The Seattle Times applauds Greg Nickels' proposal to tax disposable grocery bags, both plastic and paper:
The mayor goes further by including the fee on paper bags, arguing it takes a lot of energy and resources to make paper bags as well. Might as well make the move on both kinds of bags.Speaking of "might as well", the best thing I've ever done to reduce our household waste output was to cancel our subscription to the Seattle Times. Not only because I was tired of subsidizing their dopey editorials, and not only because we were tired of the fire hazard and clutter of all that useless paper in our kitchen. We also didn't feel right having these bundles of murdered tree delivered to our house by a gasoline-powered vehicle every morning, only to be hauled off in a truck several days later, when we could just as easily read the dopey editorials on the Internet.
Since the Seattle Times is genuinely serious about reducing the energy and resources associated with manufacturing and transporting paper, I have no doubt they will support my modest proposal to impose a 20¢ tax on newspapers.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 14, 2008 02:29 PM | Email ThisNo, it is an unwarrated tax gouge screwing of the citizen's of Seattle, based on unprovable junk science, by a lardass mayor who ought to be on the clown page EVERY DAY.
Posted by: NW Denizen on July 14, 2008 02:44 PMI don't need some douchebag mayor telling me how to shop. This isn't an economic solution to the problem--it's yet another way for Seattle to separate folks from their hard earned cash. How is Seattle planning to spend that money?
Fortunately for me when I forget to BYOB in the future it won't matter--because I buy most of my groceries at Central Market in Shoreline.
Posted by: Dantzler on July 14, 2008 03:09 PMLOL............................... (-:
nice
LOL............................... (-:
nice
Just wait, the tax on bottled water is next.
Posted by: Palouse on July 14, 2008 03:15 PM"BTW, I wonder what is the eco footprint of a cloth bag? You have to plant, fertilize, till, harvest, process and transport all of that cotton. So net/net even less than an already miniscule benefit."
Right, and unless you are a liberal hippy who doesn't care about bathing, body ordor, or hygene in general, and who braids his/her armpit hair with the hair on his/her ass, then you have to launder the bags as well, so it's actually a LOSS. More detergent laden water down the drain, and more energy usage to operate the washer, dryer.
I can hardly wait for the gravitationally challenged a$$hole to implement his table scrap recycling program. What a worthless waste of human reproductive activity!
Posted by: NW Denizen on July 14, 2008 03:41 PMAnd where's the outrage over those little boxes containing the plastic bags that are posted at trailheads, etc. Nickels will have to ban those bags as well. Why not ban all the bags at the malls too.
In one section talking about plastics and landfills, the author corrects the notion that the majority of landfill space is filled with plastic. Since plastic compresses, the majority of space is paper because it simply doesn't compress or decay in landfills.
So I feel so much better that I no longer rape the earth by reading the newspaper.
Posted by: eirik on July 14, 2008 03:53 PMFor instance, if cutting down one tree in the Pacific Northwest causes the global temperature to rise 0.0000000001 C, then the market-based solution would be to calculate how much damage that causes to the 6-billion plus people on this planet and have the person who cut the tree down to write a check to every one of them.
This is what civil suits are supposed to do---collect damages for non-criminal activities of others.
Of course, having 6 billion people sue every time tree is cut down is absurd. So this is what laws are supposed to do: limit the things you can sue people for and at the same time, put in fees and reparations for damage that will happen anyway.
The problem with "market-based solutions" (fines and taxes and regulations) being put in to "solve" the "problem" of global warming is that there isn't much firm science there. That is, we can't pinpoint who is doing what damage to whom, at least in a reliable way. The data suggests that higher CO2 levels actually have a dampening effect on global temperatures, and that CO2 levels may trail rising temperatures, and other weird things that Al Gore doesn't want you to hear about.
Whereas with air pollution, it is plain to see that smoggy air causes all kinds of diseases, as well as putting a thick layer of soot on everything, and dumping chemicals in lakes and rivers damages people's real estate values and standard of living, it just isn't as easy to show with global warming.
Heck, a warmer globe might even be a better globe for humankind, and we might end up owing people who put CO2 into the atmosphere because they are doing us a service.
The problems with the bag market is that it isn't buying or selling bags that hurts the environment, if at all. It's the way we dispose of them and manufacture them that is to blame. And for those activities we should impose fines and regulations, to make sure that bags don't clog our storm drains and that bags aren't manufactured at the cost of clean water and air pollution. Hence, we have fines for littering and controls on what chemicals manufacturers can dump out.
Posted by: Jonathan Gardner on July 14, 2008 04:05 PMHey, I reuse bags without Nickel's ham-handed approach.
BTW..where are the Tax Proceeds going?
I'm sorry but there really is no other word that fits...
Yes, why not put another TAX in place, it isn't like Seattle has so many of them, right?
How come Nickels' in his wisdom didn't consider disposable diapers?
How about taxing the city government (yes! each individual city employee would be taxed) for the bumbs they allow to hang around? The money garnered could be issued as a tax rebate to the working people in Seattle...
Seattle is a sanctuary city why not tax city government for every wetback who doesn't belong there? (none of them do belong regardless of the bleeding heart logic used as the rationale)
That money garnered could go to the victims and the family of victims who suffered assaults or murders at the hand of wetbacks...
Modest proposal by Nickels or just another moronic proposal by Nickels?
Posted by: juandos on July 14, 2008 04:21 PM
I refuse to go into Seattle for anything. We just celebrated our 29th anniversary. Dear one reminded me that 2 of my favorite places are the Metropolitan Grill and the Palisades. 'What say we take the top off and head to Seattle? Nope, no thanks.' We went to Salty's at Redondo. I will not reward pathetic, onerous, power-centric governance with my discretionary income.
Liberal policies have destroyed this state as surely as it has destroyed CA back when, as surely as it has destroyed Michigan and New Jersey more recently. The beauty of the state has not changed. The people have. The governance has. And we all know who they are, what political ideology they embrace, support and foist on the rest of us.
"Would the last person leaving Seattle, please turn out the lights."
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 14, 2008 04:42 PMThis way you don't waste a natural resource or pay hizzoner the graft he expects to receive.
Posted by: barrackslawyer on July 14, 2008 05:17 PMI recycle them and use them every day. I don't need someone who takes a Limo burning 3 times the avarage commuter to Seattle telling me what his new green tax hike of the day is.
Green Up Nichols, get your ass on a bus every day, to and from work and to every meeting, and let me know how it works for your busy schedule.
Nice try, but it's like Gregoire fixing roads with her massive 9.5 cent gas tax...It just isn't going to happen.
Hairy
Posted by: Hairy Buddah on July 14, 2008 07:38 PMIn a list of the top 32, Seattle weighs in at... drum roll please... NUMBER 31... you were saying?
So tell us, where was Seattle in 2007?
2006?
2005?
Hello? Is anyone out there?
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 14, 2008 07:52 PMAgree with you on the Californicators. We should have put a toll booth at the I-5 bridge at Vancouver in 1970. Most of them would have stayed in Oregon.
Posted by: Saltherring on July 14, 2008 09:36 PMThe thing to do would be to provide a tax break for people that don't use the bags provided by the store. Or better still, pay people to return the bags to a recycling center.
As it is, the plan looks like nothing more than a new way to generate revenue and not change anyone's behavior.
Regarding the "californification" theory, Nickels, Sims, and the other leftist whack jobs need to continue to do things like this to ensure that eco-nuts from across the country will flock to this area and continue to vote for them. They don't want to attract the sort that would look at these measures and wonder, "what in the heck are you doing???" and vote them out of office. It's these boneheaded moves from local government that send up a big flare to the rest of the country that says, "move left - move here".
Posted by: Smoley on July 14, 2008 11:11 PMSeriously, what does some guy in Northgate, making his money fixing roofs have to do with eco-Libs from Magnolia and Queen Anne making his beer run to QFC that much more difficult. Likewise, what does a Thai Restaurant owner on Rainier have to gain by pissing off his customers for take out Tom Yum soup, who now have to drag in some dirty plastic bag or smelly cloth tote sack instead of a nice clean new plastic bag.
Didn't this all start with the huge "Sargasso Sea" of plastic bags drifting along somewhere in the Pacific rather than the plain old litter and resource squandering issues?
No one actually knows the magnitude or minitude of that problem.
Have we all been diverted to the phony landfill crisis?
Posted by: Bart Cannon on July 15, 2008 01:03 AMMy garbage bill back then was about $3.50.
Why can't the Mayor come up with a plan to reward us for recycling, and eliminate that huge bill we pay to Waste Management for OUR pre-sorting of THEIR re-cycling booty?
A one penny bounty on plastic grocery bags would solve all problems, and create thousands of GREEN jobs for the homeless.
A plastic bag weighs 5.5 grams and occupies about 2.5 cubic centimeters when compressed.
A paper bag could hold $10 worth of plastic bags and would weigh ten pounds. Easy enough to carry to the neighborhood re-cycle center.
But don't take the $10 winffall to the bank these days. Put it in your mattress. Or for that matter, make your mattress out of plastic bags and then re-cycle THAT for retirement income.
Posted by: Bart Cannon on July 15, 2008 01:20 AMalso, its police are prevented from basic policing--look how they had to coddle the public park "homes" of squatters; add to that apathetic lib citizens who vote in these clowns & who must enjoy micromanaged lives;
forget the 20 cent bags; where will the former public toilet savings go? another successful policy "enacted for the citizens;" 20 cents + bureaucracy = $20.00 bags in overall impact on us; any sunset provision on this program? bet not;
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on July 15, 2008 05:13 AMI have a better way. Tell the cashier that you have no bags, but you do have boxes in the trunk of your car. Put the items back into the grocery cart and use the boxes in your trunk for transport, instead of plastic/paper/canvas sacks.
WHAT?!?!?! You actually drive a CAR to the grocery store? That's even worse than the plastic bags - you're supposed to walk to your neighborhood store or at least take the bus...
Master Nickels will be very displeased to hear of your extravagant and wasteful ways!
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on July 15, 2008 07:23 AMhttp://www.airfoil.net/blog/index.php/2008/07/15/39
Posted by: airfoil on July 15, 2008 07:33 AMSheesh.
Posted by: hinton on July 15, 2008 07:57 AMNo, Seattle doesn't but King County does. The Department of Adult and Juvenile Detention Community Work Program takes low level offenders out into the community where they work off their fines by performing basic landscape maintenance and trash clean up.
The Incredible Bulk isn't bright enough to come up with a similar program for Seattle. His answer is to punish citizens of Seattle by jacking up transfer station fees and possible even shutting some stations down thereby forcing lower income citizens to dump trash in the streets. How dare we produce trash in "HIS" city?
Like with their non-existent energy policy, eventually the mainstream will wake up and take action.
Just stop and think about the silliness of banning or taxing grocery bags in the big picture of all of Seattle's, the Nation's, and the World's problems.
And if you can do that successfully ... good news! You are not a Progressive!
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 15, 2008 09:02 AMThey are not a controlled substance in any way. How could they city legally prevent this?
Posted by: johnny on July 15, 2008 09:12 AMI am self employed.
I don't use gasoline to commute to work.
I don't contribute directly to traffic congestion.
I am a night owl. I use electric power mostly from 6PM until 6AM. Low demand hours.
In the winter, I keep my house at 55 degrees.
I dutifully sort my trash.
I don't water my lawn.
I shower and wash my clothes no more than my friends demand.
WHERE IS MY RATE REDUCTION AND MY GOLD STAR ? !
WHY ARE YOU MAKING ME SUBSIDIZE MY RESOURCE HOG NEIGHBORS ! ?
Don't get caught. I expect the fat slob to ban hibachi pots, barbeques, smokers and anything else the might give a person a bit of pleasure or comfort. You can tell that is what he has in mind because he has been working hard on putting on his winter coat of lard...for the last eight years.
Posted by: NW Denizen on July 15, 2008 04:30 PMBesides, I need them to line my trash cans.
Posted by: PeggyU on July 15, 2008 11:53 PMBesides, I need them to line my trash cans.
Posted by: PeggyU on July 15, 2008 11:53 PMSomeone with a camera snap a pic of Herr Commandant Nickels and/or one of his favorite minions with a plastic bag please.... or even better a FOAM TAKE OUT BOX *IN* A PLASTIC BAG!
get the international dog court in Brussels to demand & rule that our courts rule on this. back to paper? how about those nifty mesh onion bags? maybe I'll invent a reusable cloth doggy doo bag--whose laundromat do you want me to wash it in? or the apartment laundry room? or my condo's shared party room?
how about next eliminating those pesky, landfill-ing plastic i.v. bags in hospitals? reusable hot water bottles will do fine; esp. for universal health care service centers; (take a number)
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on July 16, 2008 09:48 PM