LA Bans The Plastic Bag

Plastic bags: faithful transporters of groceries, liners of wastebaskets, pickers-up of dog crap and inspirers of late nineties Hollywood screenwriters, now banned from grocery stores by the Los Angeles City Council. But why?

Reason.tv's Kennedy paid a visit to LA City Hall to find an answer to that question. Council members stood by the ban, despite being confronted with evidence that bag bans have no discernible effect on the health of the environment and make up less than 1 percent (pdf download) of California's waste stream.

"When you're looking at 1 percent, that's a huge difference," says Councilman Alarcon, who voted for the ban. 

Reason contributor Jay Beeber points out that a similar ban in San Francisco failed to reduce (pdf download) the small number of plastic bags actually littering the street. 

"This is just feel-good legislation," says Beeber. "It's not going to solve any problems, but it makes people think that we've done something."

Still, council member Tom LaBonge feels that he served his district well by outlawing plastic bags at grocery stores.

"That one percent [of plastic bags in the waste stream] pollutes the river," says LaBonge. "You want to go out to the river with me? I'll show it to you."

Approximately 4:43 minutes.

Interviews by Kennedy. Shot and edited by Zach Weissmueller.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to ReasonTV's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Tulpa the White||

    WTF? You link to a 172 page PDF with no information for locating the source of your claim about plastic bag waste?

  • ||

    Better start reading.

  • Randian||

    Seriously, the numbers are right there in the report. You are a professor, right? Is reading so alien?

  • ||

    *snickers*

  • Tulpa the White||

    If I cited one number buried a 172-page paper in my research without any information as to where to find it, guess what? It's getting rejected by the referee.

  • ||

    ctrl F?

  • Randian||

    I found it pretty easily. Took maybe five minutes to determine that, yes, plastic bag waste from Single and Multi-Family households comprised .6% and .7%, respectively, of total waste.

  • hk||

    ctrl F is your friend, bruh

  • Tulpa the White||

    Doesn't work on a Mac.

  • hk||

    Command-F on Mac, brah.

  • ||

    I calculate that I have approx 2-3 years to hoard plastic bags before this madness makes it up the West Coast to my home in Washington State.

  • Tulpa the White||

    You realize they're not banning plastic bags in general, just the ones the stores bag your groceries with.

    It's a stupid law, but it's not as stupid as a ban on all plastic bags would be.

  • ||

    Don't worry, Professor Pomeranian. You've cornered the market on stupid. And on tediousness. Actually, you've cornered a lot of markets, it seems.

  • The Derider||

    Man it's so tedious when people confront my unfounded assumptions with the truth!

  • hk||

    Man it is tedious when Anacreon destroys your logic.

  • Anacreon||

    Here's the stupid:

    The guvmint wants us to use those personal cloth bags instead; though only briefly discussed in the piece, it turns out these things become microbe farms very quickly. Just wait for the first epidemic to have personal bags as its origin. We'll have to make some new laws then!

    So we are supposed to wash the bags to prevent this? How much ecologically-insensitive things like heating energy, water, soap, etc must be used to keeps us safe -- so we don't use those amazingly strong and easy-to-carry little plastic bags that we always re-use to clean the cat litter?

    Prediction -- coming soon from Glad -- disposable, sterile plastic liners for your cloth grocery bags. That will be a good laugh when everyone starts using them since they can't get plastic bags at the Safeway anymore.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Tulpa is a god damn wiener. It knew and chose to disregard the context of Edwood's comment, and served absolutely no purpose by saying nothing substantially enlightening to anyone who reads reason, making itself a wiener.

  • Tulpa the White||

    What is the context of Edwood's remark that makes it a relevant statement? Nothing about this law makes hording grocery store bags beneficial. If you want plastic bags in the future, they'll be available, they just won't automatically come with your groceries.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Read this one:

    Nothing about this law makes hording grocery store bags beneficial.

    then this one:

    If you want plastic bags in the future, they'll be available, they just won't automatically come with your groceries.

    ...and see if you can tell me what's wrong.

  • Tulpa the White||

    You know how much space a supply of cruddy grocery store plastic bags equivalent to $100 worth of Glad quality bags is going to take up?

    I maintain that hoarding bags is not going to be beneficial. Any more than hoarding legal size paper because the price might go up someday would be beneficial.

  • ||

    Well put Anacreon. Perhaps this may be the time to go long on Big Trashbag.

  • Randian||

    Oh Lord, Tulpa. As I have said before, I admire your contrarianism to a degree, but you have to know that you say some retarded stuff now and again.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    I do not agree that the particular remark should be categorized as contrarianism.

  • ||

    Tulpa isn't a contrarian, he's a fucking idiot. The two are very similar, but there are subtle differences. A contrarian should at least know when to not make an abjectly retarded comment because the "contrarian" position to some things is so stupid that only an abject moron would take the position. Tulpa takes those positions, thus making him a retard.

  • Randian||

    Fair point from both of you. I think that his reflexive "Imma gonna make reason smarter and betterer!" leads to retarded remarks, rather than him being the proverbial blind pig.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Explain how the remark is retarded. Other than not being what the cool kids think.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Or you can join the glibster bandwagon (as it seems you're already veering towards doing) and become another discordant voice in the din that's transforming Reason into just another partisan hack site, made none the less partisan for not having a party.

  • The Derider||

    It's clear they're with team Red.

  • Pound. Head. On. Desk.||

    Being pacifists, isn't that Team Yellow?

  • Randian||

    Oh please spare me the histrionics. The reason your remark was violently stupid is because the context of the statement was obvious to everyone (but you, apparently), who then not only took it out of context, but then proceeded to operate as if a) you were bestowing some sort of novel interpretation of said comment and b) acted like a d-bag in the process.

    That's, as they say, retarded.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I'm still not seeing the context that makes his remark sensible.

    I figured he was talking about grocery store plastic bags. My point was that other plastic bags suit pretty much the same purposes and are still going to be dirt cheap. So devoting storage space to years worth of cruddy grocery store bags simply doesn't make sense.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Wow, you're inching closer to making an actual argument with this comment rather than just a pure insult. At least you're trying to justify your insult this time.

    You've still got a ways to go, though; a "retarded" or "idiotic" comment is presumably either untrue or irrelevant, no? You don't offer evidence of either.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Maybe you should examine my response to the comment I disagreed with above. I didn't say "Edwood is a fucking idiot!" and then disappear (Edwood is certainly not an idiot of course). I stated my disagreement and gave a reason for it.

    Perhaps one day you will learn to use that template to contribute to rational discourse too, Epi. You're never too old to learn.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Do you think that it may be that Mr. Wood's sentiment seems obvious and consistent to everyone else, and the only reason that you take issue is to fulfill some need to run contrary to commonsense. And furthermore, it's a lot easier to just say that you're an idiot than to spend the next 12 hours muddling your tortured analogies as you try to squeeze some iota of logic out of a tenuously held together original premise.

    -----------------------------

    That being said, I'll tell you what everyone else, who wasn't trying to be a dick, read when we read Mr. Wood's comment.

    'I use those grocery bags for a lot of stuff, but they're not so important to me that I feel like buying plastic bags for those purposes. I think I'll try to get enough of those bags to last me for a while before this new law takes effect.'

    If you cannot see how your comment seem idiotic to this sentiment, well then, you're beyond repair.

  • General Butt Naked||

    And I love to live on the goddamn world where saving plastic bags is what the cool kids do. Fuck man, I'd be Jim Morrison with Jimi Hendrix's dick, because I got a larger plastic bag holding many smaller plastic bags on a hook in the stairway to the basement.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Do you think that it may be that Mr. Wood's sentiment seems obvious and consistent to everyone else, and the only reason that you take issue is to fulfill some need to run contrary to commonsense.

    If you or I or Randian went to DailyKos and started dismantling their bullshit leftist claims, they could very easily say EXACTLY what you're saying here as their "argument". That's the problem with just calling someone "idiot" or "retarded" because they disagree with the group... ANY group can do that and not every group is right, obviously.

    That being said, I'll tell you what everyone else, who wasn't trying to be a dick, read when we read Mr. Wood's comment.

    Good! See, it didn't even take you 12 hours. Presenting arguments isn't that hard.

    In any case, I didn't get that from Wood's statement, because that doesn't sound like "hoarding" to me. Hoarding is amassing unusually large quantities of an item while not using it. Otherwise you could claim that I'm "hoarding" ice because I have four trays full of it in the freezer.

    But if that's what Mr Wood meant (ie, keeping a small supply of them for his daily needs) then that's plausible. Even though those baggies take up a lot of space compared to what they're worth.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Wait, I just double checked what he was saying. He was talking about years worth of bags. That would be an insane level of hoarding for an item that will still be cheaply available, just not "free".

    So, I'm sorry, but I cannot possibly agree with your interpretation.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I wash my hands of you. Wanna be an asshole for assholery's sake, great, that's your prerogative, but count me out.

    Maybe a little introspection will inform you as to why, in the end, your only friend is that goddamn Reason tote bag you got a few years ago.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Let's look at the Glad Bags replay breakdown:

    -Edwood makes initial comment about hoarding obviously in jest.

    Tulpa-"You realize they're not banning plastic bags in general, just the ones the stores bag your groceries with."

    No shit, asswipe. We fucking get it. No need for "you realize" dickhead confrontation.

    "It's a stupid law, but it's not as stupid as a ban on all plastic bags would be."

    Everybody of a libertarian persuasion who reads reason already agrees that plastic bag paternalism is stupid. You have not set yourself apart as an example of exceptional intelligence on reason by introducing an unthought of point of view, because it wasn't.

    -Flag was called for unnecessary dumbness.

  • SIV||

    Tulpa isn't a contrarian, he's a fucking idiot.

    You're giving Tulpa too much credit. "Fucking idiot" is an understatement.
    It's like MNG was caught up in the whirlwind of comment registration and Tulpa picked up his mantle.

  • ||

    "Don't worry, they're not saying you can't drive, you just can't pull them out of your driveway and operate them on public roads."

  • Bramblyspam||

    2-3 years? You're optimistic. My hometown of Portland, Oregon already banned plastic bags last October!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Council members stood by the ban, despite being confronted with evidence that bag bans have no discernible effect on the health of the environment...

    The heart wants what the heart wants.

  • ||

    I wonder when Reason's planning to move their operation the hell out of California. To Texas, maybe? You guys should probably do it before Sacramento bans libertarianism.

  • yonemoto||

    come on. Their other anchor is in DC. The whole point is to broadcast out of the maw of the beast.

  • Adamson||

    Have you seen the LP in Sacramento County? It makes Gary Johnson look positively effective.

  • ||

    Oh, I so hope they do this in Arizona just so I can piss everyone off by wasting an entire trash bag just on cleaning the litterbox every day.

  • ||

    Mohave County would say, "fuck that shit, where my fucking bag with cigarettes and Corona?"

  • ||

    Pima, unfortunately, would get a raging hard on from this idea. Ugh.

  • The Derider||

    Plastic bags that are filled with shit are a lot better than empty ones. They don't float in water, and don't get pushed around by the wind. They're a lot more likely to end up on landfills.

  • ||

    You know what makes me a misanthrope? Shit like this. I want this species to fucking choke on its own stupidity. That fucking gives me a hard-on. Fucking sheep. You deserve to get killed by some pig with a badge you fucking sheep. Shut up, American Idol is on in thirty minutes.

  • Swamp Think||

    Wait, didn't Bill Hicks say the same thing 20 yrs ago, subbing American Gladiators for AI? 20 yrs from now it'll be American Jagoffs.

  • ||

    No, it will be "Oww! My Balls!"

  • ||

    You know, in Japan, that show is called, The Super Terrific Happy Hour.

  • Randian||

    Invoking HURR DURR AMERICAN IDLE HA HA HA should be translated to "I think I'm an elitist but in fact I'm just a tool."

  • ||

    I'd like to blame American Idol or Dancing With The Stars, but the true death of the West is obviously coming from police procedurals where the cops are universally portrayed as angels. I have various family members who watch them all the fucking time and they're totally incapable of believing the police can do wrong. It drives me right up the fucking wall.

    I tried to get a few to watch The Wire and while one loved it, some couldn't even handle its serial rather than episodic nature. I'm sure Diana Moon Glampers will be happy she'll be saving on the amount of handicaps needed.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Blue Bloods is positively the worst cop show I have ever seen. It's a weekly 1 hour long session of law enforcement fellatio.

  • Pi Guy||

    Damn. I didn't know that the 214th Amendment passed.

  • Agammamon||

    I used to watch LnO and LnO CI - Drove me crazy how often they'd "smell gas" or lie to a landlord to get access to an apartment or threaten someone with an investigation of their business just to not have to go through the trouble of getting a subpoena.

    And I like Dennis Farina's work, but his character is pretty much a scumbag detective.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    I've seen virtually every episode of LnO, most of them multiple times. I've long maintained that there is absolutely a dissertation in how LnO conditions viewers to accept a police state where constitutional violations are not only routine, but are openly encouraged by the show.

  • Ted S.||

    What about the daytime court shows?

  • JW||

    "That one percent [of plastic bags in the waste stream] pollutes the river," says LaBonge. "You want to go out to the river with me? I'll show it to you."

    Yeah, I'll call that fucking bluff right now. No, you don't have time to make a call to a staffer. I'm sure it wasn't to tell him to rush down to the river and throw a couple dozen bags in, just upstream of your position.

    We were hit last year with a 5 cents/bag tax to "fight litter" in Monkey County. How many plastic bags have I seen blowing down the street over the past few years? Oh right, fucking ZERO.

  • ||

    The tax is obviously working, you heinous government-hater. If it weren't for the tax, you' have seen, like, three bags in the last year.

  • JW||

    If it saves even ONE bag...

  • ||

    I suggest getting a cup and snug fitting athletic supporter.

  • juris imprudent||

    Mayor Bloomberg wants to make sure the capacity of that cup is less than 16 oz. Speaking of the Bloomin-idiot - how has NYC not enacted this already?

  • Pope Jimbo||

    I hate to admit this, but my inner statist at times whispers in my ear about the greatness of charging a $.25 deposit on all cigarette butts.

    If you smoked and brought back all your butts, it wouldn't affect you at all. However, if you were one of those assholes driving a Durango throwing your butts out the window, you would have to pay a bunch.

    Also, it would turn the homeless into a super-energized city cleaning crew. 10 butts and you've got yourself a 40 of Camo.

  • Agammamon||

    That's pretty awesome.

    At the very least you could have a "bounty" in butts, like coyotes.

  • RPR2||

    filterless cigs making a comeback.

  • hk||

    No thanks, it is a regressive tax anyway.

  • Robert||

    What's Camo? A malt liquor that makes it hard to see you?

  • Agammamon||

    It was so effective that it created a temporal paradox.

  • Pi Guy||

    We seem to be experiencing temporal paradoxes a lot in the comments section lately.

  • Arte Jessonian||

    "That one percent [of plastic bags in the waste stream] pollutes the river," says LaBonge. "You want to go out to the river with me? I'll show it to you."

    Uh, no. Unless California plastic bags have special powers I don't know about, it's people who pollute the river, not plastic bags.

    Nice try though, Councilman McBureaucrat.

  • juris imprudent||

    The utter irony is I'm sure he's thinking the L.A. river is actually something riparian.

  • Sevo||

    juris imprudent|6.2.12 @ 5:21PM|#
    "The utter irony is I'm sure he's thinking the L.A. river is actually something riparian."

    *Excellent* point. How do you 'pollute' a concrete drainage ditch? Put fish in it?

  • The Derider||

    It drains to the Ocean, genius.

  • Agammamon||

    Put in a grate then.

  • The Derider||

    Already do, doesn't work. Bags just clog the grate and create a dam, which overflows.

  • Anacreon||

    I'm sure that it is not just plastic bags clogging grates. I would imagine that the c.o.l.a. employs some sort of person who might be able to go by these grates on the very limited occasions it rains in SoCal, and spend a couple of minutes with a rake making the river flow again. That is, of course, if said person actually is willing to work or doesn't immediately say "that's not in my job description".

  • The Derider||

    Yes, I'm sure that we could devise some system that would remove plastics from LA rivers before they hit the ocean. It's not impossible.

    The question is, who pays for it? Unless the government does by collecting taxes, the free rider problem ensures that this never occurs.

    Why do you support evil government taxation, slaver?

  • Pi Guy||

    They've already got crew who do clean up.

    OTOH, who's going to pay for all the extra hot water, soap, and sewage treatment necessary to clean the cloth bags?

  • hk||

    Right so lets use cloth bags that make the problem worse?

    All rivers should be privatized.

  • Suki||

    +1

  • commentard||

    Me and my fellow informed citizens of Austin, TX are currently funding NINE MONTHS OF "RESEARCH" into "CRAFTING" a plastic bag ban in our city.

    There simply aren't words to adequately describe how fucking stupid this shit is. When my liberal friends trumpet the virtues of this bullshit, I always ask them: "Who do you think will suffer more from this? Wal-Mart, or poor people who have to invest money into canvas bags?" They generally don't answer.

  • commentard||

    I guess I should have said, "I and my fellow informed...", but I slept late and have only had about 8 ounces of coffee, so fuck off.

  • ||

    Meet you down at Whip In for a liquid breakfast.

  • ||

    And it's, "My fellow citizens and I..."

  • commentard||

    Old man, look at this face; it doesn't really give a shit.

    Ooooo, let's. I'll bring all my Ron Paul stickers. We can hang with some liberals and point out to those who simultaneously bemoan the LA-fication of Austin while loving mind-numbingly stupid legislative initiatives like this how remarkably unaware of themselves they are.

  • ||

    I suppose you get the same frisson of joy as I seeing the look of hipster horror when they figure out that we actually take that whole "liberty" thing seriously.

    I'm the old guy at the end of the bar nursing a 512 Pecan Porter.

  • commentard||

    "Whippin' it out at the Whip In."

    Hold it down, Old Man. I won't be joining you, as I'm doing extra work for the next few weekends in order to pay off my federal self-employment taxes.

    Have you tried the Real Ale Hans' Pils? Summer has me in a pilsner mood.

  • ||

    Had a visitor here last week whom I took beer hopping, and given that it was a million degrees out with 100% humidity, that was on the schedule. Crisp and refreshing.

    Unfortunately, this may be my last month here, so I'm trying to pack in all the shootin', drinkin', and shit-kickin' I can before I depart. Bad news is that I'll be living someplace even more regressive. Good news is that my new boss is a major shooting enthusiast, does his own reloading, so has some sympathy for my 2nd amendment stance.

  • Terr||

    Hans' Pils is a great summer beer.

  • commentard||

    More regressive in the "liberal" direction or the "conservative" one?

    Too bad. I sure hate to see libertarians leave Austin, especially with the invasion of liberals we're experiencing.

  • ||

    Liberal, though when you get down to it, what's the difference? They're all regressive statist fucks.

    Fortunately, my stepdaughter is moving back down here, and a cute blonde female libertarian is far better than an ugly graybearded male libertarian.

  • commentard||

    Indeed they are.

    Okay, Old Man. I'm gonna need some digits, buddy. The stepdaughter, I mean.

  • commentard||

    Still, an ugly graybearded male libertarian is more attractive than an anemic tattooed black-dyed-haired liberal hipster city witch. Don't be too hard on yourself, Old Man.

  • ||

    She's also a Whipster. So you know where to seek.

    www.ysmay.com

  • ||

    God, no. Texas is the only titan state that isn't fucked up, and I hope the state government rapes Austin into abandoning the ban if it's ever instituted.

  • commentard||

    "Texas is the only titan state that isn't fucked up..."

    That statement is a great illustration of how pathetic our standards of effective governance have become.

  • commentard||

    Texas is royally fucked up, and the state government is far too busy robbing landowners to pay attention to Austin's self-inflicted, liberal-flavored pain.

  • ||

    Any hope of change in that regard?

  • commentard||

    I'm sorry - is that meant to be a joke? Honest question.

  • commentard||

    We had a lady running for Governor here in 2010 named Debra Medina, who was set to abolish property taxes, fight eminent domain abuse, etc. She couldn't even get the basement-dwelling "Alex Jones set" vote, because she wouldn't publicly state that she believed Dubya masterminded 9/11.

  • commentard||

    Yes, our economic climate here is slightly better than American average, but don't be fooled. Even in Dallas - a supposed bastion of conservative economic policy - business owners are violating the law if their signage covers more than 1/3 of their total window space.

  • commentard||

    Pointing to California and saying Texas is un-fucked up in comparison is like telling an early stage cancer patient to be happy that he's not a late stage cancer patient.

  • ||

    "She couldn't even get the basement-dwelling "Alex Jones set" vote, because she wouldn't publicly state that she believed Dubya masterminded 9/11."
    Cite for that? All I've seen is the Glenn Beck show hit piece on her.

  • ||

    From now on I'm telling people I'm against immigration. When people ask if I mean illegals, I'll say: "No, those fucking liberal hipster douchebag Californians!"

    We have enough retarded ass shit in this state thanks to all the RED MEAT. We don't need to add more retarded ass buillshit from TEAM BLUE.

    Aaaaarrrrggghhh!

  • commentard||

    Dude, now you're talking. All the Mexicans want to do is set up unencumbered, locally-oriented businesses and make themselves available for menial tasks the entitled white Americans don't want to do themselves, and at ungodly low prices. It should be easier for them to come here legally, and much tougher for Californians and New Yorkers to come here legally.

  • hk||

    I love defending Hispanic immigrants, but all immigrants even the annoying Socialist types, should be able to live here.

    Private property owners determine who lives where.

  • commentard||

    Apparently, the tongue in my cheek didn't translate in print.

  • Nando||

    Now you care about poor people.

  • commentard||

    I make no pretenses of being an "altruist", but I would like to see them be able to make their own economic decisions, yes.

  • ||

    It's only people like you that don't care about poor people Nando.

  • Tulpa the White||

    "Who do you think will suffer more from this? Wal-Mart, or poor people who have to invest money into canvas bags?"

    I don't think those $2 cloth bags really bust the budget. Presumably WM will be able to lower its prices a bit too by not having to invest in plastic bags.

    What will be lost are (a) the convenience of not having to bring bats to the store, and (b) the use of the baggies as mini-garbage bags etc. That doesn't really disproportionately affect the poor.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Except that it forces the poor (and everyone else) to buy canvas bags to use for groceries as well as other, separate bags to use for garbage. So now people have to buy 2 types of bags when, before this ban, they didn't have to buy any at all.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I guess Tanstaafl is suspended in the case of "free" plastic grocery bags?

    Those bags aren't big enough to use in kitchen garbage cans, anyway.

  • Sevo||

    Tulpa the White|6.2.12 @ 7:58PM|#
    "I guess Tanstaafl is suspended in the case of "free" plastic grocery bags?"

    Ever price those things in *big* quantities?
    We buy 1K qty, custom size, 4-mil thick; $0.03/ea. Oh, and we didn't bother to change the unit price when we started using them; the customers seem to find the packaging a plus and make nice comments about it. Cheap way to increase volume.
    Pretty sure WM figures the $0.001/ea is covered by any purchase, and there will be more people buying things IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO REMEMBER TO BRING THEIR OWN DAMN BAGS.
    What is it you do for a living?

  • Tulpa the White||

    Maybe WM should continue buying them in big quantitities and sell them for $0.01 each to customers who forget their own bags.

    In any case, the current topic is whether the poor are disproportionately affected. Not whether the law is a wise one (a question on which you and I agree).

  • Agammamon||

    Whothe hell only uses large garbage cans.

    Ever put a small can under the sink and in the bathroom? In the garage, workshop, or office? Ever toss your lunch into one instead of buying paper bags? Use 'em when picking up litter?

    There's a bajillion uses for these damn bags.

    Oh, and the whole TANSTAAFL bit - who do you think can buy bags cheaper - me or a huge multinational chain that buys them in bulk. The "lowered prices" you'd get from stores not having to buy them will be unnoticeable dipshit, while the cost to me is very real.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Maybe they should start selling the cruddy bags for $0.01 a pop then.

  • Anacreon||

    OK, fine. Who would even notice the pennies? But now you can't even buy them in LA, San Francisco and other bastions of illogic.

    Now, maybe you could sell them for .05 and have the money go for litter pickup. But no, the only answer is a ban. Thanks.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Are they banned from selling them? I thought they were only banned from giving them away for free. The HP article isn't clear (though they mention that Santa Monica's ban allows paper bags to be bought for $0.10 apiece).

    If they're totally banned, how do they distinguish between grocery bags and garbage bags?

  • hk||

    What exactly is your position again?

    You want all of us to buy more expensive bags and add more pollution to the world, because.... ?

    I don't care what LA says, this is fucking stupid.

  • Agammamon||

    And there's the whole customer service aspect to it - its pretty nice not to have to bring the right number of bags to the store.

    Maybe that's not a problem for you, maybe you live in a high-density, urban area and you walk and bike everywhere. And of course you stop by the local grocer, the butcher, the farmer's market everyday to ensure you have the freshest organic food for your dinner so you only need one bag.

    I live out damn near in the middle of nowhere and don't like driving 10 miles to the closest supermarket everyday since my local grocery store has to carry *hardware* and clothes to stay in business.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I don't think this is a good law. I just think some of the arguments being presented against it are seriously flawed.

    I'm like a whetting stone for the libertarian mind. And in this case the sharpening you get from my comments really is free.

  • Barfman||

    *barf*

  • commentard||

    If only large families whose earners make minimum wage had your budgetary optimism. What a bunch of bullshit.

  • Pi Guy||

    Tulpa, you're getting to the point of double plus unsmart. Re-using is the first step in recycling!

    We re-use plastic bags for cleaning up dog shit in the yard every Saturday. In fact, I double bag. Same for cat litter cleanup, pretty much daily. So we're talking about *pulls off socks for full computational power* ~100/yr for dog, 250+/yr for cat. That's a big Twinkie.

    And, by the reasoning cited above, they're full and don't blow around.

    We also re-use the bags for taking lunches to work, bringing back tupperware, forks, etc., and re-reusing until it's no longer re-re-re-re-usable.

    The kids, OTOH, use paper lunch bags. Is one of these worse than the other? Hmmmm...

    Oh, plus: plastic bags have handles. I can carry 6 or 8 bags in from the car helping unload groceries (the future Mrs. Pi does the shopping; if I did, it would be all Dogfishhead 90 Minute IPAs and Cheetos, so you can tell she's pretty smart). And the paper bags with handles glued on sucked and I never even see them anymore. What's the cost to the environment when the bag breaks and a bottle of bleach explodes on your driveway?

    How long can you really keep acting as though there's only one side to this story?

  • Brutus||

    I don't know what to do here. I want to praise Councilman Parks as the only one with the slightest shred of common sense here, but I can't stand the sight of B. Hussein O. and have been told I am therefore a committed racist.

    Isn't the problem that people dispose of them improperly? And as Parks was so impolite to mention, weren't plastic bags the response to the ecopests' last moral panic that we were deforesting America with paper bags?

  • Cyto||

    All good citizens repeat after me:

    "We've always been at war with Eurasia."

  • Brutus||

    But in a way, isn't this good news? If the LA City Council is worried about this, it surely means they've solved the impending financial implosion that has threatened to turn LA in the Thunderdome.

  • ||

    Maybe we'll get lucky and half of the state will break off and float out into the ocean. Of course then we'd have to send Snake Plissken in there to rescue the presidents daughter.

  • 0x90||

  • Pi Guy||

    But.. but.. that'll mean all those plastic bags in the Pacific - won't it?

  • Pi Guy||

    But.. but.. that'll mean all those plastic bags in the Pacific - won't it?

  • TheZeitgeist||

    Just shows how unhip LA is compared to trendy Santa Monica - we banned plastic bags like six months ago here. And its totally obvious. Its all Bambi and shit 'till you cross Centinela then its an instant toxic-dump full of plastic.

    And they charge you 10 cents (by law!) for a paper bag down at Ralph's now here in Santy M. It really fits with the vacant electro-charger parking spaces (next to the Handi-man spots) and wi-fi shopping carts that have an auto-break that kicks in when the bum (diversity!) tries to steal one off the lot.

    I can't wait for the hypersonic train!

  • Randian||

    They call it "The People's Republic of Santa Monica" for a reason.

  • Voros McCracken||

    I know you youngsters might not remember this, but there was a time in this country when the development of plastics was considered a technological advancement. What savages we were.

  • Killazontherun||

    Back in the day when the left was bitching about signs telling them how to live their lives. I remember. Memory is the only way to inoculate against the zombie strain.

  • ||

    One word: plastics.

  • ||

    Wonderful. My job here is done. It's nice to finally know why humankind was put on this earth.

  • ||

    Oh, and heller...Kennedy...plastic bags...and nary a joke to be had from you. I'm so disappoint.

  • ||

    I was thinking about it, but I don't want to rip on Kennedy every time she has a post.

  • Ted S.||

    I just vote "foe".

  • Brandybuck||

    Yeah, and cigarettes were supposed to be good for you too.

  • Nando||

    It takes 430,000 gallons of oil to produce 100 million plastic bags, and Americans go through 380 billion of them a year.

    That’s quite a bit of oil wasted on something that most of us use for just minutes before throwing away.

  • Brutus||

    A perfect illustration of the meme: A is bad, therefore we should ban A. Costs? Alternatives? Posh, you troglodyte, don't you know this is a moral crusade?!

  • Randian||

    And your point is...?

  • Randian||

    I know that Nando is a Character OWS-style troll, but in all seriousness, is there any differentiation in this analysis between plastic bags that house medical equipment, trash bags, and the nefarious 'grocery' bag?

  • Killazontherun||

    Roughly 330 million of us. If we all use 10 bags a year, that is 3.3 billion bags, 100/year, 33 billion bags, 1000 a year 330 billion bags. Somehow I don't think every America, man, woman and child, is going through over a thousand bags a year.

  • ||

    I dunno, if you count individually wrapped stuff you go through quite a lot. Not that I agree with his anti-industrial stance that the oil is "wasted" on packaging though.

  • ||

    If the US banned the production of all plastic bags, we would reduce our annual consumed oil by 0.6%. Big fucking deal.

  • Sevo||

    "That’s quite a bit of oil wasted on something that most of us use for just minutes before throwing away."

    Nando, that's nothing compared to the amount of oxygen wasted by your breathing for a year.
    What a waste!

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    If you think Americans use the most plastic bags, then you've obviously have never traveled anywhere in Asia or South America.

  • ||

    Hey dipshit, plastic is an oil BY-PRODUCT so no, oil is not wasted making something that "most of us use for just minutes before throwing away and then reuse for a different purpose".

  • MisterDamage||

    It's that "reuse for a different purpose" that's the real issue here. How many people use plastic shopping bags for taking out their trash? what's the chance manufacturers of plastic garbage bags resent people being able to use plastic shopping bags free instead of their product?

    Rent seeking?

  • Arte Jessonian||

    The oil isn't 'wasted' if someone's willing to pay for it.

    Progressives can't break out of the fascist mindset that they control/own everything. Get your revolution on and socialize the joint, or stop claiming some resource not mined by you personally is being 'wasted' when it goes to a product you don't approve of.

  • CatoTheElder||

    Nonsense. The typical shopping bag weighs something like 4 grams. So 10^8 bags weighs something like 400 tonnes.

    Crude oil has a density of about 7.5 pounds per gallon, so 430,000 gallons would be about 1450 tonnes. The 7.5 pounds per gallon would be for a fairly heavy crude, though the actual fraction of the crude used has a much lower density.

    Now most plastic bags are made out of polyethylene, which is made by polymerizing ethylene in an exothermic reaction. Not much energy is consumed in the polymerization step. Ethylene can be produced by cracking oil distillate products like naphtha and gas oil. When it is produced from these feeds, cracking energy amounts to about 25% of the mass of feedstocks. So, you could bump the the 400 tons of polymer incorporated in bags by, say, a third to get the total oil required to manufacture 10^8 bags. Let's be generous, and bump by 50%. Six hundred tonnes is still way less than 1450 tonnes.

    Anyway, ethylene is mostly made by cracking ethane in the US. Naphtha and gas oil cracking accounts for slightly over a quarter of US ethylene.

    Bottom line: Nando can't even get the facts straight, much less interpret them in a coherent, economic analysis.

  • CatoTheElder||

    Anyway, it seems a terrible waste to burn either ethane or crude oil distillates when these materials can be used to produce recyclable plastic bags. Environmentalists especially should love plastic bags because they permanently sequester carbon that would otherwise be emitted to atmosphere at carbon dioxide.

  • The Derider||

    As long as they don't end up in the ocean killing sea life, or end up covering and killing trees.

    Or we could just keep the carbon sequestered in the ground instead of mining it in the first place.

    Bottom line: CatoTheElder can't even get the facts straight, much less interpret them in a coherent, economic analysis.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 8:56PM|#
    "As long as they don't end up in the ocean killing sea life, or end up covering and killing trees."

    Derider can only offer hypotheticals as a supposed 'argument'.
    Bottom line: Derider is a bozo.

  • The Derider||

    These are not hypothetical statements. Plastic bags kill marine life. http://www.whoi.edu/science/B/.....ticle.html

  • Sevo||

    Sorry, bozo. Link to 'someone' ain't helping your cause.

  • The Derider||

    I don't think you know what the word "hypothetical" means. It's different than "wrong".

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 9:38PM|#
    "I don't think you know what the word "hypothetical" means. It's different than "wrong"."

    Uh, OK.
    I don't think you have any idea what you're posting about.

  • Malcolm Reynolds||

    Derider,

    Only ignorance or cause-driven blindnesss would lead one to believe the statistic in your link that plastic kills 40,000 seals per year. Think, man. How would such a number be arrived at?

    I've spent a lot of time in the ocean off Los Angeles County. I've never seen a plastic bag, let alone a seal anywhere near one. That number is a pathetic joke. Show us evidence of ONE - just ONE seal being killed by a plastic bag.

    In California, the ignorant populace drives an ignorant government.

  • Anacreon||

    Plus, the damn seals are everywhere, and they'll jump up and take a bite off a salmon you are pulling in outside of San Francisco Bay.

  • hk||

    The Government or the Commons own the ocean, sorry but I could not give a single fuck about government failure.

    That is their problem.

  • CatoTheElder||

    The Derider failed to refute a single fact and seems incapable of recognizing sarcasm.

    BTW, I love to see a citation that documents how plastic bags are "covering up and killing trees".

  • The Derider||

    I refuted the silly idea that producing plastic bags sequesters carbon. The carbon was already sequestered in the ground before it was made into plastic!

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 9:23PM|#
    "I refuted the silly idea that producing plastic bags sequesters carbon. The carbon was already sequestered in the ground before it was made into plastic!"

    I'll bet you think that's 'clever', don't you?
    Sorry, the carbon has already been mined. Want to burn the by-products or use them?

  • The Derider||

    That's bullshit. Polyethylene is not made solely from petroleum byproducts. It's made from petroleum, and the demand for polyethylene is a component for the overall demand for petrolium. It also takes energy to distill ethylene from crude oil, and to make it into polyethelyne, which in the US is produced by burning even more fossil fuel.

    Producing plastic increases the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, period.

  • CatoTheElder||

    The Derider is partly correct: there are alternative uses for the petroleum products that are used to manufacture ethylene. But 100% of the carbon contained in a fuel alternative goes to atmosphere when they are used for combustion energy. About three-quarters of the carbon is permanently sequestered when those same hydrocarbons are cracked to make ethylene and polymerized to polyethylene.

    Most US ethylene is produced from NGLs extracted from natural gas, not crude oil distillates. But these, too, have an alternative disposition as fuels.

    Producing plastic increases the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. But that's irrelevant. The relevant question to the eco-bozos should be: how much relative to alternatives? 'Cause people need shopping bags.

  • hk||

    Derider it is called opportunity cost, your argument is Bullshit.

    In comparison to organic bags or whatever nonsense you believe in, Plastic bags ejaculate on you.

  • Sevo||

    "Bottom line: Nando can't even get the facts straight, much less interpret them in a coherent, economic analysis."

    You're too kind.
    Nando is an ignoramus spouting nonsense s/he read somewhere.

  • Colonel Travis||

    PSSST - hey, genius: plastic bags in North America are made from polyethylene. What's that? It ain't oil. It's from natural gas. But get this - it's not even the natural gas itself. It's a byproduct from refining, which is wasted on shit no one uses like plastic bags and boats and clothes and signs and electronics and the packaging that wraps the precious leftist books sent to you from amazon that teach you this junk.

  • Agammamon||

    How much oil is used in producing re-usable bags? How much in maintaining them.

    Don't tell me none, 'cause you've got to use energy to make 'em.

  • Agammamon||

    Not to mention, how much of this oil is used exclusively for making bags?

    Typically a gallon of oil is able to be fractioned into a whole bunch of chemicals that are used to make a wide variety of product, from gasoline, motor oil, various plastics.

  • Killazontherun||

    Americans go through roughly (give or take a very large number) 70 quadrillion gallons of liquid a year. It must be stopped before all those immutable atoms are destroyed by our consumption! The very essence of eternity is threatened by our behavior. Oblivion is just around the corner!

  • Gen. Jack D. Ripper||

    Finally, someone whom understands that keeping our precious bodily fluids pure is a top national priority.

    I'll have that rain water and grain alcohol cocktail now.

  • Killazontherun||

    According to this site
    http://www.cocktailmaking.co.u.....7-oblivion

    This is how you make an oblivion -- 3 shots of pernod in a long glass,add aprox 70mm of medium sweet cider ,[woodpecker].Quantities depend on taste

    Sounds like a decent buzz but wouldn't knock me the fuck out. How about mixing absinthe with a kamikaze or Long Island Ice Tea? Certainly would be more worthy of the name.

  • MWG||

    Kennedy should do more videos like this. Her obnoxious nature is actually somewhat entertaining when it's directed at obnoxious overlords.

  • ||

    ^^THIS^^

  • Pi Guy||

    Maybe I just remember too well the early days of Music Television - what MTV called themselves when they actually played music - but I've always though Kennedy was and is entertaining. Okay, that and I think she's pretty hot.

    But even still, she's smart, funny, and feisty. I like that combo.

  • BoscoH||

    Kennedy, you ignorant slut! Why didn't you ask them how I was going to pick up dog shit now!?!

  • hk||

    Hmm that seems a bit excessive.

    Chill bruh.

  • albo||

    I do all the grocery shopping for us, and I love it when I see people using reuseable bags.

    It's usually women using them--they've bought into the whole saving-the-earth schtick, and using them makes them feel better about having driven to the store in a gas-guzzling SUV.

    The few men I see using reuseable bags looked whipped, as though their wives have forced them to walk the family's Yorkie past their buddies.

  • Adamson||

    Yes albo - just this morning I witnessed a woman piling reuseable canvas grocery bags into her Lincoln Navigator. She would have done far more for the environment just getting a more fuel-efficient car - she could have filled the whole thing with plastic bags and she'd still come out ahead.

  • albo||

    And plastic bags take up basically no space in landfills, since they compress into nothing. Paper, on the other hand, is a huge portion of landfills.

    So the problem is basically littering. And we have laws against littering. So enforce them, don't punish all for the littering of a few. That's like banning alcohol because some people get drunk and hit their wives and drive drunk. Remember how that worked?

  • Tulpa the White||

    And plastic bags take up basically no space in landfills, since they compress into nothing.

    No one will even call you on this, because you're towing the party lion.

  • Pi Guy||

    I keep seeing this here

    towing the...lion

    and wonder every time why these poor lions aren't being serviced more regularly. They must be breaking down roadside more often my '72 pea green Ford Pinto hardtop (it did have a moon roof, tho).

    Word of advice to all Lions out there: AAA Basic is ~$75/yr, depending on where you live. Judging by the frequency with which you guys are breaking down, this will save you a bundle in towing.

  • Randian||

    Would you like to do the job there Tulpa? Brief research indicates an obvious split in opinion on the subject, so if you have something substantive to add, have at it.

  • hk||

    These are all examples of government failure, since they are incapable of managing their own land.

    Also pre-crime legislation is obnoxious.

  • Arte Jessonian||

    Women are socialized to believe they have to be gentle, pure, pixie-like earth-savers and it's hella popular among elitist and hipster gals to show how much they 'care' about the environment. It's social bullshit pushed on girls when they're kids: they're supposed to be teachers, nurses, vets, and earth-saviors. Huzzah!

    I miss the strapping ladies of the Industrial Revolution. My Italian great-grandmother was a force to be reckoned with, from what I've heard.

  • Silver Fox||

    Women are socialized to believe they have to be gentle, pure, pixie-like earth-savers and it's hella popular among elitist and hipster gals to show how much they 'care' about the environment. It's social bullshit pushed on girls when they're kids: they're supposed to be teachers, nurses, vets, and earth-saviors. Huzzah!

    Dammit! I *knew* something was missing from my childhood education!

  • Tulpa the White||

    Classic 2012 H and R comment, using anecdotal evidence to show that anyone whose opinion differs from the commentariat's is immoral AND unmasculine.

    This one will be (and has already been) accepted by the hive, while my futile attempt to introduce facts into the discussion is dismissed as retarded and contrarian.

    Ironically, a couple of years ago Reason sent a reusable cloth grocery bag with their logo on it as a "thank you" for donating. I guess all of us donors may as well have cut our balls off right then and there, right albo?

  • Pi Guy||

    Tulpa: Maybe you're not familiar with the concept of swag? Like cheap advertising?

  • Randian||

    This one will be (and has already been) accepted by the hive, while my futile attempt to introduce facts into the discussion is dismissed as retarded and contrarian.

    Name one material fact you have added to this thread. *One*. I defy you.

  • Tulpa the White||

    * the ban does not cover all plastic bags

    * Santa Monica has a law stating paper bags can be bought for $0.10

    * It would be cheaper to buy other plastic bags in the future than to buy storage space for grocery bags hoarded now.

    ...and so on....

  • hk||

    *No ban is acceptable.

    *The supply curve of paper bags will shift to the left.

    *Paper bags don't seem to help the environment.

    *The government doesn't do a good job with the environment, Private property owners have less polluted land.

  • BruceMajor||

    I thought LA needed to ration plastic, since its overuse in tits and personalities left the city with a genuine synthetic crisis.

  • BruceMajor||

    I thought LA needed to ration plastic, since its overuse in tits and personalities left the city with a genuine synthetic crisis.

  • Pi Guy||

    This reminds me of the time my buddy said he saw a girls boobs and described them as "oranges in plastic grocery bags" so maybe there's really something in this whole fake tit-plastic bag thing after all...

  • Aresen||

    If LA bans plastic bags, will Nancy Pelosi be allowed to visit?

  • fish_remote||

    Only if they ban leather bags....pulled tight into a Jack Nicholson as The Joker expression.

  • Jerry||

    I don't think they banned plastic hags yet. There's a program I could support!

  • Brutus||

    This comment is full of win.

  • BigT||

    Ban douche bags - and solve the traffic problem.

  • Gladstone||

    ZOMG! War on WOMENZ! Sexist Microagression!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douche

  • Gladstone||

    Toronto City Council is going to vote on getting rid of the 5 cent plastic bag tax soon so yay I guess?

  • Gladstone||

    Though those bastards on city council could instead make the tax go directly to the city, so barf if that happens.

  • Cool Story, Bro||

    Banning things....how deliciously progressive.

  • Nando||

    Sometimes people need to be encouraged to behave in a more eco-concious manner.

  • Nyarlathotep||

    Fuck you, slaver.

  • The Derider||

    Fuck you, hysterical anarchist.

  • Sevo||

    Ah, yes.
    And actual anarchist who would use no coercion at all is worthy of derision by whom?
    Well, assholes who value coercion to promote their pet theories at the expense of others!
    Would that be The Derider?
    Yep.

  • The Derider||

    Littering in a public area is coercion. Polluting the atmosphere is coercion.
    Poisoning the ocean is coercion.

    Intent doesn't matter, only results, right?

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 9:58PM|#
    "Littering in a public area is coercion. Polluting the atmosphere is coercion."

    OK, now we've gotten to Derider's limit of intelligence, which isn't hard to do.
    Define "coercion", bozo.

  • The Derider||

    If you pollute the atmosphere, I have no choice but to breathe it. That's coercion.

  • Tulpa the White||

    If you pollute the atmosphere, I have no choice but to breathe it. That's coercion.

    Does that apply to farts, exhalation, and body odor as well?

  • The Derider||

    If they measurably change the atmosphere in the aggregate, yes.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Problem is, measurability depends on the method of measurement, not the emissions themselves. And I think your definition of coercion is bullshit anyway.

  • The Derider||

    Provide a better one?

  • The Derider||

    What I mean is that things like breathing and farting don't usually harm other people because their impact on the atmosphere is negligible.

    If we lived somewhere with a much smaller atmosphere, like a space station, breathing and farting might actually have a significant impact on the atmosphere-- but we'd be able to assign some property rights to the atmosphere in that case.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:50PM|#
    "What I mean is that things like breathing and farting don't usually harm other people because their impact on the atmosphere is negligible."

    What you mean, asshole, is that you make up a definition to suit what your lies require.
    Asshole.

  • The Derider||

    Do you have anything to contribute here other than curses and telepathy?

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 10:37PM|#
    "If you pollute the atmosphere, I have no choice but to breathe it. That's coercion."

    Define coercion, bozo. Can you read?

  • The Derider||

    An action affecting the person or property of another without their consent.

    The atmosphere is everybody's property.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Ever heard of the butterfly effect?

  • Tulpa the White||

    And if property is everybody's then it's nobody's. See, tragedy of the commons.

  • The Derider||

    The property is still everybody's, it's just less valuable.

    Pigouvian taxes help correct this problem.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:08PM|#
    "An action affecting the person or property of another without their consent."

    THIS is a definition of coercion?!
    Go away.

  • The Derider||

    What's yours?

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:54PM|#
    "What's yours?"

    Sorry asshole, BZZT!

  • The Derider||

    That's clearly a far worse definition.

  • Sevo||

    Oh, missed this the first look:
    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 9:58PM|#
    "Intent doesn't matter, only results, right?'

    Yes, that is exactly right. And as you're a brain-dead lefty, I'm sure results matter not a bit to you.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:05PM|#
    "If they measurably change the atmosphere in the aggregate, yes."
    ----------------------------------
    OK, first bozo has continued to duck this question:
    How do you define "coercion"? Does the bozo understand the question? Is it beyond the bozo's comprehension? The world wonders.

    Now we have the claim that if a fart "measurably" changes the atmosphere, it is an "externality".

    I submit that bozo has finally reached the lowest bar possible in bozo's claims of victimhood (and resultant claims that the bozos of the world should use coercion on others).

    Now, I could be wrong; bozo has lowered the bar more than I've thought possible, so maybe there's more.
    Whaddaya, got bozo?

  • The Derider||

    Do you have anything to contribute other than ancient ad-hominems?

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:56PM|#
    "Do you have anything to contribute other than ancient ad-hominems?"

    That's your answer? BZZT!

  • The Derider||

    What answer? You didn't ask a question!

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:12AM|#
    "What answer? You didn't ask a question!"

    Boy, all that ducking a weaving must make you dizzy!
    "How do you define "coercion"?"
    Now, try to keep focused, try to look at the question and try to formulate an answer.

  • The Derider||

    "An action affecting the person or property of another without their consent."

    If you have a superior definition, state it.

  • Pi Guy||

    According to Wikipedia, coercion is

    the practice of forcing another party to behave in an involuntary manner (whether through action or inaction) by use of threats or intimidation or some other form of pressure or force.


    "You breathe my air, damn it, or I'll cause you physical duress!"

  • Pi Guy||

    See? Was that so hard?

  • hk||

    Wow people calm down lol.

    TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS.

    That means common resources are extremely polluted, the solution is simply to enforce private property rights and get the state out of the common resource regulating business.

  • hk||

    Pi dude is right though.

  • ||

    It's not fucking anarchy to tell someone they're a slaver for wanting to use the government to "encourage us to do anything.

  • Sevo||

    Nando|6.2.12 @ 8:47PM|#
    "Sometimes people need to be encouraged to behave in a more eco-concious manner."

    Assertion lacking cites.
    And I'm sure Nando is more than willing, in Nando's abysmal ignorance to choose what should be banned, right Nando.
    Oh, and Nando, you should check up-thread where your ecco-bullshit concerning the quantity of oil required was called.
    Now, do you have any facts? Or just mud-momma religion to spout?

  • The Derider||

    Environmental pollution is a classic case of tragedy of the commons and negative externalities. You can solve some of the problem by having the state assign property rights, but you can't assign property rights to the air and the ocean because they don't stay in one place.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 9:27PM|#
    "Environmental pollution is a classic case of tragedy of the commons and negative externalities"

    Assertion minus evidence, bozo.

  • The Derider||

    If you're too ignorant to recognize references to basic economic concepts, I'm not going to spend my time educating you.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality

  • Sevo||

    Oh my goodness! Econ as taught by Wiki! How could I ever have missed such an authoritative source?!
    Fail, bozo.

  • The Derider||

    Wikipedia is fine for supporting non-contentious points, like that the sky is blue, or that pollution is an externality.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 10:37PM|#
    "Wikipedia is fine for supporting non-contentious points, like that the sky is blue, or that pollution is an externality."

    And the state is wonderful!
    Try Coase, Ronald, if you'd like to learn something, bozo.

  • The Derider||

    Coase, Ronald supports the state creating property rights in order to solve the tragedy of the commons.

    This doesn't work for things like the atmosphere, because you can't assign property rights to the atmosphere. Pigou, Arthur proves that in those situations, taxes produce more efficient outcomes than unrestricted free markets.

    That's your last free econ lesson.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 10:53PM|#
    "Coase, Ronald supports the state creating property rights in order to solve the tragedy of the commons.

    This doesn't work for things like the atmosphere, because you can't assign property rights to the atmosphere."

    OK, you can't read. Got it.

  • The Derider||

    How can you assign property rights to the atmosphere? Little cans of air like in Spaceballs?

    You're a moron.

  • Tulpa the White||

    I know your luggage combination, Derider.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:04PM|#
    "How can you assign property rights to the atmosphere?"

    Dunno. How many strawmen can you beat up?

  • The Derider||

    Jesus, not your idiotic strawman shit again.

    You don't know how to assign property rights to the atmosphere because it's impossible.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:40PM|#
    "Jesus, not your idiotic strawman shit again."

    Look, asshole, if you don't like being called on bullshit, quit posting bullshit.

  • The Derider||

    Calling my argument "bullshit" is not the same thing as calling it a "strawman". The latter has a specific meaning that you're misusing.

    And you still can't figure out how to assign property rights to the atmosphere because it cannot be done.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:58PM|#
    "Calling my argument "bullshit" is not the same thing as calling it a "strawman". The latter has a specific meaning that you're misusing."

    Nope. You're use of a strawman makes your comments bullshit. Not hard to figure out.

  • Sevo||

    Oh, and:
    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 10:53PM|#
    "Coase, Ronald supports the state creating property rights..."

    "Creating", asshole?

  • The Derider||

    Yes, creating. Like fishing quotas.

    http://reason.com/blog/2012/05.....youll-have

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:59PM|#
    "Yes, creating. Like fishing quotas.
    http://reason.com/blog/2012/05.....youll-have"

    I'm sure an asshole can find "creating" in there somewhere, and an asshole can then presume it applies elsewhere.
    I'm also sure an asshole can presume to have a brain-cell, but it hasn't been shown.

  • The Derider||

    What the fuck are you talking about? Fishing quotas are a government creation. Without government to create, assign, and enforce them, the Ocean's a giant tragedy of the commons.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:11AM|#
    "What the fuck are you talking about? Fishing quotas are a government creation."

    I'll bet you think that "rights" are granted by a government.
    Fail. A proper government protects property rights; it doesn't "create" them.

  • The Derider||

    Your faith in Objectivism may cause you to think so, but the article I linked clearly proves you wrong.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:22AM|#
    "Your faith in Objectivism may cause you to think so, but the article I linked clearly proves you wrong."

    Yeah, I'm sure assholes are convinced of that.

  • The Derider||

    Ronald Bailey, Reason science correspondent and asshole!

    Why don't you say it to his face?

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:45AM|#
    "Ronald Bailey, Reason science correspondent and asshole!
    Why don't you say it to his face?"

    I'd be happy to asshole, if he made that claim.

  • hk||

    Why haven't Cows and Pigs experienced Tragedy of the Commons Derider?

    Tragedy of the COmmons occurs in the Public Sector, not the Private Sector.

    If someone polluts the shit out of the air in your home, you just take them to court. The GOVERNMENT however, prevents you from doing that.

    So shut it. :)

  • Agammamon||

    Yeah dipshit, that's what Pigou taxes are for.

  • The Derider||

    I totally agree. I'm pretty sure Sevo and most hardcore libertarians see all taxes as immoral coercion, however.

  • Silver Fox||

    You mean taking someone else's hard-earned money, that you had no right to, using threats of legal action for refusal to comply, is NOT coercion?

    Okay.

  • ||

    At the very least income taxes ARE immoral coercion because my only choice not to pay them is to not work. Obviously the government needs money to do things, and the constitution gives them the ability to collect, but taking something from someone is always immoral, no matter how you slice it.

    Of course seeing as how you can't define coercion in any sentient kind of manner, it doesn't surprise me that you don't see it this way.

  • hk||

    No charlatan, Pigo taxes exist only because Public property is much more polluted than Private.

    Public toilet vs Private toilet.

  • hk||

    The answer is to privatize the Rivers and Oceans, which has already been done btw. You don't need to do "quotas", you only need quotas if the government prevents privatization.

    You lose derider, Central planners do not know how to manage anything.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 10:05PM|#
    "I totally agree. I'm pretty sure Sevo and most hardcore libertarians see all taxes as immoral coercion, however.

    And it's a good bet that Derider and other ignoramuses see all taxes as TOO LOW unless they're 100%.
    Right, bozo?

  • Nando||

    100% is not a tax anymore, ignoramus.

  • The Derider||

    If you knew what Pigouvian taxes were, you'd understand why setting them at 100% would never be efficient.

    As you are totally ignorant of economics, and I am unwilling to educate you, this disagreement seems intractable.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 10:35PM|#
    "If you knew what Pigouvian taxes were, you'd understand why setting them at 100% would never be efficient."

    But 99% would be just great, right?

  • The Derider||

    You still fail to understand what a pigouvian tax is.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:39PM|#
    "You still fail to understand what a pigouvian tax is."

    No, you presume a pigouvian tax is justified for any religious cause you favor.

  • The Derider||

    No, I think they're justified in cases where property rights cannot be assigned to contain externalities.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:02AM|#
    "No, I think they're justified in cases where property rights cannot be assigned to contain externalities."

    IOWs, exactly what I posted.
    Please tell us how farts should be taxes, asshole.

  • The Derider||

    Human farts shouldn't be taxed on Planet Earth because the harm they do is negligible.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:09AM|#
    "Human farts shouldn't be taxed on Planet Earth because the harm they do is negligible."

    Define "negligible".
    Are termite farts to be taxed?
    Cow farts?
    Mud-momma religionists are right there with other fundies.

  • The Derider||

    I don't think termites fart.

    Cows have really bad farts that do actually contribute to the levels of methane in the atmosphere. 20% of atmospheric methane is from livestock farts.

    If methane in the atmosphere is a bad thing, then yes, we should consider regulating cow farts.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:25AM|#
    "I don't think termites fart."

    OMG.
    "There are several major sources of methane: rice paddies (methane-producing bacteria thrive in the underwater environment), swamps and wetlands (ditto), mining and oil drilling, landfills, termites.."
    http://www.straightdope.com/co.....atmosphere

  • Pi Guy||

    Wait - 20%? A fifth of the total methane is from cow farts???

    Dear Loki, now they're teaching tree-hugging instead of math in schools. I weep for our future.

  • Sevo||

    Nando|6.2.12 @ 10:24PM|#
    "100% is not a tax anymore, ignoramus."

    Not high enough for you and other slavers, bozo?

  • The Derider||

    He's saying that a 100% tax is synonymous with a ban.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 10:41PM|#
    "He's saying that a 100% tax is synonymous with a ban."

    Careful, there. You're getting close to reality.

  • Nando||

    How do you assign property rights to the atmosphere?

  • Tulpa the White||

    Really high walls.

  • The Derider||

    Fuck those birds.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.2.12 @ 11:38PM|#
    "Fuck those birds."

    Naah, fuck the assholes who claim farts are "externalities".
    Asshole.

  • The Derider||

    I pretty clearly state that on planet earth, they're not externalities.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:03AM|#
    "I pretty clearly state that on planet earth, they're not externalities."

    Sorry, asshole, the record is right there up-thread.
    You tried ducking and weaving with some hypothetical 'other planet' to avoid being called once more on your bullshit.

  • The Derider||

    You can't read for shit.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:12AM|#
    "You can't read for shit."

    Real shame to be called on bullshit, ain't it?

  • The Derider||

    If it happens, I'll let you know.

    Clearly you're not enjoying the experience.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:26AM|#
    "If it happens, I'll let you know."

    Sorry, asshole. Don't call us, we'll call you.

  • The Derider||

    How many people are in there? Who's talking right now?

  • hk||

    Derider you're not very sharp.

    If I chop and mince my garbage and then sprinkle it on your property, you have a tort against me.

    You don't need to privatize the entire atmosphere, either.

  • TheZeitgeist||

    There is no mechanism to accurately compute costs of externalities, the prices are pure political computations in nature - to serve fashionable political markets in power.

    Two wrongs never make a right, silly Derider.

  • The Derider||

    "Accurately" is a very subjective term. I don't think that a government planner is better than the market in pricing goods-- that's why I support the Government creating property rights where feasible-- but in cases where that is impossible, Pigouvian taxes increase economic efficiency. Can they be misused by a corrupt government? Yes, of course , but so can the assignment of property rights!

    Do you have any more 2nd grade syllogisms to enlighten me with?

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:07AM|#
    "Accurately" is a very subjective term."

    Yeah, 1+1=2 is very subjective, asshole.

  • Sevo||

    Oh, and being called on bullshit once more.

  • The Derider||

    Wow, you really don't like being proven wrong, do you?

  • The Derider||

    So for you, "accurately" means 100% accurate.

    So if I say I'm 5'10", when I'm really 5'9.8214", you might say I had described my height inaccurately. Whereas others would say that I had described it "accurately", because it was close enough to the true value.

    See? Subjective.

  • Pi Guy||

    So if I say I'm 5'10", when I'm really 5'9.8214..."

    Actually, what you're referencing there is precision. They are absolutely not the same thing.

    But do play again. No, wait - don't.

  • Tulpa the White||

    No, that's accuracy he's referring to. Rounding is precise (because it gives the same answer for similar inputs) but not accurate.

  • TheZeitgeist||

    "Accurately" is a very subjective term.

    Politics is far more subjective - such as who is swiping this Credit Commons Card when we pollute.

    To wit in the provincial case of plastic bags discussed here, the Tragedy of the Commons is the plastic bag on the street. I'd guess the Guilty Party with the Commons Card was not the bag maker or distributor but the clown who littered.

    Come to think of it, societies like Singapore and downtown Tokyo are impeccably clean despite ready temptations of insidious plastic bags everywhere; some quite colorful and large, some EVEN MARKETED AT KIDS! Dun-dun-dun!.

    Yet as I mentioned before, those cities are incredibly clean. Now, let us go to Kinshasa. There are very few plastic bags for there are very few things to buy needing placement in plastic bags. Indeed, you could say Kinshasa has embraced a far more organic, low-carbon footprint lifestyle than the Earth Killers of Tokyo and Singapore. Very low stress on the Commons that way in Kinshasa.

    Which one of those towns do you want to live in Derider? Hahaha.

  • Nando||

    I want to know Sevo's definition of:
    Externalities

    Coercion

    Property Rights

    Until then, I will know he's full of duck turd.

  • Sevo||

    Nando|6.3.12 @ 12:19AM|#
    "I want to know Sevo's definition of:
    Externalities

    Coercion

    Property Rights

    Until then, I will know he's full of duck turd."

    OK, one: "property rights": The right to own and use what you have earned.
    Other than that, ya know, pig turd, if I'd have used those terms to advance my argument, you might have a valid question.
    Unlike you, pig turd, and the asshole Derider, I haven't done so.
    So. pig turd, stuff it.

  • Nando||

    Tnen I also need you to define
    OWN

    and
    Earned

  • The Derider||

    No, you said that my definition of "Coercion" was wrong. So clearly you've used the term "coercion" to advance your argument. Because if you don't have one, how can you know mine is wrong?

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:39AM|#
    "No, you said that my definition of "Coercion" was wrong."

    No, asshole, I asked you do define it. You seem to be too stupid to read.

  • Nando||

    He did define it. You said his definition was wrong.
    Therefore, he asked you for your definition.

  • Pi Guy||

    Sevo/Nando: Coercion defined upthread

    You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

  • Sevo||

    Nando|6.3.12 @ 12:28AM|#
    "Tnen I also need you to define
    OWN
    and
    Earned"

    Either a simpleton or a sophist.
    "Earned": What I got in free exchange from another.
    "Own": What I've earned.
    Or an ignoramus, and most likely the latter.

  • Nando||

    Did your education include free exchange with your teacher?
    Maybe you want a refund.

  • The Derider||

    Own is a verb, dude.

  • Sevo||

    The Derider|6.3.12 @ 12:41AM|#
    "Own is a verb, dude."

    Oh, how............
    Sophomoric

  • Randian||

    Own (ohn), n. Belonging to oneself or itself. Steve Smith has a love den of his own.

  • Sevo||

    Nando|6.3.12 @ 12:34AM|#
    "Did your education include free exchange with your teacher?
    Maybe you want a refund."

    Oh, ha. And ha.
    Was there something you intended to communicate?

  • Nando||

    Reading comprehension is not your forte. I get it.
    "D I D Y O U R E D U C A T I O N I N C L U D E F R E E E X C H A N G E W I T H Y O U R T E A C H E R ?"

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Nando,

    It takes 430,000 gallons of oil to produce 100 million plastic bags, and Americans go through 380 billion of them a year.

    That's quite a bit of oil wasted on something that most of us use for just minutes before throwing away.


    The value of the oil for those Americans is much less than the bags they get to use. As long as people want the bags, the oil is not wasted, your moral judgment on bags notwithstanding.

    Externalities

    Coercion

    Property Rights


    An externality is a cost that statist economists believe people do not take into account in their decisions.

    "Coercion" means using force to unduly obtain acquiescence from a person. The concept of "property rights" means the capability of a person to possess things without resorting to taking them from others by force.

  • hk||

    Yeah I concur with this.

  • Tulpa the White||

    Uh, your definition for "coercion" depends on some preexisting definition of "force". So what's your definition of "force" (and it better not include the word "coercion").

    Your definition of property rights is also circular, since the concept of "taking from" someone else presupposes that it is already known how to tell if something is someone's "property". In the case where property = possession, it's not hard to define, but more subtle types of property are going to have to be defined more carefully.

  • ||

    Property rights are my right to the things I own through my buying them, creating them, or their being physically attached to my body (limbs, organs, etc.)

    Coercion was pretty handily defined up thread.

  • John||

    http://www.laweekly.com/2012-0.....strict-50/

    Great LA Weekly article on West LA and Malibu, America's richest and dumbest political district.

  • TheZeitgeist||

    Thanks man.

  • Robert||

    I haven't looked at the ordinance, but I bet it doesn't make the selling of plastic grocery bags illegal, only the giving of them away or possibly the service of filling them for you -- which stores have been trying to cut back on anyway. So it seems all this will lead to is DIY bagging with bags that I'm sure the store will be happy to sell you.

  • air max chaussures||

    "This is just feel-good legislation," says Beeber. "It's not going to solve any problems, but it makes people think that we've done something."

    Still, council member Tom LaBonge feels that he served his district well by outlawing plastic bags at grocery stores.

    "That one percent [of plastic bags in the waste stream] pollutes the river," says LaBonge. "You want to go out to the river with me? I'll show it to you."

  • maillot de bain magasin||

    This is just feel-good legislation," says Beeber. "It's not going to solve any problems, but it makes people think that we've done something."

    Still, council member Tom LaBonge feels that he served his district well by outlawing plastic bags at grocery stores

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement