In their long-running vendetta against any measure of environmental protection, the editorial columnists at the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review took aim yesterday at Virginia's proposal to place a twenty-cent tax on plastic bags in a well-meaning effort to both tamp down on the use of plastic bags and raise money. Here's the full editorial:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_718253.html
In "Bagged", the Trib first takes issue with the fact that the tax is based on Ireland's similar tax of 20 pence, faulting them for not taking exchange rates into account in determining the 20-cent tax (irrelevant). The author calls this proposed tax "long on liberal rhetoric but precariously short on any discernible public benefit," claiming that, according to a study of the Wall Street Journal plastic bags "take up a minuscule portion of landfill waste" and are thus handily defeating any claim that plastic bags in any way are detrimental to the environment. Alright, hold it right there! Plastic bags cannot be judged by the simple amount of landfill space they take up; their detrimental impact goes far beyond simple logistics like that. The very idea assumes that plastic bags even MAKE it to a landfill to be properly disposed of. How many of the tens of millions of plastic bags used every year don't ever come close to a landfill, instead ending up blowing in the wind (I've seen it numerous times, haven't you?) or going downstream to join the pollution in the Gulf of Mexico or the swirling piles of plastic trash that exist in both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans? If you think you're being good by recycling them, don't bet on it. They're very difficult to recycle, and often clog up the machines and get trashed instead.
The Trib takes issue with both paper and canvas bags; they rightly point out that it takes more to produce a paper bag than it does plastic bags. They dismiss canvas bags entirely as they "came under fire in New York last year for their high lead content." I'm at a loss to see how cloth bags have lead in them, but this accusation is unsubstantiated by any study or survey (the Trib fails to cite any).
The editors end with a perfectly delightful accusation that is familiar to anyone who reads their commentaries. "What's revealed in the ruse over 'environmental awareness' is liberals' affinity for control over people's lives. If anyone's behavior should be modified, it's the politicians who enable these fallacies." There it is again, just like the Cornwall Alliance, the environmentals don't really care about the environment, they just use it as a tool to control your life. As though being obliged to pay 20 cents for your beloved plastic bags really merits the label of "control." So the message from these stooges? Don't worry about changing your behavior, just sit back, it's fine. After all, the whole environmental movement is just a crazy liberal plot to turn America communist, right? Right?
These people are such a joke. Too bad they're in positions of power all across society.
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/s_718253.html
In "Bagged", the Trib first takes issue with the fact that the tax is based on Ireland's similar tax of 20 pence, faulting them for not taking exchange rates into account in determining the 20-cent tax (irrelevant). The author calls this proposed tax "long on liberal rhetoric but precariously short on any discernible public benefit," claiming that, according to a study of the Wall Street Journal plastic bags "take up a minuscule portion of landfill waste" and are thus handily defeating any claim that plastic bags in any way are detrimental to the environment. Alright, hold it right there! Plastic bags cannot be judged by the simple amount of landfill space they take up; their detrimental impact goes far beyond simple logistics like that. The very idea assumes that plastic bags even MAKE it to a landfill to be properly disposed of. How many of the tens of millions of plastic bags used every year don't ever come close to a landfill, instead ending up blowing in the wind (I've seen it numerous times, haven't you?) or going downstream to join the pollution in the Gulf of Mexico or the swirling piles of plastic trash that exist in both the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans? If you think you're being good by recycling them, don't bet on it. They're very difficult to recycle, and often clog up the machines and get trashed instead.
The Trib takes issue with both paper and canvas bags; they rightly point out that it takes more to produce a paper bag than it does plastic bags. They dismiss canvas bags entirely as they "came under fire in New York last year for their high lead content." I'm at a loss to see how cloth bags have lead in them, but this accusation is unsubstantiated by any study or survey (the Trib fails to cite any).
The editors end with a perfectly delightful accusation that is familiar to anyone who reads their commentaries. "What's revealed in the ruse over 'environmental awareness' is liberals' affinity for control over people's lives. If anyone's behavior should be modified, it's the politicians who enable these fallacies." There it is again, just like the Cornwall Alliance, the environmentals don't really care about the environment, they just use it as a tool to control your life. As though being obliged to pay 20 cents for your beloved plastic bags really merits the label of "control." So the message from these stooges? Don't worry about changing your behavior, just sit back, it's fine. After all, the whole environmental movement is just a crazy liberal plot to turn America communist, right? Right?
These people are such a joke. Too bad they're in positions of power all across society.
You're right, Brady, and right-on about the BS that underlies this "anti-environmentalist" mentality. Anything that would inhibit corporate greed is bad. There are biodegradable plastic bags and they could be potentially a partial solution to the problem...but they are likely to be more expensive to make, and maybe not as easy to use. Whatever the problems, the real reason they're not more widely available is corporate greed.
ReplyDelete