On Tuesday night, several community members came before the city council during public comment to push for a plastic bag ban. This is an issue that will apparently be taken up by the Natural Resources Commission.
It is an idea gaining some traction. The California State Senate back in September voted against the plastic ban bag with the help of half a dozen Democrats, including Davis’ Senator Lois Wolk. The measure would have banned plastic carryout bags in supermarkets, drug and convenience stores. The measure failed 21 votes against, to 14 votes in favor.
The issue also was one of the questions asked to council appointment hopefuls. Of interest was that Dan Wolk, one of the possible appointees, said that this is an issue he differs with his mother on, he likes the idea in principle, he is concerned about the environmental impact, but does caution that we ought to study the legal and economic consequences.
On Tuesday night several members of the community pushed the issue. Among them was Ann Saageau, a Professor of Design at UC Davis.
She told the council, that, “For the past 3 years I have carried out a global collaboration with over 200 people in 62 countries to raise awareness of the environmental pollution and animal deaths caused by the estimated 500 billion to 1 trillion single-use plastic shopping bags used and discarded annually around the world.”
The project she said, called Bags Across the Globe, or BAG, also offers its participants attractive and sustainable alternatives to plastic shopping bags.”
She also talked about a show that “documents animals’ deaths from plastic shopping bags, including a 30 kilo calcified rock of plastic bags and plastic rope eaten by a camel that starved to death as a result. It also has the photo of a sea turtle that died after eating bags.”
“The second most common debris in our oceans is now plastic bags,” the professor added.
Michael Siminitus, who describe himself as a consultant with a zero waste event support company that he started in Davis, argues that plastic bags are something that we cannot recycle and are consistently puled out of the compost and recycling stream.
He said, “They are a major contaminent in recycling systems, the number one contaminant in compost streams, and a problem for recycling reprocessors everywhere, as they get caught in conveyors and represent a material that has little marketability or useful end-life so it ends up as pollution in a landfill or elsewhere.”
He added, “Less than 5% of bags get recycled. Most get exported.”
There are nine other cities in California that have banned the plastic bag including San Francisco, Palo Alto, Fairfax, Malibu, Santa Monica, and others. This fall, roughly 1.1 million people in unincorporated Los Angeles County were also covered under a county-imposed ban.
County supervisors approved the measure 3-1 “in hopes of preventing billions of bags from polluting neighborhoods and waterways.”
It bans stores from giving customers single-use plastic bags and would require them to charge 10 cents for each paper bag. Such a ban in Davis would work similarly.
Californians spend $25 million a year to collect and dispose of many of the 19 billion single-use plastic bags used by residents of the state every year. Local governments also spend money cleaning up the bags.
AB 1998 would have banned single-use carryout bags, beginning in 2012 for supermarkets and pharmacies, and in 2013 for liquor stores and convenience stores. The measure would have allowed stores to give away reusable bags for free until the ban took effect, after which shoppers who forget their own bags would have been able to buy reusable bags at the stores. The stores also would have been allowed to sell recycled paper bags of 40 percent post-consumer material at cost, not for any profit.
Assemblywoman Julia Brownley, from Santa Monica, the bill’s sponsor said, “Communities across the state were waiting for the state to adopt a uniform, statewide ban on single-use bags before they adopt their own ordinances. The state failed them. But, this is an environmental movement that won’t be stopped, even by big-money interests like the American Chemistry Council. It’s not a matter of if, but a matter of when consumers bring their own bags and become good stewards of the environment.”
Senator Lois Wolk told the Bee that she would not support this bill. “I prefer that we begin with incentives, and if that doesn’t work, move to mandates,” she said. “This is a windfall for the retailers.”
Senator Wolk added that recycled grocery bags cost 6 to 10 cents each, a cost now absorbed by grocers that they would pass on to consumers if the legislation passed.
“California is poised to lead a national movement against plastic bag pollution that is injuring and killing marine life and imposing a costly blight on our cities and open spaces,” Assemblywoman Brownley said. “This is a strong bill that safeguards the environment, protects California jobs and gives consumers a no-cost option to carry their purchases. It has the support of a historic coalition: consumers, environmentalists, unions, grocers, retailers, cities and counties.”
The issue is clearly an emerging issues and thus the positions shown by the council appointees reflect a cautious approach. Dan Wolk, as we mentioned, favored the ban with caution, but other applicants tried to forge out some relatively safe position.
Linda Parfitt recognized the problem, acknowledged that it could be reduced but probably not go to zero waste, and she thinks any ban should be carefully worded and would encourage reusable bags.
Walt Bunter suggested a phase-in, Sherelene Harrison talked about a cultural shift, Kerry Loux says she is supportive of it as a goal but is concerned that it might not be attainable, and argued that people’s attitudes need to change.
Robert Smith said he reuses his own plastic bags. Paul Boylan argued it was more important to have an admirable goal than to worry about feasibility.
Kari Fry was supportive of the argument but was cautious about the process. Steve Williams wants to work with retailers and ensure that the community is on board. And Vincent Wyatt has concerns about the environment but wants to ensure the public supports such a ban.
Bottom line here, all of the candidates were trying hard to nuance a position. They all seemed to think the idea had merit, they were concerned about the potential blowback from the community, obviously, and have no idea if the community is ready to back this effort. It is a good approach, and to use an example of the wood-burning ban, there is a clear environmental problem that the public is not yet behind. What this ought to tell the public is that this is a cautious group of candidates.
In response to discussion from the council applicants, a number of Vanguard readers commented on the issue. There is a suggestion first that the city needs to get its fiscal health in order first. I am strongly in favor getting the city’s fiscal health in order. However, I fail to see how discussing and dealing with a plastic bag ban will preclude the city from addressing other issues.
It would be interesting to see how much the City of Davis has to spend cleaning up plastic bags.
Moreover, it is a climate issue and city has priority the climate action plan.
There is an argument against having a climate action plan and carbon reduction plan locally which is that local communities have a tiny impact on the global system. On the other hand, I am a believer that you have to act locally to act globally. Change filters up not down.
It just depends on what you think the local role should be.
Personally, I would like to see every community adopt these kinds of regulations, and as such, Davis needs to lead the way or at least follow the other nine communities that have already acted.
Given the amount of waste generated and the amount of oil consumed to produce bags, this seems to be a very urgent issue in the general sense.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Jefferson wrote that every society has two parties, though they have different names at different times.
One party wants to have the smartest leaders run the affairs of its citizens in such a way as to achieve the optimal outcome.
The other party wants to leave people to make their own choices.
In all known cases, said Jefferson, members of the second party make better neighbors.
Thanks for reporting this. Davis’ good citizen ethics is one of the most attractive attributes of our city; I hope the city stays true to its ideals and passes this ban.
I see grocery clerks putting ONE single item in a plastic bag, often leaving another plastic bag half filled with light weight items. It’s a mindless act.
I see plastic bags everywhere they shouldn’t be, contributing to animal deaths and adding to one product we’re still good at making: polllution.
We pollute in so many ways that are difficult to correct. Our use of plastic bags is not one of those; it’s just careless to pollute this way and it’s so easy to correct.
Keep a cloth bag on your bike or in your car. Put the emptied cloth bag at your front door so it goes with you on the next trip. If you forget to take the bag into the store with you, just go back and get it. Simple.
If all else fails, an occasional 6 to 10 cents for your next garbage bag is a small price for most people.
Finally, how about a collection site for plastic bag donations at every grocery store?
JR,
You’re quoting wise men, but they lived in a pristine environment. Those few settlers had an entire virgin continent to trash. Some 300 years later, we’ve done it; not only have we trashed our continent but much of the world as well. Trashing one’s home is about as stupid as it gets.
The US is unique in individual rights, but these values were nurtured at at time we had infinite land and resources. One of the slogans from those frontier days was that it was time to move when you could see the smoke from your neighbor’s chimney. This is no longer the case. We may not even have fire places anymore because there are so many of us sending off so much pullution.
We now have no more land to pollute and our neighbors are considerably closer than in the 16th century. Older countries than ours recognize their finite borders and large populations; they find ways to balance individual rights with civil concerns. We should do so also.
To JR: Excellent comment. I would add the following:
1) Go back to paper bags? But what about all those trees that will have to be killed, causing deforestation and less oxygen in the air? What about the 40% more energy it takes to produce paper bags and the greater amount of energy it takes to recycle paper bags? LOL
2) Some of the recycled bags have been found to have lead in them, and are unsafe for children to use.
3) If the populace were so concerned about plastic bag pollution, they would already be employing reusable bags – which are readily available. Sounds like a minority is trying to push its myopic eco-agenda on the majority.
4) What about plastic bottles, plastic packing pellets, plastic soda rings, plastic syringes, disposable diapers, used condoms (have you ever been to the Davis Wastewater Treatment Plant? – full of used condoms that look like bloated white balloons), plastic fish nets, plastic garbage bags? (Shall we ban plastic?) How about pushing for sorting of garbage at destination to ensure recycling? Now there’s an idea!
5) Much of the garbage in the oceans comes from foreign polluters, fisherman, and ships (garbage thrown off merchant ships cd represent 1/3 of ocean’s garbage according to Nat’l Academy of Sciences) that ignore the law.
6) How about encouraging the development of truly biodegradable plastic?
7) Here’s an idea – why don’t we try incentives first as Lois Wolk suggested, before we use the sledgehammer of “thou shall not”?
Ireland instituted a tax on plastic bags which resulted in a 90% reduction in usage.
Are we talking about the plastic produce bags as well as the carry-out plastic bags for all the goods purchased?. I read somewhere that Cuba severely restricts the manufacture and use of grocery plastic bags as part of its very strong official policies of environmental eco-sustainability. The scarce bags are often recycled to be sold on street-corners, generating some small “underground” income for those who need it … an additional benefit.
If it is irrelevant, irreverent, or inconsequential, Davis is FOR it! We need to stop fiddling with the recipe for “frosting issues” (paper or plastic in this case), while a major “cake issue” (such as the pending State of California bankruptcy) remains unbaked! “Have we been successfully diverted?..” is a major line from a recent production of Jane Austin’s Pride and Prejudice, but it certainly appears to apply here.
From article on Ireland’s tax on plastic bags at:http://www.reusablebags.com/learn-more/top-facts/about-irelands-plastax – “Many retailers are …now benefiting from selling reusable bags. Administration …and retailers keep …records on purchasing and receipts, while the government monitors retailer compliance and collects revenue.”
So now Ireland has to have whole monitoring system in place for this new tax – and how much does that cost the people, people whose gov’t is virtually bankrupt!
David:
I think you left out an important issue–the effects of plastic bags on marine life. While only a small amount of plastic reaches the oceans it has serious consequences on marine life which is already stressed (overfishing, acidification due to global warming, etc.).
Landfill is not as serious. Yes we’d like biodegradable material but the stress on marine life is greater than most people realize, even some environmentalists.
I do think this matters. I generally favor individual rights but I do not think anyone has the right to destroy the planet. I am not an eco-extermist as many people know, but I do favor banning plastic bags. Would Davis’ banning plastic bags make a difference? Only if it persuades other cities to follow suit. Otherwise its tokenism. But unlike banning fireplace burning, banning plastic bags has a chance to gain wide acceptance.
Perhaps the public should be surveyed. Here’s how they feel in the UK:
[url]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/consumer_affairs/article3662082.ece[/url]
“used condoms (have you ever been to the Davis Wastewater Treatment Plant?”
After Davis tackles plastic bags they should move on to disposed used condoms. With our big college population used condoms are a huge problem in Davis. I just can’t think of the possibility of a small fish ending up in one of those balloons. I hereby want to have our council take up this problem soon. How about reusable condoms? Maybe outlaw all condoms and make college abstinence classes mandatory in order to graduate? A Davis fine if caught having sex with a condom? A Davis condom tax?
I give Davisites credit for being intelligent enough to figure out how to get their groceries home in a reusable cloth bag. Just like we got used to separating out our recyclables back in the seventies, when the nay sayers said “You can’t teach people to recycle”,we can also learn to take reusable bags to the market.Some of us have been doing this for years. I get back a nickel for each paper bag that I don’t use at the Davis Food Co-op. When my family show up at the register, at Grocery Outlet in Woodland, they love us because we bag our own stuff as fast as it comes over the scanner. No big deal.
With the high level of education and environmental awareness in Davis, we are in a unique position to be leaders. Lois Wolk lost a lot of credibility when she took money from the Chemical Council, and then came out against reusable bags. Reusable bags are here. We can lead, or we can follow.It’s time for Davis to stop resting on our laurels and lead the charge toward sustainability.
Now we have prospective Council members pussyfooting around the issue. How about our leaders start leading. Replacing plastic single use bags with cloth is a no-brainer! The only question is why have we allowed corporate profits to get in the way of sustainability for so long.
Wow, this blog replaced “uss” in one of my words, with***. Somebody must think pussy is a dirty word.
I think there are reasons for grocery clerks to put only one item in a plastic bag. If you’re buying meat, which can leak, it goes it its own bag. If you’re buying some type of cleanser, it also goes in its own bag instead of in with food items. A loaf of bread will often go in a single bag to prevent it from getting squashed by cans or boxes. If Davis is going to participate in a movement, how about a movement to force the manufacturers of plastic bags to make them biodegradeable? I reuse my plastic bags and so do most other people I know who get them. Try cleaning up dog poop in the yard or park with a reusable bag and let me know how that works for you. If making the bags biodegradeable makes the bags more costly to produce, I for one would have no problem paying five or ten cents for a bag.
I get back a nickel for each paper bag that I don’t use at the Davis Food Co-op.
Excellent incentive. Exactly the sort of thing Lois is suggesting. And as JayTee suggests, there are a few situations where a plastic bag would be appropriate.
http://chrisjordan.com/gallery/midway/#CF000313 18×24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67j7JlEZzpQ
http://www.ted.com/talks/capt_charles_moore_on_the_seas_of_plastic.html
ya, plastic is probably not that big of a deal, we probably shouldn’t be worried about it
I don’t see any plastic bags inside that bird.
There are corn based alternatives to plastic, that pretty much seem like plastic. so no “going back to paper” as it were.
The lois wolk position was that the legislation was flawed, which I believe in this particular case.
Lastly, Davis is not so special nor is this some “crazy only in Davis idea.” Richmond, CA is also looking into this, not exactly an crazy leftist town.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/incontracosta/detail?entry_id=83372
Incentives could work, if they were strong enough. Outright bans tend to create black market transactions and burden enforcement entities anyway. I think this is one case where incentives might work better than punishment.
The “ted.com” site was fascinating, but depressing. Ideally the industry could manufacture plastic that dissolves into starch when exposed to brine, kind of like the packing peanuts that dissolve in water. Minus that, I’d go for a quarter a bag tax on plastic bags directed at cleanup efforts. I doubt that, given our geographical location, that a lot of Davis plastic ends up in the ocean, but perhaps we could inspire a few beach towns to think about it. Random thoughts.
“Outright bans tend to create black market transactions and burden enforcement entities anyway.”
Ooooh, a black market for plastic bags, money to be made.
Have you people even thought that most of the products you buy in the market are already encased in some kind of plastic? How about just picking some fruit, vegetables, etc. You’ll need a bag for each X 10 to 25 cents per bag. Buy two sandwiches at Nugget, another 50 cents for the two bags. Newspaper delivered on a rainy day, another .25. That loaf of bread comes in a plastic bag. Bring that shopping bag from home with you and load it with all those plastic wrapped products. Look, I get it, every little bit helps. But plastic bags are just a drop in the ocean compared to all the plastic you come across each day. You can’t hardly buy anything anymore without plastic being involved. The way to go is biodegradable plastics for all products. If banning plastic bags in Davis makes you sleep better at night, then great. But it’s just a pimple on an elephant’s arse.
Yes, we should absolutely ban carry-out, single-use plastic bags. If you still have reservations, go see the current exhibit at the Design Museum in Walker Hall. Powerful and disturbing.
rusty49: Maybe outlaw all condoms and make college abstinence classes mandatory in order to graduate?
I think that must be pretty darn close to the Republican position, based on what I read. For instance:
Mrs. Bush, Abstinence and Texas
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/opinion/17gailcollins.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss[/url]
I just had no idea that it was really all about preserving the environment. Thanks for clarifying.
Your welcome wdf1 and thanks for noticing, it’s just conservative’s little contribution to the health of humanity.
[i]”Have you people even thought that most of the products you buy in the market are already encased in some kind of plastic?”[/i]
If the goal is to stop plastics from going in our landfill–a miniscule percentage of our waste in Davis–why would anyone only target plastic bags used to carry out groceries and other goods?
It is somehow less problematic if I buy a bag of carrots, which come in a plastic bag, and I place that plastic bag inside a bag made of canvas?
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_U8RG0N1zvEU/SpAT8_tcIVI/AAAAAAAAARU/oYkQUuFcHh4/s400/Canning+Tomatoes+034.jpg[/img]
If you are going to ban plastics–or place a tax on their usage–then do so to all plastics in the supermarket or other retail locations. Every time I buy a whole chicken, it is wrapped in plastic. Why is no one agitated over that use of this god-forsaken product? If I cannot use a plastic bag to hold my groceries, why should I be allowed to purchase Glad Freezer bags? Should I not be condemned for using Reynolds Oven Bags which are convenient for cooking a turkey?
[img]http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51uOa6RSQwL._SL500_AA300_PIbundle-24,TopRight,0,0_AA300_SH20_.jpg[/img]
Plastic bags by weight are a small percentage of plastics. Getting rid of them does not solve the supposed problem of plastics in landfills. (Never mind that our Davis use of plastics don’t wind up in the oceans.)
Focusing on one use of plastics and ignoring, for example, the plastic containers that Mr. Shor uses to sell 6-packs of tomato plants, seems like folly.
[img]http://fromdirttodinner.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/tomatoes_second_potting.jpg?w=101&h=96[/img]
It’s like banning cigarette smoking but allowing cigar and water-pipe tobacco smoking. They too are insalubrious.
[img]http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/Funny-BabySmokingWeed.jpg[/img]
Surely we can come up with another dozen distracting issues that will preoccpy our council during 2011. Concentrate on getting our budget in order Or chase down every environmental leadership opportunity that someone champions. Our recent council record suggests we can’t have both.
Yes yes and HELL YES!!! WE SHOULD BAN PLASTIC BAGS IN DAVIS AND HOW DARE DAN WOLK CALL FOR A “STUDY”…BEWARE..THIS TYPE OF TALK MEANS HE’S GOING TO THROW A MONKEY WRENCH IN EVERY ASPECT OF OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT WICH IS KIND OF SCREWED ALREADY.
ps David, I was against the abuses of the public union workers, but after Wisconsin, I’m totally on their side.
I can’t believe (Wait, actually I can) that Gov. Walker excluded the cops and firefighters from his attacks. What a hypocrit. I find it interesting that he just a few weeks ago gave a tax cut to the wealthy in that state and is now trying balance HIS deficit on the backs of the hard workers of the state of Wisconsin. WHAT A CREEP!!! Go unions!!!They Rock and have won back my support.
Rusty, it’s a step in the right direction. If we can take the courage to ban the use of plastic bags, then next we’ll start buying bulk. We can eliminate most of the waste that’s being forced upon us. WE CAN!! Don’t be such a cynic. So what if it’s not enough in your eyes, it’s still a step in the right direction. We don’t have biodegradable bags so in the mean time, let’s make a diff!!! I never use plastic bags any more. I always bring my own bags to the store. I bring my old pickle jars to stock up on bulk items and bring my own coffee cup to peets! You can do it too. it’s really not that hard!
“is now trying balance HIS deficit”
It’s not “HIS” deficit. He just took office and inherited a 3.2 billion dollar deficit. It’s refreshing that he’s actually trying to do something about it. Go Gov. Walker, most of America backs you.
We’re getting closer and closer to then end of this great experiment. As soon as people learned they could vote people in who would give them free (other people’s) money, the US was doomed. It devolved into two warring factions who simply oscilated between transfering money from one to the other based on whose turn it was, rather than what was right.
rusty49: It devolved into two warring factions who simply oscilated between transfering money from one to the other based on whose turn it was, rather than what was right.
You have a poor record on this blog of directly answering criticisms of your position, but I’ll take my chances here to ask you this: Indigorocks is right. Gov. Walker wants to strip most collective bargaining rights away from all public employee unions except for firefighters, local police, and state patrol:
[quote](The) plan would remove collective bargaining rights for prison guards, but it would exempt local police and firefighters and the state patrol.
[url]http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20110211/GPG0101/110211052/Public-workers-in-Wisconsin-reeling-from-anti-union-bill[/url]
[/quote]
If you have followed local issues here in Davis, you wouldn’t think that firefighters should be exempt from such legislation, if there is a genuine belief that collective bargaining organizations are putting government jurisdictions in a bad budget situation these days.
But given those exemptions, this looks more like political revenge rather than a principled position. Locally, firefighters earn far greater compensation than do teachers and custodians in the local schools. Why is that exemption appropriate in Wisconsin?
“most of America backs you.”
Actually, it looks as though Wisconsin is pretty divided.
[url]http://weaskamerica.com/2011/02/18/weirdness-in-wisconsin/[/url]
Hard to say what “most of America” thinks. Bringing this issue home: much as I’d like to see the public employee contracts renegotiated in Davis, I still think that negotiation is a better approach than trying to destroy the unions. I wonder if there is much internal discussion going on in the public employee unions. I know that when the issue came before the teachers (choosing between layoffs and pay reductions) there was not unanimity.
Actually it was His deficit. He inherited a balanced budget, then turned around and gave a tax cut to the wealthy in his state and is trying to balance his deficit on the backs of the public unions.
Go UNIONS, most of America backs you!
Rasmussen ([url]http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/jobs_employment/january_2011/support_for_public_employee_unions_declines[/url]): [quote]A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 45% of Americans now at least somewhat favor unions for public employees, while the identical number (45%) are opposed to them. These findings include 21% who Strongly Favor such unions versus 30% who are Strongly Opposed to them.
In May of last year, 53% of Adults favored unions for public employees, while 37% opposed them. [/quote] Pew ([url]http://people-press.org/report/705/[/url]): [quote]The favorability ratings for labor unions remain at nearly their lowest level in a quarter century with 45% expressing a positive view.[/quote]
Clarus Research Report
Do you think government employees should be represented by labor unions that bargain for higher pay, benefits and pensions, or do you think government employees should not be represented by labor unions?
Should 29%
Should not 64%
I have a better idea… considering the environmental problems, why not make a law that requires families to shop together and consume everything they purchase before they leave the store. That way they are just using their stomach and intestines instead of dangerous bags.
One other point… has anyone consider the homeless? How might the lack of waterproof bags impact their quality of life? How will a shopping cart of worldly possessions stored in paper bags survive a rain storm.
What about doggie duty… should we acquire reusable poo bags too?
I don’t think we are thinking hard enough about this problem.
[quote]Could a large number of Americans rate public employee unions favorably while simultaneously believing they should not exist?
One explanation for the conflict may be the way the Clarus poll characterizes public unions as bargaining “for higher pay benefits and pensions” (emphasis added). While that phrase accurately describes the historic mission of unions generally, public employee unions — including those in Wisconsin — have more recently negotiated to limit reductions in pay, benefits and pensions. Some respondents may have reacted more to the notion of pay and benefit increases than the notion of union representation generally.
Clarus Research President Ron Faucheux concedes that the language about higher pay and benefits “could have influence”
From Wisconsin Protests: Polls Find Mixed Results On Public Employee Unions
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/18/labor-union-polls-wisconsin-protests_n_825363.html[/url]
[/quote]
Same article discusses some detail about the Pew Research poll that Rifkin excerpts:
[quote]The Pew Research survey probed more specifically for feelings about both government and private sector unions. They found a net positive rating (48 percent favorable, 40 percent unfavorable) for “unions that represent workers for state and local governments.” The ratings of unions that represent “people who work for private companies” was very similar (48 percent favorable, 37 percent unfavorable).[/quote]
To Jeff Boone.
Youre points are ridiculous and clearly you’re not interested in being part of the solution..just giving out ridiculous scenarios to justify your lack of desire to make a positive contribution..just throwing a monkey wrench in the workings of it..
for people like you, it will never ever be good enough..making people aspire to some unnatainable ideal of environmental perfection in your mind is only a pathetic attempt to force people to abandon any attempts to cut down on our WASTE.
why bother, it’s never good enough..so don’t bother right? please..your arguments are negative..you obviously don’t care about making the right choices, you just care about making people feel guilty about trying to make a difference so YOU don’t have to make an effort.
IT’S PPL LIKE YOU THAT ARE KEEPING DAVIS AND THE REST OF THE WORLD IN THE DARK AGES. JUST A BUNCH OF LAZY WASTEFUL HATEFUL CYNICS…YOU’RE A WASTE.
Re. the Wisconsin teacher’s unions.
I’m all for making all public unions accountable to the tax paying public that they serve..however taking away their power in order to unilateraly lower wages to pay for tax cuts for the rich was an underhanded attempt to redistribute wealth from the middle class to the rich.
makes me sick how these republicans are..
gov. walker should be recalled..in addition to that, he excluded the firefighters and cops from his attacks. by giving tax cuts to the wealthy just three weeks earlier, he made a fateful mistake and has given a gift to the public unions in the form of renewed public support for public unions.
Let’s hear it for Republican Gov. Scott Walker, a true American hero who’s standing up for what’s right, not like those 14 Wisconsin Democrat senators who fled in the night and are hiding out like cowards.
rusty, you’re just being a bitter old man. You’re on a government pension or social security..look if you hate big government so much, then don’t take it’s money.
gov. walker’s an idiot..he made a big mistake and gave a great gift to the unions.. you’re right.. he’s an inadvertane true American hero..
Let’s all hear it for governor walker, for restoring the American public’s trust in the rights of the working class.
rusty49: Let’s hear it for Republican Gov. Scott Walker, a true American hero who’s standing up for what’s right
and exempting firefighters and cops from collective bargaining? Why?
Indigrocks, you have no idea, I’m not on the gov’t dole. In fact I’m a former union worker that wasn’t brainwashed. I saw many fellow workers who were lazy and useless keep their jobs only because the union had a stranglehold on the Company and they couldn’t fire them like they should’ve been. Guess what, my company eventually went bankrupt, the unions priced them out of existence. So now the answer is for hard working Americans to pay higher taxes so these public union employees can have higher wages and pay less into their medical and retirement than their counterparts in the private sector? I hope not, are you willing to pay higher taxes for that indigorocks?
rusty49: Let’s hear it for Republican Gov. Scott Walker, a true American hero who’s standing up for what’s right
Should have read:
and exempting firefighters and cops from collective bargaining limits? Why?
wdf1, one step at a time. It’s kind of equal to Obamacare giving special waivers to unions from having to follow the health law.
Here’s the list of known unions* getting ObamaCare waivers:
Service Employees Benefit Fund
UFCW Allied Trade Health & Welfare Trust
IBEW No.915
Asbestos Workers Local 53 Welfare Fund
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 123 Welfare Fund
UFCW Local 227
UFCW Maximus Local 455
Local 25 SEIU
UFCW Local 1262
Local 802 Musicians Health Fund
Greater Metropolitan Hotel
Local 17 Hospitality Benefit Fund
I.U.P.A.T.
Transport Workers
UFT Welfare Fund
UABT
And to think, the unions fought so hard for the passage of the health law just to seek reprieve from it.
I see your point Rusty and agree with you on many points. What we need to do is reform the system in the unions that allow such abuses. I am a victim of abuses within the teachers union and their Tenure. Once you have tenure, you can pretty much do whatever you want to the kids and that just not fair. Cops, firefighters, and teachers can work for 20 years and retire with full pay. It’s totally not fair, but now that this has come to a head, I feel that we can address these injustices in the system, stop the abuses, while protecting the union and worker’s rights.
But completely dismantling the Unions is WRONG! We need to reform the unions, not dismantle them.
And Oh yes, you ignored wdf1’s point about him exempting firefighters and cops from his attacks.
What’s your take on that? Walker obviously excluded them because he doesn’t really care about saving the tax payers money. It was a political move that turned on him. Oh well, live and learn
Rusty, you’re retired, you already have your health care and pension, so obviously you couldn’t give a damn about everyone else. I think it’s totally hypocritical to be receiving a pension that your union members fought for.
if you hate Union pensions so much, DON”T TAKE THEIR MONEY.
as far as the “obamacare” issue is concerned, well i’m sorry but what’s so wrong with giving health care..what’s so wrong with stopping insurance companies from discriminating against ppl that are sick???
Like I said, you’re a hypocrit and already have yours, so fuck everyone else right?
Economic Policy Institute: Wisconsin public servants already face a compensation penalty
[url]http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/wisconsin_public_servants_already_face_a_compensation_penalty/[/url]
Summary: In Wisconsin, public employees earn less than their private sector counterparts.
To indigorocks:
“Youre points are ridiculous”
Certainly, so, I think, is you fear of plastic bags.
“clearly you’re not interested in being part of the solution”
There you are wrong. I am all about solutions that apply balance and common sense. By the way, were you also against disposable diapers and incandescent lights?
rusty49:”Let’s hear it for Republican Gov. Scott Walker, a true American hero who’s standing up for what’s right, not like those 14 Wisconsin Democrat senators who fled in the night and are hiding out like cowards.”
Right on Rusty. I agree 100%. We hear progressives opine for leaders that stand up with conviction to solve real problems. At a time when we should all support and celebrate politicians that try to do the right thing… with their attacks on Governor Walker, the left proves again that their goals are wholly political.
Rusty 49,
My “fear” of plastic bags is not a fear, it’s a real threat to the health and safety of the planet, animals that are killed by plastic bags, and of course human beings.
As far as solutions that are common sense, banning plastic bags is a good solution. There will always be a minority of ppl that bring their own bags to the store, but most won’t so laws need to take precedence over consumer choices. In S. Africa, other countries, towns, counties and cities they have managed to ban the use of plastic bags in stores with much effect and little problems. It’s made a huge difference in the amount of waste that’s produced. If we don’t take action NOW to safeguard the environment then we’re in real trouble.
Look at the oceans and plastic islands, marine mammals, birds, and fish being killed by plastics.
Banning plastic bags is a first step in attempting to fix the problems we face.
and yes I am against incandenscant lights. LED lights are the best alternative. And yes, disposable diapers are a huge burden on our planet.
One step at a time we are taking steps to repair the damage we’ve done
hopefully old farts like you will die off with your old world ignorant ideologies that serve your bloated egos at the expense of everyone else.
Jeff Boone,
if the governor was so interested in fixing the problem, then why did he exclude firefighters and cops from the law?
Hey equal opportunity. it’s not like their pension isn’t a burden on the state.
if walker was so interested in fixing the problem he wouldn’t have given the rich corporations a tax cut just three weeks earlier.
now THAT would be a truly courageous move to stand up to the elites that are destroying our country and freedoms. and if you’re going to try and convince me that they needed a tax cut in order to employ more ppl, well that’s a big fat lie. unemployment went down under the last govenor, even though he raised taxes for the wealthy.
AND BY THE WAY, IF TAX CUTS WERE SO EFFECTIVE AT GENERATING REVENUES AND JOBS FOR AMERICA, THEN WHY DO WE STILL HAVE SUCH A HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT RATE?
THEY’RE JUST HOLDING US HOSTAGE, USING THAT SAME OLD ARGUMENT THAT IF THEY DON’T GET A TAX CUT, WE’RE GOING TO SUFFER.
WELL GUESS WHAT, WE’RE STILL SUFFERING,
TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS DOESN’T WORK, IT HASN’T WORKED, IT ISN’T WORKING, AND IT WILL NEVER WORK.
IT WORKS FOR THE WEALTHY TO AMASS MORE WEALTH AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYONE ELSE.
AND IT’S TIME TO STOP. THE WISCONSIN UNIONS ARE STANDING WITH THE REST OF AMERICA AND SAYING THAT THE BUCK STOPS HERE.
NO MORE FLEECING OF AMERICA, JUST SO THAT THE WEALTHY CAN BUY MORE JETS AND MANSIONS.
I SAY FUCK THEM…AND BY THE WAY RUSTY, YOU’RE A BIG FAT BLOATED HYPOCRIT.
RETURN YOUR PENSION IF YOU HATE THE UNION SO MUCH. RETURN THE MONEY.
THEY ARE THE ONES THAT WORKED HARD SO YOU COULD LIVE A GREAT LIFE AND HAVE THE LUXURY OF BLASTING THE VERY SAME ORGANISATION THAT FEEDS YOU.
IF THERE’S ANY REFORM OF THE UNIONS, IT SHOULD BE TO DROP IDIOTS LIKE YOU OFF THE DOLE. WERE YOU ONE OF THOSE TEA BAGGERS THAT SUCK THE SYSTEM DRY, WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT IT?
TALK ABOUT BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU
@ indigorocks: please don’t call people names. Thanks.
TO JEFF BOONE AND RUSTY:
ANSWER THE QUESTION!
ADDRESS THE FACT THAT WALKER EXCLUDED FIREFIGHTERS, STATE TROOPERS, AND POLICE FROM REFORM.
DO THEY NOT COST ALOT FOR THE TAX PAYERS?
I THINK WALKER’S GOT IT IN FOR THE TEACHERS. HE’S GOT A VENDETTA AGAINST THEM. PROBABLY DIDN’T LIKE BEING TOLD WHAT TO DO WHEN HE WAS A KID IN CLASS.
wdf1: “Economic Policy Institute: Wisconsin public servants already face a compensation penalty”
Have you checked the membership of the EPI Board of Directors? They are mostly union thugs and their charter is at least suspect of being biased toward union labor. Besides, if these employees are public “servants”, as the EPI says, then why make an issue over lower pay?
Let’s try some more objective sources:
[url]http://www.wistax.org/taxpayer/0709.pdf[/url]
[quote]Given that Wisconsin had above-average state-local government employee benefits and below-average private benefits, it is not surprising that the gap between the two was relatively large. As already mentioned, 2005 benefits per Wisconsin worker were 50.1% higher for public employees than private workers[/quote]
and…
[url]http://reason.org/news/show/public-sector-private-sector-salary[/url]
[quote]Moreover, data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis illustrate that average state and local government compensation has been increasing at a faster rate than average private sector compensation over the past 30 years[/quote]
This article makes several good points to counter the left/union arguments for more pillage and scorched earth of our nation’s state budgets…
1.Public sector employees are generally over-educated for their roles; hence this is an invalid justification for higher compensation.
2.Private sector works work an average of 12% more hours per year than public-sector workers ([url]http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj30n1/cj30n1-5.pdf[/url]).
3.Public sector workers enjoy much greater job security; while private sector employees are routinely fired for poor performance or laid off when their employer becomes insolvent.
To indigorocks:
“Youre points are ridiculous”
Certainly, so, I think, is you fear of plastic bags.
“clearly you’re not interested in being part of the solution”
There you are wrong. I am all about solutions that apply balance and common sense. By the way, were you also against disposable diapers and incandescent lights?
indigorocks:”if the governor was so interested in fixing the problem, then why did he exclude firefighters and cops from the law?”
First, I think you need to apologize to rusty49 for mistaking my comments for his. He deserves more respect!
What I understand is that Walker wanted to get something done to prevent the economic collapse of his historically union-liberal-controlled, high-tax, state and knew he had to pick his battles carefully. Obviously he was correct since the national Democrat party, led by Obama, has sent in their armies to defeat him. I have no doubt that Walker will go after these other unions next.
By the way, I’m sure you know that it was proven that cloth diapers were worse for the environment than disposables. Also, I’m sure you know that the ban on incandescent light bulbs has created a major problem with florescent bulb disposal… putting more toxic chemicals into the ground. Any price for progress, right?
One last point… do you know that typing in all caps is the equivalent of shouting?
@ Jeff: EPI Board: [url]http://www.epi.org/pages/board/[/url]
Definitely a Who’s Who of labor leaders and former Dem Party labor officials. That makes your point that they may not be objective. But why do you choose to characterize them as “thugs?”
@ indigorocks: please don’t use all caps.
Meanwhile, Berkeley’s plastic bag ban is on hold: [url]http://www.dailycal.org/article/111679/city_s_plastic_bag_ban_faces_more_delays[/url]
and Salinas puts off the issue pending further review: [url]http://www.thecalifornian.com/article/20110219/OPINION01/102190313[/url]
and a strange side-effect of plastic bag bans elsewhere: [url]http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-R-0685.htm[/url]
To Jeff Boone
“By the way, I’m sure you know that it was proven that cloth diapers were worse for the environment than disposables. Also, I’m sure you know that the ban on incandescent light bulbs has created a major problem with florescent bulb disposal… putting more toxic chemicals into the ground. Any price for progress, right? “
Let me guess, this study that proved cloth diapers were worse for the environment than disposables was a study sponsored by pampers? Perhaps?
Like I said LED’s are the better solution, progress not perfection.
Flourescant is still better than incandescant because it uses way less energy and saves mountain tops in west virginia and saves water from being polluted..what little clean water is left in this country..
if they are disposed of properly it’s still better than incandescants. Incandescants have other toxic chemicals in them, so if we’re going to have toxic chemicals in our light sources, it might as well save energy.
remember, i know you and rusty are perfectionists in your caring for the environment, i’m sure you live zero impact lives, but the rest of us have to make due with a little bit of a difference.
Progress not perfection my dear. I mean you could make the argument that we’re better off using combusible engines forever because battery packs for electric vehicles are toxic. Well you have to take the lesser of two evils.
i know you want to be stuck in the dark ages and all, with your diesel trucks, and your wood burning fires at night and all, but the rest of use want to actually move on into the 21st century.
the technology is out there and all we need to do is embrace it.
we need to ban plastic bags. it doesn’t take much to just buy your own cloth bags and bring them with you to the store. really, it’s not that hard.
i know you can do it. truly it’s really easy..
just go get a few 99 cent bags from the store, keep them in your car or have them handy close to the front door so you can just take them with you when you go to the store.
IT’S SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO EASY. WHAT’S THE RESISTANCE?
“According to an Irish newspaper, that nation’s largest food retailer reported a 77% increase in the sale of trash can liners after Ireland began requiring most retailers to charge a fee for each plastic bag they provide customers. Other retailers reported similar increases. However, the Irish government cautions that such statistics may be meaningless because there is no comparable data on pre-tax bin liner sales.”
i’m sorry but i don’t trust this study. they keep on repeating the 77% number over and over and over again as if it’s their ace in the hole argument against banning plastic bags.
let’s talk about this. trash bin liners are HUGE compared to your average shopping bag. so they’re saying that ppl reuse the shopping bags to line their garbage cans? few do, but many people buy plastic bag liners for their trash cans AND use plastic shopping bags.
cutting out plastic bags or adding a tax to curb their use is a brilliant way to cut down on waste. regardless of whether this “77%” number is an honest number there would still be at least a 3000 metric ton drop in plastic bags. THAT’s a HUGE number.
the 77% increase sounds too much like a plastics industry sponsored number.
i’m not buying it.
@jeff boone..
you still did not answer my question.
If walker was so interested in bringing down the costs of labor unions, then why didn’t he go after the cops, firefighters, and state police?
Why? answer the question Jeff… anyone who was truly interested in bringing down the deficit certainly wouldn’t have given an unsustainable tax cut to the wealthy of that state.
in addition to that, he would have gone after ALL the public union employees, not just cherry picked.
@don
regarding all the cities in california where the ban is on hold
it’s very clear that the plastics industry has a strangle hold on the politicians of this state.
in addition we are mired in the goo of old thinking men and women who are just desperate to keep us in the dark ages.
ppl like rusty and jeff are examples of the type of person that is desperately holding onto their ideals, regardless of how it affects everyone around them. unfortunately them and ppl that tend to watch fox news are very vocal and effective at preventing progress.
Oh yes Don, just one more thing… all those articles point to the “save the plastic bag” campaign the the Plastic bag coalition.
These are chemical industries that want to continue to force their pollution on us by making up bogus statistics and fuzzy math science.
hey, remember what happens when we let a company be in charge of its own research?
monsanto, dow chemical and agent orange. they concluded through their own research that agent orange wasn’t harmful to humans.
45 years later, dioxin is still persistant in Vietnam, we have third generation deformities in families living in “hot zones” and vietnam vets who successfully sued the manufacturers of agent orange.
what Davis should do is impose a tax on plastic bags AND paper bags. I can guarantee you, you’ll see a significant reduction in both paper and plastic bags.
I use a paper bag at least 5 times before I throw it away as a trash can.
I bought some biodegradeable bags for my dog’s poop.
it’s happened everywhere else except the good ole us of a. why are we so backwards?
every single industrialized nation has healthcare for all…but no we..we just have to be cheap whores to industry.
the uk bannned corexit..but we..oh no…whores to industry..
why the fuck are we so greedy, stupid and backwards.
wake up America
“ppl like rusty and jeff are examples of the type of person that is desperately holding onto their ideals, regardless of how it affects everyone around them. unfortunately them and ppl that tend to watch fox news are very vocal and effective at preventing progress.”
He sure nailed us, didn’t he Jeff. Jeff and I have Fox News parties at my house with the fireplace going full blast burning paper, green wood and fake logs while we sit there and plan how we’re going to save the plastic bag.
regarding all the cities in california where the ban is on hold
it’s very clear that the plastics industry has a strangle hold on the politicians of this state.
Berkeley?!
rusty49: “while we sit there and plan how we’re going to save the plastic bag. “
Ha! Yes! In fact I am up at Chester in the mountains this weekend doing cross-country skiing thinking of ways I can destroy the beautiful snow-covered forest with a bunch of plastic bags and fossel fuel.
indigorocks: “you still did not answer my question.
If walker was so interested in bringing down the costs of labor unions, then why didn’t he go after the cops, firefighters, and state police?
“
But I did respond:
[quote]What I understand is that Walker wanted to get something done to prevent the economic collapse of his historically union-liberal-controlled, high-tax, state and knew he had to pick his battles carefully. Obviously he was correct since the national Democrat party, led by Obama, has sent in their armies to defeat him. I have no doubt that Walker will go after these other unions next.[/quote]
Further discussion of Wisconsin should be done on the article about Wisconsin rather than the article about a plastic bag ban in Davis.
“But why do you choose to characterize them as “thugs?””
Don, union leadership, in my opinion, has not evolved much since the days of bricks and bats. It is still part of their culture to intimidate workers that would cross a picket line. I don’t know if you watched much of the video footage of the protesters at the Wisconsin capital, but attendee statements and signs displayed made Tea Party rallies look much more civil by comparison. This is the stuff condoned by union leaders.
Jeff, I just asked you to keep this on topic. You are free to repost that in the Wisconsin article comments.
David: I didn’t see your post before I clicked send. I’m there now.
I think the Davis council might as well wait until Alameda County completes their EIR on this before considering a ban. They could consider incentives first and see what impact those have.
Don,
The plastics industry preempted municipalities from being able to levy a fee on PLASTIC bags (AB 2449) in the State as long as they provide “recycling” bins for bags. We want to put incentives out there to make wasting less cost effective than reusing or recycling so bringing a bag will save you money. Since we can’t put a fee on plastic, but we can on paper, the only real way to reduce the pollution from these “free” bags is to ban plastic bags outright and put a $0.25 “pass thru” fee on RECYCLED content paper bags. Although they may use more energy to make and transport, they can be easily reused then easily recycled or composted (unlike plastic).
Still the ACC and Save the Bag (an unofficial coalition of bag makers and marketers) fight for their market by suing in the name of CEQA and asking for EIRs! This is ridiculous in my opinion as the law is intended on protecting the environment and they use it to justify continued pollution. They backed off Santa Monica, saying they will not sue and that LA’s EIR was satisfactory (does this mean they admit to the damages their product causes?). The facts are out there, the plastic industry has no ground. They are being challenged in court on their grounds to cite CEQA anyway.
I’ve been consolidating resources on this issue at [url]http://zerowaste.wikispot.org/Bag_Bans[/url]
Don,
I’m just curious about this EIR issue..I’m actually confused as all get out.. don’t you think they should have done an EIR when they first introduced plastic bags into the market place? I mean really is this a JOKE? An EIR to explore the potential negative environmental impact of banning the plastic bags? Are you serious?
This has GOT to be a joke. Actually I think it’s more revenge against the public by the plastic industry. They are pissed that they have to go through an EIR for their toxins, so they’re just turning it around on us, just for spite and revenge.
I mean really. Asking for an EIR to ban plastic bags is as ridiculous as claiming that nuclear waste is good for you..
or demanding that we explore the EI of cleaning up a nuclear waste site, or requiring an EIA before we caution parents against not letting their kids smoke crack!!
@ Jeff boone and rusty 49,
your cavalier and flippant attitude towards the environment speak volumes.
you can be as sarcastic as you want, but the simple matter of the fact is that if you don’t take a stand and work towards progress then, you are against the environment!!
there is absolutely no reason for you to not support banning the plastic bag. it’s unecessary, wasteful, harmful and destructive to the environment, wild life habitat, human and animal health and isn’t worth it.
if the plastics council whores want to sell our futures down the road for a couple of thousand bucks, then so be it..let them do so, but if they want an EIR, then they should do it on their own time, but not on my watch.
they should be the ones who should prove that they aren’t harmful to us or the environment, but in the mean time, the bags need to be banned entirely.
it’s the necessary and right first step towards cleaning this mess up that ignoramuses like rush limbaugh, david koch and rusty have made.