17 cents per grocery bag tax - what do you think?

[Dookus]

http://home.earthlink.net/~shawnford/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/

San Francisco is expected to take a step closer today to becoming the first city in the nation to charge shoppers for grocery bags with the idea of reducing waste.

The San Francisco Commission on the Environment is likely to approve a resolution urging Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Board of Supervisors to impose a 17-cent fee on both plastic and paper bags, said Mark Westlund, spokesman for the Department of the Environment.

The resolution also calls for an independent study -- requested by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi along with the mayor -- of just how much the use of disposable checkout bags, including their disposal, costs the city.

The 17-cent fee could be adjusted depending on the results of the study, Mirkarimi said.

**** more at link above***


This seems a bit excessive to me. Will double-bagging cost 34 cents? I understand the motivation, but 17 cents seems pretty pricey.

[Liberal In Texas]

1. Make it an even .25.

I have no problem taking canvass or other bags in with me.

We do it all the time.

And I hate those little plastic things we get now anyway.

[Dookus]

12. well I love the little plastic things...

I use 'em all the time. Perfect for cleaning up after the dog on walks.

[Liberal In Texas]

17. Well, good. You should pay for them.

If I choose to take cloth bags in, I shouldn't have to pay for your indulgence.

I also am a fan of deposits on bottles. I'm guessing that you are not.

[Dookus]

20. you would be quite mistaken

I was very active in getting the Bottle Bill passed in New York State in the early '80s.

But in the bottle bill, at least the one I worked on, you could get your money back. As far as I know, the market won't refund your 17 cents if you return the bag.

[Liberal In Texas]

24. I'm not mistaken.

It's the same principle.

.25/bag.

Do that and people will bring their own.

[Dookus]

25. no

you were clearly mistaken. You presumed I was opposed to bottle deposits. I am not, and in fact, worked hard to pass one in NY State.

[Kenneth ken]

31. don't know about returning plastic bags

but I bought cloth/canvas bags from my grocery, gosh about a dozen years ago - and they always gave me back $.05 for each time I used them. I still get that, and the bags have long, long ago recovered the money I spent on them. They were only about $3 per.

[Dookus]

33. that's great!

and I think $.05 per bag is reasonable. But I think a lot of people can't reasonably carry around lots of canvas bags for shopping purposes, and $0.17 is excessive, and hurts the people who can least afford it.

Here's my experience: I have three markets near me, and I go to each of them for various purposes. One is Albertson's - a sort of low-end store. The second is Safeway - a step up from Albertson's. The third is a local independent market - sort of upscale. The most expensive one is the ONLY place I see people using their own bags.

Carrying around canvas bags for shopping is simply not something I see at the low-end market, but I see it all the time at the high-end one.

[Kenneth ken]

39. I will agree

that charging $0.17 per plastic bag is excessive. Especially given that most people jus throw them away after they have unloaded their groceries. Maybe it will get more people thinking about making different choices.

The bags I currently have I got at Albertson's, and like you I go to different grceries for different things, so I can truly say that the Safeway by me is now selling cloth/canvas bags because I saw them the other day. I think they have sold them before, or maybe they always do, and I just haven't noticed, or maybe they do it seasonally or something. But I'm thinking about getting some from them; mine are starting to look pretty raggedy, so they'll probably start getting holes in the not-too-distant future.

I only have two, and have got in the habit of taking them with me whenever I go anywhere, so I use them for bagging anything I buy that will fit in them. I grocery shop at least 2-3 times per week, so two is always enough for what I buy.

I would think that people who shop once a week, or once every two weeks would be hit hard by the $0.17 cost per bag. Whcih would give them even more incentive to buy cloth/canvas bags, and make an effort to remember to take them to the grocery. It wouldn't be difficult to stuff 10 bags inside one, and take the one to the grocery.

As long as plastic and paper bags are free, people don't have to think about the cost of producing them, the amount of waste they generate, or any of that. So from that perspective, I do favor the idea of charging shoppers for them. $0.17 might be excessive, even though I can applaud the move for reasons of my own.

[Dookus]

40. I guess the canvas bags

you have are much larger than the ones I've seen. The ones here MIGHT hold as much as one paper bag.

[Kenneth ken]

44. probably not

I think they hold about the same as a paper bag; I just only shop for one, and as I said, go pretty often. I never know what I will want to eat at the end of the week, heck most times I don't know what I'll want tomorrow.

[leesa]

188. I have cotton net bags that I have had for 6 or 7 years and they hold

ten times the amount the plastic bags hold.

[fob]

134. I still have my canvas bag from my paperboy days and take that

and even THEN they try and bag stuff up!

[CrispyQ]

143. Yep, me too!

We have about five or six now. I keep a couple in my car & hubby keeps a few in his. I also have a few smaller 'fishnet' bags that I take into places like hardware stores. My goal: never bring a plastic/paper bag home.

I'm all in favor of a 25¢ per bag charge. The environmental impact of plastic bags is HUGE.

http://www.deh.gov.au/industry/waste/plastic-bags/

snip...

Although plastic bags make up only a small percentage of the total litter stream, the impact of these bags is nevertheless significant. Plastic bags create visual pollution problems and can have harmful effects on aquatic and terrestrial animals. Plastic bags are particularly noticeable components of the litter stream due to their size and can take a long time to fully break down.

The persistence of plastic bags in the environment means that they can entangle and harm marine life and other animals. In fact, the World Wide Fund for Nature estimates that more than 100,000 whales, seals, turtles, and birds die every year as a result of plastic bags. For example, on 24 August 2000, a Bryde's whale died in Trinity Bay, 2 km from central Cairns. An autopsy found that the whale's stomach was tightly packed with plastic, including supermarket bags, food packages, bait bags, three large sheets of plastic, and fragments of garbage bags. There was no food in its stomach.

[phylny]

48. Now in New York State, at least where I live,

you don't "get" your money back, you get "credit" at the grocery store where you bring the bottles or cans back.

[Dookus]

49. that wasn't the law that was passed when I was there...

you paid a nickel per can or bottle, and you could return it to ANY place that sold cans/bottles for a full refund. But that was well over 20 years ago. The law might've changed.

[Speed8098]

50. Then you're going to the wrong store

You should report them to the Dept of Consumer Affairs.

The deposit is a refund. You paid that $.05, and they're obligated to give it back to you when you return the bottle or can to their store.

I've never seen a store here on Long Island that tried to get away with that crap.

Imagine a store manager telling some homeless person that they're getting a store credit instead of cash.

[Dookus]

54. Thank you...

the law I worked to pass was NOT the one described by that user.

I grew up on Long Island (West Islip) and I was in college in Albany when the Bottle Bill was passed. I was the chairman of the SUNY Albany chapter of NYPIRG at the time.

[Danmel]

58. You don't get a credit, you get a voucher

You get a slip of paper with the amount the store owes you. You can turn it in to customer service or it will be taken off the total when you check out. That way people don't vandalize the machines for the change.

[phylny]

62. OK, thanks - I didn't realize you could turn it in for credit.

Not that the money amounts to that much, but it's good to know!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

65. well in my section of NY i get money back for bottles and cans

[SmokingJacket]

80. What????

Maybe in your city. In my upstate NY city, you can return your bottles anywhere and get cash.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

130. we already DO pay for them

in the cost of the groceries we buy...do you think that they are just given away??? geez...

theProdigal

[rfkrfk]

93. I oppose specialized taxes, that target the poor, n/t

[jdj]

172. People all over the world bring their own bags, why can't we.

The purse or pocket-book that women carry traditionally originated in our hunter-gatherer ancestors, as women roamed around providing 80% of the food of the tribe, much more than the 20% the hunters provided although that gets all the press.

It's gonna be a moot point, because stores like Aldi and Sams etc, just don't do bags anymore, and once it becomes a little more wide spread stores will quit using the bags, or they will charge you a quarter to buy them if you forget to bring them.

[Tacos al Carbon]

2. Not San Francisco

Alameda County, which includes Oakland. Thankfully, San Francisco has yet to buy into this idiocy (which will primarily hurt the poor).

[Liberal In Texas]

3. This hurts the poor how? n/t

[Dookus]

5. maybe because it's an extra tax on them?

and the poor are more likely to need double-bagging because they have to walk or take public transportation.

[raggedcompany]

100. Bah...they can buy canvas bags once and be done with it.

Or bring whatever cloth bags they already have. This is not a huge burden on the poor. It is a much bigger burden on the environment, one that even the poor have to be held responsible for helping to aleviate.

[Dookus]

4. no, it's San Francisco

I quoted the article directly.

And yes, I agree it will primarily hurt the poor.

[Liberal In Texas]

So.

Poor people are not able to take empty bags to the market?

[Dookus]

11. sure

No doubt the working single mother of 4 carries 10 extra canvas bags with her at all times.

[Liberal In Texas]

19. Dookus...she carries bags all the time? She shops all the time?

Come on.

[Dookus]

21. OK...

she carries them with her to work in the morning so she can buy some food to feed the family on her way home.

Do you have children?

[LeftyMom]

148. I took mine with me on the bus to shop (along with a squirming leftykid)

when I was broke as heck and didn't have a car.

They don't take up much space and the plastic bags fall apart or cut into the hands and the handles fall off the paper ones. I bought mine at Goodwill and yard sales, none cost me more than fifty cents.

I'd suppourt a measure like this locally but I think the city should buy a lot of canvas bags and sell them cheaply to get people started, for goodwill purposes if nothing else. :)

[jdj]

173. onion bags work,

people can just save the ones they have.

[Contrary1]

177. So do old pillowcases. n/t

[PaulaFarrell]

64. I'm a working single mother

and I take my own bags. Not too difficult - the hard part is stopping the clerks from giving extra bags for no reason. And like, $1.70 a week max is really going to make a difference to anybody?

[SmokingJacket]

81. If you're going to be carrying home ten bags of groceries...

it's either in a car or in a wagon of some kind -- where you can easily stash your bags. If you're on foot, you can stuff two or three in your pocket or backpack or your kid's stroller. I've done it. The inconvenience of carrying bags is a totally specious argument.

I've been collecting canvas bags for about ten years now, and I have over a dozen. I started when I was single, now a dozen is about what I need for my family of four. I've only actually paid for a couple; some I found and some I got as freebies. I use them all the time, even though I don't get a discount.

Sometimes checkers give me dirty looks and ostentatiously rub their hands with disinfectant -- yeah, yeah, sorry, but trying to decrease the number of plastic bags blowing along the sides of roads, caught in trees, floating in the ocean, not decomposing in landfills TOTALLY justifies a little extra inconvenience.

[KittyWampus]

114. My Newest Canvas Bag Was A Freebie From A Rubber Stamp Store

[CrispyQ]

144. Amazing!

"Sometimes checkers give me dirty looks and ostentatiously rub their hands with disinfectant..."

Amazing! I was a checker for many years & canvas bags were the least of my worries in terms of germs. How about the awful leaky raw meat that drips on the entire conveyor belt that I had to pick up with my bare hands? What about the handle of the grocery cart with all the germs from customers? Sheesh! A canvas bag is nothing compared to those things.

Americans don't want to be inconvenienced by having to think ahead to bring their own bag or inconvenienced by worrying about the personal impact of their choices on the environment.

[itzamirakul]

155. I found some "crocheted" net bags at a discount store

about 10 years ago. they are very small, probably about 8-10 inches high....but here is the trick...the more you put into them the more they stretch until they will hold the heaviest load of groceries imaginable. The handles are crocheted on as a part of the bag so there is no way for them to break off. I have been carrying groceries in some and laundry in others for all these years, tossing them into the washer and dryer and while looking at them this minute they still haven't lost a stitch. Wish I knew how to make them.

i say "crocheted" but in a way, they sort of look like fisherman's nets.

They are so small that they are easily carried. This is the kind of thing that could be made available as well as the canvas bags. People who carry handbags could stuff several inside and still have room for wallets, etc.

[Tacos al Carbon]

118. My mistake

I thought that the article may have had it wrong but it looks like the guy talking about this on the radio was mistaken ... or I mis-understood him, which is at least as likely.

[TwentyFive]

6. How much will this help the environment?

I never plan a shopping trip, so I will probably get stuck paying the 17 cents. If these bags are recylable, I think they should have a provision where you can return them for your money back.

[Liberal In Texas]

8. So you pay.

Like not paying for a deposit on a soda bottle or can.

We SHOULD all be doing this.

[jojo54]

7. We're ALREADY paying for bags...

...it's in the overhead. I don't have a website or article that states this, but it's true. Here in Jersey, there's a chain of grocery stores called Aldi. You take your own bags (or you can buy plastic at .10 or paper at .05), pay 25 cents for the cart (which you get back when the cart is returned) and only have 2 cashiers during busy times. But you know what, they have pretty good stuff, pretty darn cheap. I don't have a problem sacrificing a LITTLE taste for more $$ in my pocket as long as it keeps my money out of the hands of corporate Amerikkka. Contradictory to myself, I smoke. Damn, I hate this.

[Liberal In Texas]

9. Sure it's in the overhead. Because it's there.

If it wasn't, it wouldn't be.

DUH.

[foo_bar]

10. it should be somewhat proportional to the production cost

They probably cost half a penny to manufacture and a penny to distribute. Maybe less. A 500% sin tax is 5.75 cents per bag, people would pay that no problem. For 17 cents I expect a nylon sack.

[Liberal In Texas]

13. Understand overhead.

If costs them pennies, over time it costs them dollars.

Plastic bags have to be delt with.

I bring them home, chuck them out.

They go to the dump. They don't really degrade as we're told they do.

Animals have a problem with them.

How much nicer to walk into the local Super-What's-It with some cloth bags and take your groceries out stuffed inside.

People are so lazy.

[Dookus]

16. yes...

we get it. You're an environmental god. Do you have children?

[Dookus]

18. Why do you throw them out?

they're recyclable.

[Nobody]

57. And reusable

I've never spent money on garbage bags and don't plan to start now.

I get paper bags that do biodegrade and they have handles and they make good garbage bags.

[mevans426]

95. Not to ruin your day...

... but here's an article that says paper bags don't really biodegrade any faster than plastic. Also cites a rather depressing statistic that only 0.6 percent of bags are recycled. I just use one bag to hold a few hundred other bags and take them down to the store to recycle every month or so, it doesn't seem like a terrible hassle to me.

link

[MostlyLurks]

77. Many stores have recycling bins for them.

So while you might throw them away, I take mine back to the store regularly - I've never had to throw one away.

Instead of forcing a straight-up tax on them, it should be exactly like the bottle system: take the bag and pay some cash, then bring it back and get your refund.

The real problem here is that 17 cents is WAY more than the cost of the bags. So somebody is making a profit on the idea, whether the city imposing the surcharge or the grocery store itself. So it's not an "environmental surcharge", it's a revenue enhancement in diguise. Additionally, what's to stop grocers from overusing bags (anybody gotten the double-bagged half gallon of milk lately?) and then receiving "good boy" kickbacks from the city. That's not a terribly farfetched idea as I don't trust any pol to keep things on the up and up when surreptitous profit could be made.

And once you make that sort of back door tax, it opens up a whole can of worms of other possible back door "environmentally friendly" taxes that are really just to enhance revenue. For example, why not place a surcharge on the plastic bags used in dry cleaning? Why not a surcharge on plastic beverage bottles? On frozen dinners that have a plastic tray?

I'm all for a recyclable society, but this is just profit-seeking. I'd be fully in favor of a 17 cent deposit, but not a straight up fee.

Mostly

[Yupster]

132. I went to college in Austria in 1980

and was surprised to see everyone bring their own sacks (lots of mesh type ones) to the store with them. I'd like to see us move toward that, but 17 cents does seem excessive to me too.

[Dookus]

14. I agree...

I was thinking 3-5 cents per bag would be feasible, but 17 cents just seems very excessive.

[Liberal In Texas]

22. Ah, there's the rub.

If you make it a trivial amount, who cares?

It's like bottle recycling. Make it worthwhile to do it.

I have grown kids. BTW.

I don't recycle as much as I should. I'm the first to admit it. But, dammit, we're dems and this stuff matters...every little thing matters.

[Dookus]

23. ok...

by having children, you have done immeasurably more harm to the environment than any amount of plastic bags I can throw away.

As to a trivial amount - who cares? I'll venture poor people care.

[Liberal In Texas]

26. Excuse me? I've done harm to the environment by having kids?

First of all, you aptly named poster, how in the hell do you think that the species is going to survive if people don't have kids?

That is such an idiot argument, I will only do one more post.

Wasting materials is stupid. Saving them or recycyling is smart.

Deposits and fees that encourage people to conserve works.

End of argument.

[Dookus]

28. of course you did harm

to the environment by having children. The earth now not only has to deal with YOUR garbage, but the garbage of your descendents for generations to come.

I suspect the species could survive just fine without your additions to the population.

Anybody who thinks plastic bags are a bigger environmental problem than population control is the very definition of short-sighted.


You might also note that I never suggested not recycling supermarket bags - in fact, I *DO* recycle them and you have stated that you throw them away.

Don't you get bloody noses on that high horse?

[Dookus]

36. lol

I just caught the "aptly-named poster" comment (jab?).

Can you tell me what a dookus is?

[REP]

38. Of Course You Have

Do you have ANY idea how many resources were spent in the raising of your three children? That by having more than two you wasted even more resources? Reproducing beyond the replacement rate was your privilege, but we all paid for it.

Every child born in this country sucks up resources at an amazing rate. Why anyone refuses to admit this is beyond me.

Before you ask: nulliparous; sterilized twice.

[Dookus]

43. to be fair, he didn't say how many children he had

but you're right. Even having two children is a horrible affront to the environment. There is no greater environmental issue than population. You can recycle all the plastic bags you want, but having even ONE child is a much worse long-term environmental problem.

[REP]

46. You're Correct

For some reason, I thought I saw he had three children; I see I misread.

You're also right for agreeing with me.

[Dookus]

60. and you're right for agreeing with me...

god, I love a good mutual-admiration society. :)

But the important fact to focus on is that people who procreate have no fucking business lecturing anybody else about environmentalism.

[foo_bar]

104. how will we make new environmentalists?

[LeftyMom]

149. Having kids isn't the problem

Having kids and teaching them a stuff-centric consumerist lifestyle is. For that matter, I know a hell of a lot of single people who have more of an ecological footprint than my family does.

You're not going to get far by telling people to ignore a biological imperative. The left says don't breed, the right says don't fuck, people do both. How about engouraging people to use resources wisely instead of encouraging the idea that the first world can keep destroying the planet provided we can get those stupid thirdworlders to quit having so many kids. :argh:

[aquart]

29. This will shock you...

But the cost of the bloody bags is already figured in!!!!!!!!!!!!

What, you think retailers can afford to give them away??????????

Jesus, what entitled innocence.

THE BAGS AREN'T FREE. THEY NEVER WERE.

[fishwax]

124. The tax isn't about the cost of bags

and the 3-5 cent comment wasn't arguing that was the right market price to offset the retailer's cost.

The tax is meant to discourage the use of plastic or private bags or to provide the city with additional funds to dispose of the extra waste and to cleanup the streets that are littered with the things.

Of course the STORES charge customers for the bags, but this is a different issue.

[aquart]

30. You already paid for the bags. It IS figured in.

Retailers DO NOT give away things for free. Why? Because retailing works on a TIGHT MARGIN OF PROFIT.

Office rats. In and out of stores all the time and not a CLUE how they work.

I'll never forget my local Democratic club planning this big thing where they wanted the opinions of small retailers and scheduling it for a SATURDAY because that's when their volunteers (all school and office workers) were free. They couldn't get it into their heads that no retailer has free time on a Saturday and the quickest way to create Republican votes was to interfere with Saturday sales.

You really, really, really ought to google some bag manufacturers. You don't have a clue what things cost.

[foo_bar]

32. what do you suppose they cost?

I work at a food co-op, mostly in receiving. We sell plastic bags 3 for a nickel, on something very close to a 0% margin. That's about one and a half cents apiece. I thought we were pretty far out by charging wholesale, but now I'm an enemy to seagulls for suggesting ~6 cents a bag.

[theboss]

185. So now I have to pay for them twice....

The cost of the shoes I bought last week was factored into the cost of the shoes. I still had to pay a sales tax. And the tax did not reduce the price of the shoes.

[Camaro]

15. Not sure

I usualy bring my own bags or just carry them out. I think I have used the same grocery bags for over a year. I do not think a tax on bags is the answer. The answer is to educate people on recycling.

[aquart]

27. Penalizing women and old men?

And those of us who can't move the goods directly from cart to car? And those of us who need the plastic for strength and the paper for form so the bag can be balanced on the hip?

Who else shops?

[Liberal In Texas]

34. Please. Obviously exceptions could be made.

I'm talking about people who pollute because it is more convenient for them to do so.

[Dookus]

37. and yet

you've already said you "pollute" by throwing them away. I recycle them.

What kind of exceptions do you imagine? How does somebody determine which exceptions are warranted?

Face it - you use canvas bags and think it makes you an environmental hero. Yet you have children, throw away your bags and admit you don't recycle as much as you should. I'm guessing the horse is 19 hands tall.

[PaulaFarrell]

66. if you already recycle, why are you getting so worked up ?

It's 'reduce, re-use, recycle' in that order for a reason - recycling may be better than throwing things away, but it's way, way better to re-use. Seventeen cents is a pittance and you know it is. Even poor people can afford that once in a while - which is all they'd need if they re-used the bags. Someone suggested education, but the sad reality is most people only care if it affects them perosnally.

[Dookus]

128. this isn't about me personally

I don't live in San Francisco anymore. I thought it would be a good topic for discussion.

[Nobody]

55. My car is parked in my driveway, I walk to the store

I recycle by using the bags for something else. Garbage bags? These work great. A friend is moving? Bags with handles work well.

I already help the environment by walking places (easy to do in the inner city) and reusing the bags.

[cheezus]

85. what's stopping them from bringing a reusable bag?

I think that's more of the idea, rather than making people carry armloads

[Wilms]

35. It was 10 cents in Denmark in 1989. n/t

[KittyWampus]

115. Thank You. In Germany You Also BAG YOUR OWN GROCERIES!

[OneTwentyoNine]

159. Hell,you do that here now days at Krogers and other places.....

They've basically got rid of most of the help,you pay the same price and NOW get to bag it yourself. Welcome to the REAL corporate world.

[lapfog_1]

41. While this might help

why not go for something far more important?

A $.50 per gallon tax on gasoline to be used to create alternative
transportation systems (mass transit and alternative fuels).

And, while we are at it, a sales tax on SUVs of at least $5,000
to be used for the same purpose. ( to be fair, this tax should
apply to any van,truck,SUV or car that doesn't meet some minimum
MPG standard).

Grocery bags (plastic or paper) are a problem, but the continued use
of them is NOT going to end human life on this planet, unlike the
continued use of fossil fuels. Not to mention the economic hell
the world faces if we are, indeed, at or past "peak oil"... plus
the fact that Mid East oil is directing so much bad foreign policy
now and our use of it also creates a climate of hatred for the US
in that region.

[carla]

42. this discussion highlight differences

in shopping in the US vs Europe. In Europe, there still exists the local groceries store that people can actually walk to. No automobile is necessary to bring the groceries home. Most Europeans still do to this day, do daily shopping. The bread is purchased at the baker, the meat at the butcher, the vegetables at the vegetable store etc. You bring your own bags or purchase one at the store. Most Europeans actually do carry small bags in case of unplanned shopping. Since the stores are within walking distance, the elderly and disabled, can access the stores. Many elderly and disabled have these handy little carts designed for shopping. They come with a small baskets for groceries and some even has a little shelf which they can sit on if they need a rest.
I left San Fran for Amsterdam 11 years ago. No regrets.

[Dookus]

45. yes

you're right. I lived in San Francisco for years, and I've also spent lots of time in Amsterdam. They are very different when it comes to shopping.

But America will never become like Europe. We simply have too much land, and we enjoy using it too much. We DO have some urban environments similar to Europe in the shopping realm, but it just won't apply nationally. In Manhattan, you can still pick up groceries while walking home from work. But few people, proportionally, live in Manhattan.

I love SF, but I envy you living in Amsterdam. It's my favorite place on Earth.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Solly Mack]

47. I already furnish my own here in Germany

or I am charged at some businesses for their bags, if I use them. At the "mall" here, some stores have an automatic surcharge for bags.

I invested in washable cloth (mesh) bags that I take shopping with me to carry my purchases. It beats paying per bag.

I understand and accept the reasoning behind it.

[illflem]

51. When the bagger asks if I want paper or plastic

I say neither, just put it back in cart. Wheel it out to my car and put the goods in cardboard boxes.
I don't feel 17¢ even comes close to paying the price for picking up the plastic bags you see blowing around the countryside. Make it an even buck, make people pay more attention to the waste they generate. There are plenty of ways to avoid paying the bag price if people just plan a little ahead.

[Solly Mack]

52. I agree.

[Dookus]

53. Seriously? a dollar a bag?

that's insane. A single mother of four should pay a dollar for every bag used? Even if she recycles them?

I'll ask you, too... do you have children? If not, good for you. If so, you're a hypocrite.

[AliciaKeyedUp]

56. A single mother

I would try the simple approach. I would shop out of town and cost the businesses involved EVERY penny, instead of paying the 17 cents here.

This is a ridiculous, regressive tax. Even more, I use the bags for, naturally, recycling. I take all my cans and bottles and put them in the blue bags.

This is a rare time where living in a red state isn't entirely bad.

[neebob]

71. How is that hypocritical?

Serious question.

I'm for things that make people think about how much waste they generate - and how many children they have would be nice, too, especially if it was before the fact.

I'd have to be convinced about a tax on grocery bags, though. It's highly avoidable, as illflem has pointed out, and then there's the question of how much goes in the bag and who decides. Never mind how the money will be misspent.

[infusionman]

61. The government doesen't care about bags flying all over the street...

They only care about taking your money!

Do you think taking your money is gonna clean up the enviorenment? NO, it's going to go right into their general fund for spending.

[fishwax]

125. Part of what they spend money on

is disposing of waste and cleaning up the streets, which are littered with wasted little plastic baggies.

I think 17 cents is too high, but it is an interesting idea to encourage people to reduce the harm they do to God's Creation.

[infusionman]

59. This is all a bunch of CRAP...

Designed to part you from your money. Why don't they just put a deposit fee on them and encourage their return??? Then the homeless will have a job and perhaps not seek so much to part us from our money too.

Whatever happened to recycling? Whatever happened to biodegradable bags?


This can go even further when they decide they want to tax garbage bags and leaf bags, and...

[PaulaFarrell]

69. Look, the point is to stop people using so much crap

in the first place. Recycling still uses lots of resources, including fossil fuels, and there really isn't that big a market for recycled plastic anyway. Jeez, if people can't even give up a few crappy bags without this kind of fuss, what hope is there for the planet? We need to cut down on 70% of green house emissions - cars only account for 12%-15% or so, that means consumption needs to go down. Bags are useful when they're needed but mostly they just aren't needed, they're just a bad habit, and contribute approximately zero to out quality of life. So out with them, I say. No tax, just ban the damn things.

[BiggJawn]

63. They do this in Ireland.

The "Emerald Isle" was getting covered in ragged plastic flags fluttering from every twig and branch until they enacted a stiff tax on the things. Now Ireland no longer looks like the woods downwind from your average Wall-Mart.

Duh, people! Get some canvas musette bags and when they ask you "Paper or Plastic?" hand 'em the bag and say "Canvas" if you don't want to pay for your bags. Aldi's has charged for bags for YEARS.

For full disclosure, I recycle my plastic bags and ask for paper when I have a project that needs brown paper.

[Bridget Burke]

67. Plastic bags are useful....

When cleaning the litter box, a day's worth of waste fits into one bag quite well. In my neighborhood, responsible dog owners can be seen walking their dogs--with bags at the ready to avoid decorating the neighbor's lawn.

Don't know if 17 cents is the right price, but I wouldn't mind paying. It's stupid to just toss the bags.

[Vinca]

68. This is a great idea!

It would make people more aware of waste, starting with the grocery store clerks. I'm always puzzled when they do such things as wrap bath soap in a separate plastic bag and then put it in another bag. They're bag happy. I've got a couple of LL Bean giant canvas totes that I forget about 99% of the time. If a fee was imposed for plastic bags, I would be sure to take them with me.

[noonwitch]

I think it will be a big boon to grocery stores in neighboring cities

Detroit is considering a higher tax on cigarettes, liquor and restaurant food. All it will do is further encourage people to shop in the suburbs (the lack of clean grocery stores already does that to some extent). I don't buy cigarettes and liquor in the city, but I do eat lunch here often.

[sweetheart]

70. why must it be a tax

The mayor of SF could just as well hold a meeting with all the
supermarket chains in san francisco and ask that they charge a dime
a bag for bags... that rather than enact legislation, that cooperation
would be appreciated.

Likely it would work faster, with no taxpayer overhead costs in
compliance.

As people began to see the cost of bags, they'd start to bring their
own and whatnot, and the whole thing would come full circle towards
eliminating bags... why do we need laws and a tax... its silly overhead.

[DistantWind88]

73. Because if it's a tax

the money goes straight to the city of San Francisco!

[sweetheart]

74. you forget the overhead

You presume such a tax is free. First there will need to be a tax
administration office, an accounting clerk to collect the payments and
to verify recieved, and to follow up on unpaid accounts. Then an
inspector or two to visit various shops to make sure they're on with
the program. By the time you're done setting up the requisite overhead
to operate the tax, the net result is no benefit to the city of
san francisco.

Rather by asking that businesses charge a "deposit" on bags, that is
refunded if the bags are, that no overhead is incurred, and the same
results are achieved.

People are grossly naieve as to the cost of implementing such ideas as
government programs.... some libertarian common sense is advisable.

[DistantWind88]

78. I don't presume it is free at all

That's why it's probably 17 cents instead of 10 cents.

[sweetheart]

82. well its a pretty silly idea then

That the charge needs to be higher for a city job creation scheme,
that in effect is a gross inefficiency and abuse by "big government
democrats". I'm unimpressed.

If you did this to my grocery store, just to screw the city, i'd not
pay the charge. Then the city would have to file a lawsuit against my
business, and i'd use it for public relations, telling the world that
my business is pro-customers and we want you to come shop at my business
because we'll let you have your bags for free... and after all the
hubub, i'd probably lose the lawsuit and pay my missing fees... but
i'd subsidize it myself and get free airtime at the cost of the city.

As well, the city would incurr court charges, prosecutor charges, and
all the crap around that! So what starts off sounding like a good
"green" idea, turns out to be an open ended taxpayer funded employment
scheme for the city tax office. As the employees will need to be hired
before the tax revenue starts coming in, the scheme will actually
require the taxpayer to start out funding it... stupid.

I agree with the principals, just people are too quick to presume that
legislation is needed and tax collectors, and legal enforcement... what
happens when i give bags away and refuse to pay, will you arrest us
as well? This additional stupidity is soooo san francisco and is
what makes a joke out of liberalism... where people earn the title
of "libbies" showing themsleves to be silly and ignorant of the
cost of big government.

By simply asking stores to charge a deposit on their bags, to get
them out of the trees and the landfills, that kids'll pick them up
to get the deposit money, is sooooo much simpler and will work without
hitting the taxpayer or the stupidity scale.

[DistantWind88]

110. And I said this was a good idea, where?

[sweetheart]

140. ha! well, pardon moi

I thought you were a regressive taxation supporter.. wrongly!

Gosh, were this same attention organized and put towards reforming
the income tax in this coming period of income tax reform, some
much better good could come of it.

[soup]

72. We pay 10¢ a bag at the no-frills grocery outlet.

We also bag/box our own groceries there. When the shelves are stocked, the boxes go in a heap and are available for customers, too.

Don't mind at all.

When the groceries are unloaded at home, we stash the bags back in the trunk and reuse them the next shopping trip. Sometimes we end up needing a few more, but all in all, it works out fine.

[illflem]

105. That's the same way my local Costco does it

they don't even have bags and ask if you'd like your items in a box. Otherwise they go right back in the cart loose.

[newportdadde]

75. Bad idea.

Its just enough money for it to be a nice revenue stream to whore from instead of an actual determent. Most people will just pay the 17 cents and the city will siphon it off for something else. If you want to make people stop using them and use reusable bags then do this:

Every bag you bring in and use that old bag you get 10 cents off your sales tax on your grocery purchases. Lets see how serious they are about being cleaner or if its just intended to bring in money.

[infusionman]

76. Good Idea!

[Neecy]

83. well....

You don't pay sales tax for food in California, so your idea wouldn't work.

There has to be a middle ground somewhere - I don't agree with the cost of the surcharge, because it will primarily hurt the poor (although I think most people have a stash of these plastic bags at home anyway, they're reusable, so the impact might be minimal).

I lived in upper Noe, across Market from Twin Peaks, and the plastic grocery bags would constantly be whipped down the hill due to wind and would lodge in trees. These things really *are* everywhere, and they're a problem, but I dislike seeing the City profit from the solution.

[fishwax]

127. full of loopholes

you could bring in a dozen bags and have the checker bag each item separately (at far too many stores they seem to do that anyway), thus depriving the city of revenue while effecting little or no benefit.

But since SF apparently doesn't have sales tax on groceries, it's mostly a moot point.

Anyway, a tax on the bags is essentially the same policy, since if you brought in and reused your old bags, you wouldn't have to pay the 17 cents.

[rucky]

79. The most regressive thing I've heard in awhile.

and that's saying alot with Bush in office and all.

[cheezus]

86. what's regressive about using reusable bags?

i don't get it

[ClassicDem]

90. Did you grow up poor?

I did, instead of using garbage bags we used the grocery bags for our garbage. Heck even today I still use my grocery bags for my garbage.

[cattleman22]

101. I do that as well.

I use the plastic grocery bags to bag my lunch in every weekdy. We then either recycle them or use them as trash bags.

[sweetheart]

109. Same here, even recycle egg cartons

A local farmer uses them for eggs, and we get a few eggs by dropping
off a pile of cartons.

Surely san francisco should implement an egg carton tax as well!!

[KittyWampus]

116. So Society Needs To Subsidize Your Garbage Bags? Sorry...

[cattleman22]

120. How is society subsidizing anything?

People pay for their grocery bags indirectly and people pay for their trash bags directly. Where is societal subsidization occurring?

[ernstbass]

84. I'm fine with this

They use their own bags in Europe and we should be doing the same. Excellent idea - we have to stop being such a disposable society.

[muriel_volestrangler]

87. I'd have thought working out the cost first would be a better idea

If the concern is the use of limited oil, consider this:

a plastic grocery bag weighs about 0.3 oz (I've just measured this - this reckons 0.2oz. That link is worth reading in this context anyway)
say a round trip to the store in a car is 2 miles - 1/16th of a gallon of fuel, perhaps
1/16th of a gallon is half a pint - maybe 7oz of fuel (it's a bit lighter than water)
So if you use 5 bags per trip, they're still only about a fifth of the oil that you burn to get there.

Granted, the cost may be disposal costs - but 50 cents an ounce seems pretty steep to me.

[sweetheart]

98. My lab scale produces the following +/- .01 grams

Somerfield: 5.67 grams
Tesco: 8.09 grams
Morrisons: 9.97 grams
Coop: 3.16 grams
Safeway: 5.38 grams
Lidl: 13.21 grams

I can't help but see this best implemented as the greater part of a
"deposit for return" for a grocery sack. In this way, rather than
simply paying a tax, someone poor might be able to recover the
deposit by collecting discarded sacks and cleaning up those that
get lost, tossed and blown away.

[truebrit71]

88. Effing stupid idea......

:eyes:

[ClassicDem]

89. Well I hope they will accept Food Stamps.

Because this tax is just another burden being put on the poor by a bunch of rich people who are sitting around with to much time on their hands.

[KittyWampus]

117. Food Stamps? You Can't Pay The 17Cents You Bring Your Own Bag

it's really that simple...

[Squatch]

91. Great idea.

I support this consumption tax.

[GoSolar]

94. An excellent idea.

Even better than recycling, is not to create the waste in the first place.

I have a baby, and work outside the home. I am able to keep some canvas bags in my car to use at the grocery. I get 5 cents for each bag, but I would do it anyway, even without the rebate.

I also use cloth bags for produce/grain. I ordered some from ecobag.com.
The store does not give a discount for these, but I find using them keeps the clear produce bags from piling up. :)

[dutchdemocrat]

96. In Holland

We have been doing that for years. It's very smart.

There are two types of bags sold in supermarkets - cheaper plastic ones and stiffer nylon bags that will last longer and can be used for years.

No bags kicking around the streets here.

G.

[Misunderestimator]

97. I say, make it a dollar.. it will encourage more people to bring their own

or recycle the old ones. I remember paying a Deutsche Mark per bag (about 65 cents at the time) when I lived in Germany about 10 years ago. Almost everyone brought their own cloth bags with them to shop.

[Thtwudbeme]

99. BYOB. Bring Your Own Bag.

We waste so much of just about everything in this country, this is a nice start in eradicating one of the most egregious wasteful habits of America.

[Cleita]

102. Back in the forties, your groceries were packed into the cardboard

boxes the groceries came in from the wholesalers. The kids who packed them and helped you to your car were called boxboys instead of baggers. You could also carry your own grocery bag, which many auto less housewives did who walked or took the bus to the market.

The cartons were useful at home for a variety of reasons, or you could put them out on the curb for the trash to collect. Back then you had to divide your trash into garbage and things that could be recycled like carboard, newspapers, cans and bottles. During WWII when many goods were rationed and in short supply, recycling of anything that could be used again was necessary.

I never understood why the practice was stopped. Instead the boxes were collapsed and thrown in the trash, while bags were provided by the store for you, which you then threw in the trash. It seems like a big waste of trees anyway you look at it.

[sweetheart]

103. While we're at it with silly things

How about a cigarette butt tax, so that cigarette butts that litter
the streets cover the cost of cleanup.

How about a chewing gum tax for the same concern.

How about a toilet paper tax for people who use public restrooms and
use extra wads of paper... and a "flush" tax as well.

How about a napkin tax for people who take more than 1 at a restaurant

How about a ketchup tax, a straw tax and a coffee stirrer tax

What about a sugar-packet tax for starbucks

How about a general packaging tax for products that use too much
packaging.

Cities that have had garbage problems like in denmark, have instituted
deposit/return systems that recycled things make it back, and if not,
somebody picks it up for the extra cash. The same could be done
with most of these "litter" problems.

Instead, just to be anal and silly, big government zealots would
rather set up a load of punative taxes that are indeed regressive
as they fall mostly on the high consumption brackets, families with
children and the poor. At least with a deposit return system people
might be able to recover their spend. To suggest recycling sacks
is not that realistic... 1 out of 3 sacks i take home from the shop
is torn apart by the time it is unloaded... they're pretty flimsy
those things.... and to make poorer high consumption shoppers buy
more canvas sacks is still a regressive tax.

Geez, for a buncha liberals, you guys sound like a load of
big government, regressive taxation zealots.

[Misunderestimator]

106. LMAO... Comparing various TAXES to a VOLUNTARY purchase...

of a shopping bag. You have the choice to bring your own carrying implements to the store with you. Not as if a tax is being imposed on you for your and others' wastefulness, just an OPTIONAL charge for your own.

[sweetheart]

108. But what is the objective?

Is it to keep the baggies out of the trees? If so, then a return/deposit
will work better, as once the person tosses the bag with this dumb
tax, there will be no incentive for it to be picked up by anyone
else.

As well, I have a load of canvas baggies, and as fortune would have it,
they're always not with me, when i get the chance to nip by the
grocery unexpectedly. So i get more of them and pay the silly tax.
Then i throw them in the garbage as they get torn in-transit drop
holes, or the handles tear out... so finally, i give up re-using
teh baggies and rather use them for garbage/trash sacks... where they
will fill landfill sites for the next millenia.

So this is a tax without recycling, without common sense, just because
san francisco needs some cash. I challenge you to arrive at a grocery
without a carry sack and call it an "optional" charge. It is only
optional for those who are on planned adgendas... for those who are
not with housewives doing the shopping, it is less practical, as who
carries and extra set of sacks when they jaunt to work, or leaves the
health club and walks by the grocery for some fresh bits.

As well it punishes people who use fruit and more healthy bulky foods
.... as lets make sure we add a tax for those vegetable bags as well!
You say its voluntary, i say that that statement itself is only
a statistical sample of people who are making planned shopping visits
(a certain set). For the rest of us, its an involuntary tax.

Then as well, it falls mostly on the disorganized poor who buy more
consumer items for children and whatnot.... surely disposable diaper
taxes should be in there as well... and lets not forget escalator
tax for those who use escalators, and revolving door tax for those
who use electric doors, and ... san francisco can become the
taxation capital of the universe... Put an RFID in to everyone's hand
and tax them as they use sidewalks as the pavement wears away beneath
their feet.... and tax people for looking at signs, and tax them for
making silverware dirty at restaurants, and for wine bottles.

This stupidity is infinite and it is indeed regressive, as much as
i find it trivial and ssoooooo sanfrancisco irrelevant. I can't help
wonder whether san francisco is leading liberalsim down the drain by
developing silly causes that, when they hit the national stage,
become divisive and ultimately undermine true liberalism.

Lets than the grocery sack tax crowd for another one! ;-)

[Misunderestimator]

113. It has worked in other countries, very successfully... better than deposit

We should adopt solutions that have been proven to work instead of relying on ones we know are faulty.

It is not a tax without recycling... it is a method to ensure that people use their common sense to recycle the bags they use, and it is not a tax.

As for the situation you describe of not being prepared... I'm sure that after some repeated purchases of plastic bags that you don't need, you would change your habits and do something as easy as putting your reusable bags in the trunks of all your cars.

And a hearty LOL at grocery bag surcharges being the impetus for "ultimately undermining true liberalism" :D :D :D

[sweetheart]

119. As i noticed in an earlier post to a vole strangler

The weight of various sacks changes, and the lighter ones tear, the
heavier ones are more reusable and end up not requiring double bagging.
This tax should, if you MUST make another bleedin tax, charge based
on the weight of the sack... as my sample varies between 3.6 grams and
13.6 grams for a free grocery (plastic) sack... so the tax is not
sensical if it is for recycling, as one is 3+ times the weight of
another.

I was making an indirect reference to the gay marriage issue that
really blossomed from san francisco just in time to divide the
electorate for this past poll... Not that i've any concern with it,
but that san francisco is not exactly promoting sense, rather divisive
issues that only work there... and could be better couched and framed
for the national stage. i'm sure the bush nazis are just drooling over
the grocery sack tax as electoral ammunition with the middle class
walmart voters.

If you want recycling, reverse the tax, offer a san francisco recycling
center 10 cents for every plastic grocery sack dropped off. Then the
place will be spotless of them. There are so many ways rather than
hiring tax inspectors... and indeeed the schemes of which i'm aware
in germany and on the european continent in this regard, charge for
teh sack, not as a tax, but as a fair charge for a bag the store must
pay for. On top of this, there are indeed depost/return charges on
all sorts of containers like i was suggesting.

Where is your international example of a grocery sack tax coming
from.

[Misunderestimator]

122. Why do you keep saying tax? The grocery charge, as others have

already posted, is present in at least Germany and the Netherlands.

Why must you insist on calling this a tax... it is an optional purchase of a bag.

As for you bringing gay marriage into it, I can tell from your post that you and I have a different opinion on its divisiveness.

[DistantWind88]

123. If the Government is requiring businesses to collect this "purchase"

and then pass the proceeds on to the Government, it's a tax.

[Misunderestimator]

131. I see the logic, but it is not a very normal "tax" since it is applied

as a charge for an item. Not a surcharge, not a tax on something you would need anyway... an optional item that you do not require, since there are any number of methods to cart your groceries away, including a one-time purchase of reusable bags. I don't see how this is such a big imposition.

[sweetheart]

135. Frankly its not an imposition

It is the point that it makes that is disturbing. That rather than
focus on a bazillion other areas of unfair taxation, the "libuls" have
dreamed up another tax that is a wet dream for conservatives everywhere.
It is anti-consumer and not progressive. Then people can drive away
from said market in an SUV getting 5MPG on tax subsidized gasoline.

It shows that "libruls" are penny wise and pound foolish, and that the
people of san francisco are so frustrated with teh bush administration
that they've gone off the edge to legislate silly things... that will,
unless mainstream democrats, eschew them publically, be used to hurt
democrats ultimately... as they are punative taxes on consumers, in
a country with a sputtering economy.

Had this tax discussion been about the "consumption tax" most people at
DU would have chimed up that it is regressive, and wrong headed, but
when you throw in a little environmental language about plastic bags,
then shallow "libruls" will vote for a regressive tax... showing that
the san francicso brand of liberalism is all fluff and no substance,
something that the democratic party should not waste any time with.

I did indeed compare this to the gay marriage thing, as it started in
san francisco. The issue all along was equal rights for gay people,
which can be achieved by civil unions, but san francisco went the
extra mile towards "marriage" and this hit national mainstream and
gave the conservatives enough ammunition to rally their troops on
homophobia reasons...

So this plastic bag thing, is another trumped up bullshit liberalism
issue to ultimately weaken those more serious about winning real
ground against the GOP, and not fluffing up "in your face" issues
that are divisive and ultimately weaken the very cause they claim
to be forwarding. I'm sure gays all across america are thankful
that we got screwed in the last poll, as civil unions become a lost
cause in states across the union because one city got too much
democratic attention for pushing it tooo far.

Its a matter of strategy in one sense, to be wise with the issues
we choose to make "hot" and of all things.. really. A regressive tax.

[Misunderestimator]

137. Yes, by all means, let's make sure not to make any little strides...

and let's make sure that we don't bring up any divisive issues like gay marriage either.... I'd hate for those on the right to have a bad impression of us... :eyes:

[sweetheart]

139. What the heck, the cause is lost, do whatever

That seems the new approach of our buds in SF. :eyes: Perhaps the
democratic party really has no place in SF. In that case, this is a
green party issue, and i'm fine with the green party making up
regressive taxes and silly issues as they are already unelectable
having no coherent policy for how to deal with modern international
economics on day 1 of their administration besides closing the stock
markets and throwing all the CEO's in jail. I'm being facescious
but you see my point.

Very wealthy people will just buy the plastic sacks, or have their
groceries delivered. Middle income people will not really care as
the tax is trivial. The minimum wage working poor will make sure to
buy canvas sacks and haul around their groceries in in creasingly
wearing old bags (THAT THEY HAD TO BUY). This is the definition of
a regressive tax. It is equal across all brackets, and unlike the
progressive income tax that is "zero" for below a certain income, this
one forces the very poor to buy some sacks.... trivial though it might
be... so you open the floodgates then for a plethora of regressive
taxes on the principal that the new california liberalism has lost its
sense about taxation fairness.

There's a difference between feeding the hard right ammunition and
making political headway for a cause. It seems the omen of this is
that san francisco has fallen off the country, and should no longer
be looked to as any sort of role model for american liberalism.
Sadly that IS the message one should take from all this. So in
that case, in a glass bubble, SF can be a separate couuntry of
the silly people and we need not give them any credence.

[Misunderestimator]

141. Well, I hope so... I'll be moving to San Francisco as soon as they secede

in that case.

[sweetheart]

146. I'm sure you'll find it ain' no utopia

I've done my time in san francisco... and the Sf-liberalism is just
the opposite side of the coin to bush-thuglicanism... either way, a
gang'll beat you up for being out of line... and the policy is partisan
to the gang in office.

Enjoy the lower haight.

[Misunderestimator]

162. Well you make it so appealing, I wish I was moving to SF

sounds like you wouldn't get along with such libruls yourself.

[sweetheart]

167. funny that

I found it stifling and repressive, sooo much political correctness
that liberalism is actually a second concern... and actually rather
draconian. I recall for example, that people will not cross a street
with no cars, because of the no-walk sign, when clearly there are no
cars... but rules are rules...
Standing over teh line on the bart will actually get fellow passengers
to inform you about the line and the rules.... nazi utopia.

So yes, i'm a libertarian liberal, and i am not impressed by regressive
taxation, needless taxation, political correctness and silly rules.
It is emasculated liberalism at best, and i prefer the real thing.
I frankly don't see much difference between small "c" conservatism
and liberalism in its true form.

I had high expectations of SF when i went to work there, and found
the south bay more pleasant... more libertarian and less stuffy.
(plus the climate is much nicer)... good fortune in your move west.

[Misunderestimator]

169. Funny that... I found Germany to be exactly the way you describe...

Rules are actually followed by pedestrians, yeah, sometimes people have a stick up their ass, but all in all it saves lives... I see we differ most completely, since I am definitely all about PC, in its best and most liberal sense.

[sweetheart]

176. Germany as well indeed

I got told off for getting off a bus at the "wrong" door... :-) No
body was hurt, no crime was committed, but i was out of line with the
convention, and this was a sin! ;-)

I find that the new york city method of traffic and pedestrians suits
as i cross a street fully aware of the traffic and don't ask them to
maneouver for me, its easier to predict the cars if they don't try
to make special for pedestrians. I recall it took an extra 5 minutes
to walk down montgomery street in SF waiting for lights at intersections
with no cars.... so i just walked across the street and gave the finger
to any doorknob who gave me shit for not wastiing my time whilst they
stood in packs on the corners waiting for lights. I support the spirit
of the law, and the pack supports the letter.

I was once asked in SF, by the office manager whether i needed anything.
I jokingly said "A beautiful <member of the opposite sex> would do fine."
I was reported to the management for being sexist. They ganged up on
me in a room to insist that such a comment implied sexism, and i told
them they were dead wrong, and that it had no sexual connotation what
soever outside of the immediate situation... assholes.. no sense of
humour... all the while the women in that office were lower paid, and
all the senior jobs were taken by men... but rather than address
the real sexism, the sheep bleat about silly things in a culture of
abuse and conformity.

Fake liberals are an insult to the real thing. I call them what they
are, and have no patience with bullshit... new york and i really
get along so much better as i later discovered... and the UK even
better where liberalism is real and grassroots.

You know, i guess its because i'm a small c conservative, that i
feel that i already know in my heart what justice is, and its an
insult to legislate it, when i will do a more impeccable job without
the rules to start with. As much as i like a society of laws, there
comes a point where legislating what should be innate, becomes a
pointless exercise, and the money be better spent on education that
people discover their own conscience.

Fuck PC. :-) Its the dirty lie that covers racism and the evil
of war and violent repression.... lipstick on a pig. No insult
intended to yourself... you've inspired this libertarian to be honest.

[Misunderestimator]

180. Yeah, ha ha... that's such a clever, funny thing to say, to an office mgr

and you don't understand how that was sexist... lol... funny that they all told you it was sexist, but you disagreed... lol

[sweetheart]

183. it was not worth the bother

Why is it a sexist thing to ask for a "sexy whatever you fancy", sorta
like if you asked for coke or pepsi? I was not making any comment on
anyone else, or imposing any view on anyone else. It was not sexist.
That there was a glass ceiling in the company, and that the senior
management was all men... THAT was sexist.... but rather lets play
semantic games.

"They" were wrong... as "they" were not me, and did not know what i
meant, nor my intonation. It is your political correct crowd, making
bullshit, and ignoring the elephant in the room.

Had i to do it over, certainly i would have kept my guard up and been
mega-formal in all interactions. Letter of the law, spirit of the law.
Persecute the appearance and overlook the reality... that seems the
way of the faux liberal... and certainly don't tell any jokes either
as assholes have no sense of humour.

Come to think of it, i was spending about half my paycheque from that
company financing free meditation classes for women's enlightenment
the entire time i was there... just to add to the irony. I have no
respect for bullshit liberals, they are a violation of liberalism
with their faux judgements and lies... its no wonder bush has come
to power in a culture where image triumphs over substance.

[DistantWind88]

154. I don't NEED to buy a Lexus

but there is a tax on it. Are you saying that since it is not something I need anyway, that 5% sales tax I pay is not REALLY a tax?

[Misunderestimator]

157. The purchase of the grocery bag is not a tax... if you paid for your Lexus

entirely with tax money, then there would be a comparision.

Bottom line, I don't give a damn if it is a tax, a surcharge, a fee, whatever... it's a good thing to do.

[DistantWind88]

160. It is a fee LEVIED on behalf of the Govt with the proceeds

GOING to the Govt. That's a tax.

[Misunderestimator]

161. Like I just said.... I don't give a damn.

Oh... and welcome to DU.

[DistantWind88]

163. I know

You'd just perfer to raise taxes.

[Misunderestimator]

164. Indeed, I would, for the right reasons.

[DistantWind88]

168. I would too

But not something this regressive.

[theboss]

186. Wasn't that the beginning of Altman's "Popeye?"

That's a $1 docking tax and a $1 arriving in town tax....

[bleedingheart]

191. sadly all those silly cases you point out are actually the lack of

personal responsibility that abounds around the country.

There are many people who view the world as their personal dishrag....

[davidinalameda]

107. bring your own bags!

I have dozens of old plastic bags sitting in my cupboard

[BrightKnight]

129. Whole Foods Market gives a 5 cent discount for canvas bags.

Whole Foods Market gives a 5 cent discount for canvas bags. I think that you have to use on of their bags to get the discount. I got my canvas sack as part of a promotion but you normally have to buy them. Central Market also gave me a promotional canvas bag.

Carrying groceries in canvas is much more dignified that disposable plastic. The bag never breaks and it is not uncomfortable to carry.

[davidinalameda]

189. you need that nickel discount at Whole Foods

since they charge so damn much!

[durablend]

190. "I think that you have to use on of their bags to get the discount."

That's the rub in this...if they're going to give you a discount, they're going to make sure you pay a pretty penny for the bag(s) and make sure it's of Chinese origin so it falls apart after 50 uses (otherwise you'd use it forever...no profit for the store with that).

[Butterflies]

111. I'm all for it

It should cost even more, and the money can go towards cleaning up the environment. If people don't have the money, they can bring their own canvas bags. I'll bring my own.

[GiovanniC]

112. Anything That Makes Grocery Shopping More Expensive Is Great By Me!

In fact, I think that macaroni and cheese, ramen noodles, et cetera are FAR too inexpensive, and those prices should be raised as well! No more of this 6 boxes of mac & cheese for a $1.00! Down with poor people! Who's with me? If poor people want to eat, they should have thought about that before they got poor in the first place.

And if people don't want to pay $0.17 each for flimsy little plastic bags that might transport your groceries from the car to your kitchen IF YOU'RE LUCKY, then they should buy canvas bags. And for those who complain that buying canvas bags means they'll have to spend a lot of money to buy a lot of the bags, or drive to the store more often so that they can buy less on each trip, or overload the bags so much that they are too heavy to lift, eat shit. It's not my fault if you're poor or old or weak, or all three.

Fuck, why don't people just do what I do, and have your own personal robot butler carry all your groceries home in the finest Coach bags. I save the environment so fucking much that I have to dump Penzoil directly into the ground to make up for it.

[SeekerofTruth]

121. Yeah, let's tax diapers too and give a deposit when they are returned...

Diapers are a lot worse on the environment that plastic bags. Pay a deposit when you buy them and you get the deposit back when you return them....sorry. :bounce:

[Donkeyboy75]

126. I think it's a good idea.

They charge 15 cents per bag where I live, and you simply get used to taking bags with you when you shop. It really does cut down on the plastic used...not to mention you don't see many plastic bags littering the streets (although all the other litter here sucks).

[fob]

133. Charge a $1.00! Ever since I've lived in Cali I've had to practically

fight to get FEWER bags. The standard training is to bag every frickin' thing that gets scanned it seems. In a lot of cases EVERYTHING is double-bagged and quite a few times the double-bagged pack is then inserted into a PAPER bag!

Buy a bag of ice;
"You want that in a bag?"
No, it already comes in a bag, why waste another? (And before you say "you need a bag because the ice is cold", it's not rocket science to carry a bag of ice without touching the ice OR if one isn't strong enough then it's not like you HAVE to carry it around ALL DAY OR if you NEED a bag to carry a bag of ice then go ahead but why should the baggers DEFAULT to bagging everything!)


It drives me insane!

I often say, just put it in one bag it will fit. And 99% of the time I get from a "whatever" look to "nasty" look along with the comment "the bags are weak, it'll tear and spill" while they continue to double-bag AGAINST my wishes. I then remove the second bag and depending on the severity of the "look" I swing the bag repeatedly over my head and say, they're strong enough and I will take full responsibility for it if it breaks.

AGAGHAHGAHGHAGHAHGAHGAHGHAGHAHGAHGHGGAHHGH!


Sorry. It's a major pet-peeve if you couldn't tell. Thanks for bringing it up Dook!

:evilgrin:

[jmatthan]

136. In Finland plastic bags made from

a biodegradable thermoplastic material based on starch is becoming popular. It is compostable, recyclable, can be disposed as domestic organic waste. It is being used for disposable knives, forks and spoons. One trade mark is Mater-Bi.

Or you could be crazy as my better half of 38 years who recycles almost everything such the little aluminium holders used for candles or as these fused electric bulbs. (I do not know whether this picture will be available online!!)



Jacob Matthan
Oulu, Finland

[KissMeKate]

138. those plastic bags are EVERYWHERE.

its disgusting to see them blowing around like they were tumbleweeds.

[Dookus]

145. so wouldn't a refundable deposit

work better? It would give people an incentive to pick them up.

but I gotta say, maybe it's regional. I'm in California, and I never see them blowing around anywhere.

[sweetheart]

150. They're on every fence in the county

What happens is that they blow out of the garbage truck pickup as the
winds whip by at 80mph and lodge eventually on remote barbed wire
fences and trees... that you can drive about and observe the white
buggers flappin away in the remote regions. California ain't quite
got the wind storms for that... y'all's got other types of pollution
(read: water and air).

[Dookus]

152. actually

our water's pretty good. Some parts do get pretty smoggy, though.

But my question was, wouldn't a refundable deposit be a better solution than a one-time tax?

[sweetheart]

153. Deposit indeed

I've made that same point repeatedly, as a deposit is not regressive,
and allows the bags to get cleaned up... it is actually progressive as
the bags that are littering the place may be cleaned up by homeless and
sorts for extra cash.. a subtle income redistribution much more in
keeping with a progressive idea.

What i meant about water, was not its quality, but flash flooding,
eroding coastlines, draining the owens valley, the human disaster that
is the salton sea, mudslides, boulders blocking topanga canyon....
california is littered with water problems.

[idiosyncratic]

142. My local store puts only two or three items in each bag

Maybe they had someone's stuff break through the bag one time, but now they go overboard and give me at least twice as many bags as I need.

However, I reuse them for trash bags and for packaging material when shipping our eBay items, so they don't go to waste.

[durablend]

192. You're better off with what they're doing

I wouldn't trust more than a couple of items in an individual plastic bag...they're made so thin these days that they almost disentegrate if you breathe on them. I'm guessing that somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 of the plastic bags from the supermarket are rendered useless (ripped, holes, etc) after the first use (which makes the deposit idea better than taxing them outright)

[sbj405]

147. I'm all for it.

What drives me crazy is seeing someone bring back a bunch of bags stuff them in the recycle bin outside the store and then go in and get a whole bunch more. While I applaud their efforts at recycling, reducing and/or reusing is always better. There used to be a store here that sold bags for 5 cents. It's amazing how many more people reused bags or used less than if they were free.

I have dogs, so I definitely have the need for a limited number of bags, but if I were to accept one at every offering I'd have enough for the whole dog park.

[scottxyz]

151. Seems like a lot

The Park Slope Food Coop in Brooklyn NY, the oldest all-labor food coop in North America, has charged a few cents for plastic bags for years. But I don't think it's anywhere near 17 cents a bag - more like a nickel. The bags aren't worth THAT much!

[RPM]

156. Invest in a Bean Bag...

Reusable, strong, no fee :-)

[SweetLeftFoot]

158. Ireland

They have similar charge in Ireland and it works really well. Now I've moved to the UK I have once again got a giant pile of plastic bags I keep meaning to recycle clogging up a kitchen draw.

[The White Tree]

165. This seems like a reasonable proposal

I read this article yesterday. The 17 cent fee is what the city estimates it is costing to dispose of and deal with plastic bags. So in the end this is really just a way to reduce waste for something that has very limited use to most people.

I recycle my store bags to bring lunch to work and then throw them away in most cases, or I use them to line waste paper baskets as do a number of people I am sure but this is such a limited recycling use and they still end up in the land fill. And the reality is that I still end up throwing many away because I often build up a supply of many more bags then I can possibly use. This is especially true when store employees double-bag everything even when there is no need, or when they put a limited amount in each bag. For example, many times I visit the store to buy a paper and they want to put it in a bag which I would immediately be throwing away. Often they look a little perplexed when I say, "I don't need a bag" (which is not to say I am blaming them though it'd be nice to see more attention paid to that.)

I think this is a good initiative to get back to. In the 80's and 90's there seemed to be a lot more attention to trying to get people to make small sacrifices that would add up to big gains for everyone. In this proposal I think it stated that buying 2 large canvas bags would cost about $60. This cost could be recouped fairly quickly thru savings from not having to pay for the bags.

After reading this yesterday, I resolved to be more conscious of this myself and am going to purchase my own canvas bags and try to put this into practice for my family.

Also, one last note, many grocery stores are going more and more to a self-checkout system where a lot more is being required of the customer then what this proposal is asking and there is no real benefit to the consumer that I am being made aware of (such as lower prices) so I think this is really a small inconvenience when compared to that.

[LiberallyInclined]

171. i PREFER the self-checkout...

i'm a lot faster than most of the checkers and baggers- it gets me out of the staore faster and with less hassles.
i'd like to see them have MORE self-checkout registers than manned registers, rather than the other way around like it is now.

[Kellanved]

166. No free bags = good idea; tax = bad idea

IMHO it should be the store's decision.
Bags are not free for the store; the so-called "free bags" are actually paid for by higher product prices (as are the use of Credit Cards and all other services).
The tax is likely to simply lead to even higher prices: shops might (?) continue to offer "free bags" by simply paying the tax for their costumers. So the disposal will be paid for, but will there be fewer bags?

[LiberallyInclined]

170. I think thatit's a TERRIBLE idea-

i USE my old plastic grocery bags- i use them to pick up dog crap when i walk the dog, i use them when i clean the cat litter, and i use the as garbage bags in the bathroom wastebasket, as well as in the car. I use them as catch-all bags around the house, and other things, but my bags are NEVER discarded in such a way that they are left to just blow around.
Besides- we already pay for the bags, as they are figured into the cost of the groceries.

[jdj]

174. eventually stores will drop these like they have dropped bag boys

they'll bag your groceries but almost never take them out like they used to.

Once it gets widespread, they'll probably quit stocking the bags and just use their discarded boxes like Sams does.

And Aldi here makes you deposit a quarter before you take off with one of their shopping carts. You get it back at the check out.

[LiberallyInclined]

175. ????

i strongly doubt that...those bags are dirt cheap for the stores to buy, and you can store hundreds, even thousands of those bags in a LOT LESS space than trying to keep piles and piles of boxes up by the registers.
and the quarter per cart thing is probably more for keeping the homeless people from walking off with the carts- that was the reason a couple store tried it here, but the experiment didn't last long, and now i don't know of any stores around here that still do that.

[sweetheart]

178. The cart thing saves cart-people

In britain, its a pound.. near 2 dollars... so rather than ditching
the cart near where you parked, you walk it back to the entrance to get
back the pound coin. It seems that the german supermarkets all use
this model (aldi and Lidl). As well, Lidl sells bags, and perhaps
this model is an outgrowth of german markets overseas.

In new york city, i used to not carry any bags for the dog's shit, and
instead, count on the reality that there would be a nearby piece of
litter which there always was, for years... its damn near impossible
for a dog to shit in NYC not within 20 feet of a floating big mac
wrapper or something of the sort. :-)

Probably the cart thing din't work, as a quarter is too small a
denomination... if it was 2 dollars, all the carts would be returned.

[LiberallyInclined]

181. if it were 2 dollars per cart deposit-

people would shop at the store that didn't have the deposit.
so, unless it's made into a law, it ain't gonna happen...

and it ain't gonna be made into a law.

[idlisambar]

179. dumb idea

grocery bags have an inconsequential impact on the environment.

[Name removed]

182. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[theboss]

184. Why not just give free canvas bags to everyone?

Why install a regressive tax? Poor families now have the choice of paying a new tax on food or spending $15 or $20 on canvas bags that they never would have bought before.

[slackmaster]

187. Enforce the law against littering!

Once people who throw trash in the streets start feeling like there's a real chance of getting a $1,000 fine for it, most of them will stop doing it.

This propsal isn't for a tax. It's the grocery store lobby looking for another way to gouge consumers. The bags cost them less than a penny.

[Nikia]

193. I don't think anyone has brought this up

Has anyone else been asked to leave their bags, which they brought, at the counter? I have. Evidently, they thought that me having a bag was a shop lifting risk. Do some stores really want poor people bringing in their own bags?