« If you ever wondered what a "Soft Tyranny" is take a look at current events. | Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Final as Passed Both House and Senate) » |
Paper or Plastic?
![Permalink](http://winduprubberfinger.com/rsc/icons/minipost.gif)
The choice is going to be much easier come Jan 1 of this year, at least for the people of DC. DC will place a tax on plastic bags this year. The thing that makes this so absurd is the stated reasons for the tax.
Starting today, the District of Columbia becomes the first major city in the nation to impose a surcharge on disposable paper and plastic bags commonly used at grocery and retail stores everywhere.
Customers who tote their food or liquor purchases home in the ubiquitous bags will now be required to pay 5 cents for each one they use. The fees will go to a fund for cleaning up the city's Anacostia River.
"I signed this law in July to cut down on the disposable bags that foul our waterways," D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty said last month. "We want everyone to know that you can save the river, and 5 cents, if you bring your own reusable bag to the store instead."
D.C. Becomes Only U.S. City to Tax Grocery BagsBut in many cities -- including New York, Seattle, Philadelphia and Baltimore – voters have rejected attempts to impose bans or fees. Critics of such measures say they would add hundreds of dollars a year to families' grocery bills and amount to a tax.
"Consumers don't need to bear a tax in order to help protect the environment," said Progressive Bag Affiliates director Shari Jackson. "Plastic bags don't belong in roadways, they belong in the recycling bin." Some parts of the country have attempted to find a middle ground between a tax and a ban, opting to mandate plastic bag recycling as a first step towards "going green."
This is surreal. What ever happened to personal responsibility. A bag tax isn't going to stop anyone from throwing a bag out of their window! This is absurd.
Wouldn't it make more sense to offer people money for recycling bags? Why is it that the government is stuck on the idea that, in order to sway public opinion, negative reinforcement must be used. Why not reward people for doing the right thing, instead of punishing them for doing something other than what you want? People can rally behind a movement that encourages individual responsibility, and thus rewards the participants. Nobody can rally behind someone who is whipping them.
Just keep in mind, taxes are being used here as a negative thing to punish those who use plastic bags. Just as you are taxed more based on what you make. The idea is to keep you from making "too much." The message is "don't achieve too much." Why else would you tax people on a sliding scale. The end result is less achievers. Why would anyone want that?
It's a good thing that the IRS isn't invovled in this tax. We would end up with a progressive bag tax. People would be taxed for plastic bags whether they used them or not. It would be just like the income tax. Wouldn't that be great!
The final and most absurd aspect to all of this is the fact that --plastic bags were pushed by the environmental movement in the first place. Paper is more easily recycled; whether it be by humans, or by simply being on the ground and getting rained on. But we needed to save the trees right? I guess we saved "the trees," so that work is done. When is this mess going to stop!
Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.
2 comments
![Hollie Hollie](http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=21f06f768bdbbdf78bc886af8893c8d9&size=64&default=http%3A%2F%2Fwinduprubberfinger.com%2Frsc%2Fimg%2Fdefault_avatar.jpg)
Rewarding recyclers sounds like a better idea to me too, but the overarching intent here is to reduce the total number of bags -- paper or plastic -- being produced. It sounds like they wanted a ban but settled for a surcharge.
This story reminds me of fake Christmas trees. The fake ones eventually end up in a landfill where it takes many more years for them to decompose as compared to live trees. I actually have a fake tree myself that I will continue to use, but I'd rather see production of plastic trees stopped altogether. Now, if there was an effort to melt them down for reuse or something, I might reconsider.
Well, I guess they'll be implementing a surcharge on plastic water bottles next. And why not go ahead with a surcharge on those impossible-to-open clamshell packages while we're at it?
Overall, I favor natural materials (so long as we are not depleting resources) and positive encouragement for individuals to reuse or recycle whenever possible. But this mess won't stop until the recycling of plastics and other non-biodegradables is made mandatory.
![Me and My Giant Dollar Store Glasses Me and My Giant Dollar Store Glasses](http://winduprubberfinger.com/media/users/admin/./.evocache/jeff_giant_glasses.jpg/crop-64x64.jpg?mtime=1313953406)
But this mess won't stop until the recycling of plastics and other non-biodegradables is made mandatory.
Be careful what you wish for! Health insurance would be cheaper if everybody had it right? I know let's make it mandatory...
Speaking of health care, have you noticed that C-SPAN is being kept out of the debate? I thought this was supposed to be an open "transparent" administration.
Leave a comment
![](http://winduprubberfinger.com/rsc/img/blank.gif)