Los Angeles to ban plastic grocery bags.

what's worse, dot indian or slurpee indian?

Kind of dumb. It would have been better to require supermarkets to explicitly charge for bags, whether paper or plastic, to encourage reuse or alternatives. Basically, plastic bags don't do much harm as long as they're kept away from bodies of water.

arch8ngel said:   ganda said:   arch8ngel said:    Are people to stupid

Apparently

It's a little humor.

There is a difference between a typo and perpetuating antiquated distinctions of ethnicity.

Sure, but a spelling mistake that negates the point trying to be made is funny.

See Exhibit A.

KayK said:   

Anyways.. I have never heard that plaastic bags are illegal in India. Saw plenty of them while shopping last year in India. Googling around, the only thing I see is that plastic bags are illegal in Delhi.. just one city. So this affects 1% of the total Indian population.

I have no idea. This would have been 2003 or 2004. The (1970's Sears 100% Polyester Clearance Rack Tribe) Indian coworker I asked about it, who I'm fairly sure wasn't originally from Delhi but somewhere further south, told me they were banned "in India" because they clogged up sewers and ditches. Maybe they were, but have since been unbanned - progress!

If they're not banned WTF was the (1970's Sears 100% Polyester Clearance Rack Tribe) Indian passenger doing with many, many 100s of used grocery bags in his luggage? Google that!

ganda said:   If they're not banned WTF was the (1970's Sears 100% Polyester Clearance Rack Tribe) Indian passenger doing with many, many 100s of used grocery bags in his luggage? Google that!No clue..that is strange. I would have though that the passenger might be concerned of the bag being damaged on the way..and so had plastic bags covering actual stuff so that stuff doesnt get damaged easily.. but 100's of bags? That's too many for my scenario.

MadAnthony said:   I'm glad to see that the government of LA has eliminated all crime, poverty, and suffering amongst it's residents and can now focus on shopping bags.

Actually, maybe it's good that they are focusing on small, stupid stuff instead of big, expensive, stupid stuff.It's not. We need goverment that's highly competent like Singapore's, only democratic and not as brutal (i.e., it should be more brutal).

arch8ngel said:   larrymoencurly said:   Kind of dumb. It would have been better to require supermarkets to explicitly charge for bags, whether paper or plastic, to encourage reuse or alternatives. Basically, plastic bags don't do much harm as long as they're kept away from bodies of water.By what mechanism could they reasonably compel them to charge? Seems pretty absurd to have a law that says you can't give a bag away for "free".5¢ bag tax. I'm betting a ban on plastic bags will raise costs the same.

If people had to take their own "clean" milk containers to the store, can you imagine how many people would get sick? Sure it would be Darwinism, but someone has to try to stop dumbass mom/dad from pouring contaminated milk on junior's Frosted Chocolate Sugar Smacks With Candy.

arch8ngel said:   KayK said:   arch8ngel said:   larrymoencurly said:   Kind of dumb. It would have been better to require supermarkets to explicitly charge for bags, whether paper or plastic, to encourage reuse or alternatives. Basically, plastic bags don't do much harm as long as they're kept away from bodies of water.

By what mechanism could they reasonably compel them to charge? Seems pretty absurd to have a law that says you can't give a bag away for "free".They have that "pretty absurd" law up in Toronto.. and it works pretty well. You want plastic bags? Pay up 5 cents each. Pretty simple!

I guess my question is, what legal authority is there to force a business to charge for something they want to give away?

I know there is something to that effect related to alcohol, but that isn't really a good comparison given the host of other product-specific laws associated with drugs and regulated substances.

In Atlantic City they originally had free parking at the casinos until the city implemented a $2/car parking tax and all the casinos added booths/people to collect the money. Jobs program!

talljay said:   arch8ngel said:   KayK said:   arch8ngel said:   larrymoencurly said:   Kind of dumb. It would have been better to require supermarkets to explicitly charge for bags, whether paper or plastic, to encourage reuse or alternatives. Basically, plastic bags don't do much harm as long as they're kept away from bodies of water.

By what mechanism could they reasonably compel them to charge? Seems pretty absurd to have a law that says you can't give a bag away for "free".They have that "pretty absurd" law up in Toronto.. and it works pretty well. You want plastic bags? Pay up 5 cents each. Pretty simple!

I guess my question is, what legal authority is there to force a business to charge for something they want to give away?

I know there is something to that effect related to alcohol, but that isn't really a good comparison given the host of other product-specific laws associated with drugs and regulated substances.

In Atlantic City they originally had free parking at the casinos until the city implemented a $2/car parking tax and all the casinos added booths/people to collect the money. Jobs program!

Oddly enough I was in AC for the holiday weekend and there was no shortage of old bags drifting around.

advocatus said:   arch8ngel said:   KayK said:   arch8ngel said:   larrymoencurly said:   Kind of dumb. It would have been better to require supermarkets to explicitly charge for bags, whether paper or plastic, to encourage reuse or alternatives. Basically, plastic bags don't do much harm as long as they're kept away from bodies of water.

By what mechanism could they reasonably compel them to charge? Seems pretty absurd to have a law that says you can't give a bag away for "free".They have that "pretty absurd" law up in Toronto.. and it works pretty well. You want plastic bags? Pay up 5 cents each. Pretty simple!

I guess my question is, what legal authority is there to force a business to charge for something they want to give away?

I know there is something to that effect related to alcohol, but that isn't really a good comparison given the host of other product-specific laws associated with drugs and regulated substances.

I think it's pretty clear that you tax the business for bag usage. 5 cents per bag goes towards environmental clean up. You don't want to pay the tax? Then bring your own bag.

edit: Oh there was a whole additional page to read before I commented.

Given how bags get used at the counter, if I was the business owner, I'd just spread that tax across everything else in the store rather than hassle the customer with it... so that is not the same as me being compelled to charge for the bags, explicitly.

Kandykornhead said:   webferret said:   arch8ngel said:   ganda said:   arch8ngel said:    Are people to stupid

Apparently

It's a little humor.

There is a difference between a typo and perpetuating antiquated distinctions of ethnicity.

Is this another case of it being ok for the ethnic group to refer to themselves in a particular term, but nobody else is allowed to? Because I know quite a few Choctaws, Cherokees, and a couple of Apaches who refer to themselves as Indians (or should I say the "I" word? )

I'm not trying to be a smartass. I'm genuinely curious.Concur for the Sioux. I worked on the Rez for 10 years. The Indians only called themselves Indians. The only subcontinent Indians were doctors, and they were called foreigners e.g. "I go to that new doctor at the clinic, you know the foreign guy." "Dot" is a faster to type than "subcontinent" or "India Indian" but I'm willing to avoid it if it offends.

Since this discussion came up, I asked one of my Apache friends if she was offended by Indian. She rolled her eyes and laughed at me. Yes AT me. She told me she was an Apache Indian. She was not an Apache Native American. I asked her if it offended her to use the dot/feather distinction. She laughed again.

She said what she found MORE offensive was people tiptoeing around her heritage because they were afraid of offending her.

But that's just one person, and she's pretty cool. I don't presume to think she speaks for an entire cultural group.

arch8ngel said:   The part that is ridiculous is the need to specify a subcontinent Indian. They are Indians, period, unless you are specifying their sub-group like Tamil, etc.

I get that you guys in the midwest have a different level of exposure to actual Indians, so you don't realize that everybody on the rest of the planet just knows what you're talking about without the absurd "dot"/"feather" distinction.

Well bless your heart!

Suit yourselves. It sounds ridiculous.

I'm sure the ratio between Eastern Indians and Wild Indians here in West Texas is significantly different than what you have on the coasts. If you were to refer to Indian here, most would think you were referring to the Indians WE are most familiar with. The common terms I hear used are Eastern Indians and just plain Indians. Because here, just plain Indians are, well, Indians. But, of course, all you people on the coasts are more correct than any of us "Midwestern" hicks. (TX isn't Midwest, btw.)

Speaking of global misinformation, it might surprise you to know that quite a few *other* continent persons still believe everyone in Texas rides horses, we all wear cowboy hats, and wild Indians still run amuck.

arch8ngel said:   webferret said:   I'm sure the ratio between Eastern Indians and Wild Indians here in West Texas is significantly different than what you have on the coasts. If you were to refer to Indian here, most would think you were referring to the Indians WE are most familiar with. The common terms I hear used are Eastern Indians and just plain Indians. Because here, just plain Indians are, well, Indians. But, of course, all you people on the coasts are more correct than any of us "Midwestern" hicks. (TX isn't Midwest, btw.)


FWIW, much of my wife's family is from Texas, I've been there numerous times, and I realize that the place isn't populated by a bunch of gunslinging rednecks.
That said...the elderly people I've met in that region still refer to black people as "colored" in normal conversation so it doesn't surprise me that the state isn't leading the way on how to correctly refer to foreigners and other ethnic groups.

"Not Texans". Done.

On the same subject, since it's coming up, listen for how many times the NBC Olympic commentators refer to non-American black athletes as African Americans during the Olympics. It's political correctness gone mad, or at least daft

^^^ You guys do have REALLY good hamburgers though. I think my small sampling of Whataburger is adequate to make that judgment.

arch8ngel said:   
That said...the elderly people I've met in that region still use the term "colored" people in normal conversation so it doesn't surprise me that the state isn't leading the way on how to correctly refer to foreigners and other ethnic groups.

Meh, I'm guessing that there was probably a time, probably during their lifetime, where "colored" was an acceptable term - or the NAACP probably wouldn't have named itself the NAACP.

arch8ngel said:   Given how bags get used at the counter, if I was the business owner, I'd just spread that tax across everything else in the store rather than hassle the customer with it... so that is not the same as me being compelled to charge for the bags, explicitly.This is why if the goverment wants to reduce use of bags through a tax on consumers, it should require merchants to explicitly ring up a separate charge for them.

larrymoencurly said:   riznick said:   advocatus said:   Ultimately we pay for the bags, their cost is rolled into the prices of the products. If we all brought our own bags not only could we reap the savings but also help the environment. If we can't be bothered to bring our own bags; paper bags make the most sense as they can be made with recycled material, are biodegradable and are great for stuffing all of those ads/newspapers/junk mail paper that get recycled.Are you sure about that? I've read studies that say plastic bags are the better environmental alternative.It may depend on whether they're recycled or not because a lot of biodegradable stuff just doesn't degrade in landfills, as University of Arizona scientists who've dug up old cheeseburgers have discovered.

More proof that unless it can get skin cancer, it just WILL NOT DIE in Arizona.