more revenue generating disguised as concern for the environment.
The Los Angeles City Council has unanimously voted to ban plastic bags in stores and to charge 25 cents per paper bag if the buyer chooses to/forgets to/doesn’t stockpile, therefore, doesn’t bring bags with him or her to the store.
Upon first glance, yes, this looks like a nice idea for the environment and all, but let’s think this through logically, rather than emotionally. First of all, let’s not delude ourselves into thinking this has anything to do with environmental concerns, if it did, the consumer wouldn’t be charged 25 cents per paper bag. The city would have just banned plastic bags. Done, problem solved. Apparently not. You see there is not as much money in a plastic bag ban. Oh wait, maybe they want us to stop using paper products all together hence the charge…well, hmmm..
Actually, I am going to assume that if the state follows suit there are going to be a lot of people out of work. I am not familiar with plastic bag manufacturers, and if they manufacture other items as well, but common sense dictates a whole slew of revenue loss which always means unemployment for “unskilled” workers. You know, the people politicians claim to care the most about. And if plastic bag manufacturers are in state they will take their entire business to another one. The same would hold true for paper bag manufacturers seeing as the result of charging for paper bags would be a decrease in paper bag use. Good thinking city council! Who needs the revenue and jobs created by/from manufacturing in their state anyhow?
The linked article states that this measure will greatly reduce clean up costs for the city. Does this mean that the taxpayers will be receiving a rebate? If the city will be decreasing it’s costs coupled with earning more revenue through the bag fee, it only makes sense that the consumer who will be paying both for the bags and already pays taxes would get some of his or her money back. Sadly, that part was not mentioned in the article.
This is not a charge for bags. We already pay for bags. They are included in the cost of any product we purchase, just as the retailer employees hourly wages and salaries are. The city just basically gave a gift to store owners. They will get 3% of the “fee” aka tax returned to them. Yes, all they have to do is order more paper bags (that we already pay for) and whala (!) a new revenue stream! Do you think the retailers are going to use that revenue to increase the wages of their employees? Odds are against it.
Who else benefits from charging the consumer extra for something they already pay for? You guessed it, the state. The state will get 3%. You see, it does not occur to politicians to stick to a budget, like you and I do in running our daily lives. If you or I can’t afford something we rearrange our priorities, switch some things around and make it work. Government doesn’t see it this way. As long as they can find clever ways to take more of our money they are not forced to use our money responsibly.
And lastly, the leftover revenue will “go to the city to fund an education campaign.” I’m sure this education campaign will not be called, “Hey constituent, your state government thinks we know better how to handle your money than you do, so not only are we going to take more from your check, but we are going to impose our morals on you because the environmental lobby gives us a whole lotta cash.” I’m not too sure how after the first month of bag fees everyone in the city won’t be aware that they are being charged for bags, but apparently the city, in their infinite wisdom, will be continuing and education program on it until the end of time. Because that wouldn’t be a waste of tax payer money either?
I guess there is some paper bag lobby that pays more than a plastic bag lobby. Wouldn’t be surprised.
I love LA.