MoCo plastic bag ban and tax increase on paper bags

[Anonymous]

The current bag tax (5 cents, on paper and plastic) has drawn criticism from the county's auditors in terms of implementation:
https://montgomeryperspective.com/2023/06/15/inspector-general-county-has-poor-enforcement-of-bag-tax/

Why will they do any better just by increasing the tax? How about they fix the problems administering the existing tax first?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

Read the article in the OP. There are a lot of studies that show how mixed the evidence actually is on plastic bag bans that drive people to paper and reusable cotton and plastic use more resources to produce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The current bag tax (5 cents, on paper and plastic) has drawn criticism from the county's auditors in terms of implementation:
https://montgomeryperspective.com/2023/06/15/inspector-general-county-has-poor-enforcement-of-bag-tax/

Why will they do any better just by increasing the tax? How about they fix the problems administering the existing tax first?

Because they are more interested in performative progressive gestures than actual outcomes. Everything that these people do is big talk followed by mediocre outcomes. I don’t understand how people keep falling for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

Small actions are bad: too small. Large actions are bad: too large. Somewhere there must be an action that's juuuuuuust right? My advice for you is to get in the habit of bringing bags when you go shopping. Lots of people are able to do this, and likely you are too.

There’s real debate over whether the multi use bags are actually better for the environment. Evidence is very mixed on that; heavier bags require greater resources to produce and they usually fall apart before you can “break even.” I know it feels like you’re doing something for the environment by reusing a bag, but very likely, it’s doing nothing.

I’ve been using the same bags for almost 20 years. How many uses does it take to “break even” exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

Read the article in the OP. There are a lot of studies that show how mixed the evidence actually is on plastic bag bans that drive people to paper and reusable cotton and plastic use more resources to produce.

I clicked on the link, I looked at the authors, and now I am even more strongly convinced that the bag ban is a good idea.

As I recall, all of the studies cited by the authors were funded by the disposable bag industry. They're similar to the studies saying that ackshually it's better to use a disposable styrofoam coffee cup instead of a ceramic mug, based on the assumptions on the order of you use the mug five times and then throw it in the trash.

[Anonymous]

I hate paper bags and paper straws. The worst are the wegman bags with no handles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

The plastic bag tax has actually increased the amount of plastic bags that are used. This is because the new bags are ultra flimsly and thus break more often, require double bagging and are reused less. It's one of those ironic unintended consequences situations that arise when well meaning theory meets the reality of real life use.

Ban the bags if you want but don't tax them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

The plastic bag tax has actually increased the amount of plastic bags that are used. This is because the new bags are ultra flimsly and thus break more often, require double bagging and are reused less. It's one of those ironic unintended consequences situations that arise when well meaning theory meets the reality of real life use.

Ban the bags if you want but don't tax them.

Wut?

Just bring your own damn bags, that aren’t flimsy. Duh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

The plastic bag tax has actually increased the amount of plastic bags that are used. This is because the new bags are ultra flimsly and thus break more often, require double bagging and are reused less. It's one of those ironic unintended consequences situations that arise when well meaning theory meets the reality of real life use.

Ban the bags if you want but don't tax them.

Wut?

Just bring your own damn bags, that aren’t flimsy. Duh.

You asked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

The plastic bag tax has actually increased the amount of plastic bags that are used. This is because the new bags are ultra flimsly and thus break more often, require double bagging and are reused less. It's one of those ironic unintended consequences situations that arise when well meaning theory meets the reality of real life use.

Ban the bags if you want but don't tax them.

The global plastic bag manufacturing market has changed their products in response to the five cents a bag Montgomery County plastic bag tax? Wow!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

Small actions are bad: too small. Large actions are bad: too large. Somewhere there must be an action that's juuuuuuust right? My advice for you is to get in the habit of bringing bags when you go shopping. Lots of people are able to do this, and likely you are too.

There’s real debate over whether the multi use bags are actually better for the environment. Evidence is very mixed on that; heavier bags require greater resources to produce and they usually fall apart before you can “break even.” I know it feels like you’re doing something for the environment by reusing a bag, but very likely, it’s doing nothing.

I’ve been using the same bags for almost 20 years. How many uses does it take to “break even” exactly?

Depending on the materials used in the bag, you probably still haven’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine and your right to support it, of course. Understand it’s just purely performative environmentalism that likely does more harm than good while costing the taxpayers money. Read the article for a little nuance.

LOL. Explain how it does ANY harm.

Will there still be unlimited plastic bags in the produce aisle for my one garlic? Can I still buy one slice of watermelon from the deli in a plastic container? How about single use bags of bread yeast?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Montgomery County hasn’t met a tax idea it won’t pass.

This. Why tax paper bags 10 cents? They are usually made from recycled paper, and can easily be recycled or composted.

Because it’s not about the environment. It’s not about reducing amount of bags.

Montgomery County sees its citizens as cash cows. They were find everything and anything, (including the rain!) to tax. And the citizens keep voting in the same people. Montgomery County will present this tax as a virtuous and necessary tax to “protect the environment” and obviously if you’re against it, then you are against the environment therefore a terrible human being.

This new tax will be used to fund unnecessary pet projects.

And before you accuse me of being Maga and a right winger, I’m not. I bring my own bags and when I do get a plastic bag, it’s always reused that’s a trash bag.

[Anonymous]

I live in a place that has banned plastic bags for like 5+ yrs now. I don't have an issue with it. I've never purchased a reusable bag, but somehow have 2 cars fully stocked with them.

I always previously saved our plastic bags, and use them for our home garbages. We are actually approaching the end of them! I never before thought I'd "run out" of plastic bags!