents before their ban.
You only need a few bags per person because they hold a lot more than plastic grocery bags.
The bags last a loooong time too. I've had some of mine for 4 years, still going strong after many washings.
EastBeach (anonymous profile)July 20, 2011 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Conservative AZ2SB wants something for free. If you use your "free bag" to line your trash can then why should anyone else pay for it. The bag is a product. Shouldn't all good 'conservatives' pay for their product and services; otherwise isn't it stealing? And what about the clean up or environmental damage. Tell me you're a coupon clipper and expect a senior citizen discount too. Small Business Administration loan lately? Why can't you just pay retail for the products you want like everyone else. (no creepy letters please)
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)July 20, 2011 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I voted "no" because I think they should be banned; a city tax would go only into the general fund, something that Das Williams wanted and helped doom it first time around --- if there is to be a charge for the bags, it should be one equal to their cost, including landfill costs.
at_large (anonymous profile)July 27, 2011 at 12:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Tax having more than one child. Then they won't be here to litter in the first place.
Riceman (anonymous profile)August 8, 2011 at 3:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
5 cents or 25 cents (or whatever this tax will be) will have ZERO impact on peoples' behaviors and thus ZERO impact on the environment above what people are voluntarily doing today. It will absolutely grow the size of government and put more money in the hands of politicians and bureaucrats to make decisions with our money and pick winners and losers.
willy88 (anonymous profile)September 17, 2011 at 7:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)