Memphis Flyer Editor Bruce VanWyngarden thinks we’re so confused in the grocery check-out line that he considers the “Paper or plastic?” question an “eternal, never changing… riddle” and “a Zen koan without a ‘correct’ answer.” But this time, at least, he offers a solution:
What’s needed is fresh thinking. In San Francisco and Los Angeles, city governments are considering charging customers 17 cents for each plastic bag they take home from the grocery store. The idea is to discourage people from using disposable bags altogether. They’re also encouraging grocery stores to sell or provide reusable cloth or mesh bags for their customers. Many stores are doing so and putting their logo on the bags. Win, win.
“Win, win” is a concept that implies that two (or more) parties are winning. It’s the Fourth Habit, “an attitude whereby mutually beneficial solutions are sought.”
But which two parties are winning in this scenario?
It can’t be the store and the customer; if it were, they probably would have already done it by now, and wouldn’t need the government to force them into it.
The customer doesn’t win, because he’s inconvenienced by either a 17 cent tax or the hassle of bringing bags from home or buying them from the store. Not to mention the overbearing government looking over his shoulder in the checkout line.
The grocery store likely doesn’t win, either, because it now has to deal with bags from the customer that are of various conditions and are not uniform, or with pissed off customers who fail to bring bags, or who fail to bring enough bags, or who simply hate having to pay another tax or purchase the stupid mesh bags. If it’s harder for the customer to manage and carry the merchandise, the customer buys fewer products, meaning the store sells less and loses money.
VanWyngarden brings up logoed mesh bags as a selling point for the grocery store. Yeah, think of the free advertising they’d get out of that, eh? Stores never would have considered putting a logo on shopping bags… no, never. It takes the government to come up with that glorious idea.
So, take me through this. Customers would buy these mesh bags from the store… but how many bags does a customer need for one episode of shopping? Six? Eight? Ten? And do customers typically shop at only the one store? Hardly. So now customers are buying ten or more logoed mesh bags for every store they visit… meaning they’ll eventually have to keep hundreds of mesh bags in a closet somewhere and dig through the pile each time they leave the house. Oh, that’s just great.
Maybe it’s the government that wins. Of course, because it gets paid every time you shell out another 17 cents. And it gets to have more power over your life and over your decisions. But then, theoretically, the consumers eventually wise up and stop using bags that are taxed… meaning the government loses that potential source of revenue.
That leaves us with the socialists and the radical environmentalists. They win, because it’s one more blow against freedom of choice and consumerism. So there’s your win, win, I suppose.
Sound crazy? Can’t possibly work? In fact, it already is working elsewhere. Some European countries have already banned disposable bags. In the three years since Ireland imposed a 15-cent-per-bag fee, the use of plastic bags has decreased by 90 percent.
Can anybody guess why VanWyngarden takes us all the way to Europe to see this revolutionary idea in practice?
Isn’t there, maybe, an example of bag-less consumerism right here in the good ole USA, and right here in Memphis?
Of course there is, but that would force our liberal editor to tip his hat to the dreaded Wal-Mart company, whose Sam’s Club stores offer no bags whatsoever. And to think it didn’t even take a socialist state and new tax laws to make it happen…
But, no, it’s just a cRaZy idea, I tell you. It’ can’t possibly work.
It’s interesting that the same type of people clamoring for more government interference at the check-out are the ones who claim to speak for the poor. They’re the same people who argue that it’s an undue burden on poor voters to simply show a valid ID on election day.
If this were a Republican idea, couldn’t you just see the headline:
Grocery Bag Tax Imposed - Women, Minorities Hardest Hit?!
Indeed, because if the Sam’s Club model is any indication, the rich SUV drivers wouldn’t be fazed one bit. They will just load up the cart, check out, then dump everything into the trunk of their tank.
It’s the poor people on foot who will be the ones paying the extra tax for bags.
Which means the next step is bag-tax means-testing. We’ll all have to provide the clerk with a valid ID, last year’s income tax papers and a current bank statement.
The most funny thing about all this, though, is that it’s the local paper pushing the idea of paper (and plastic) conservation. You know, an industry whose very essence is the consumption of… wait for it… paper.
Somehow this bit of trivia escaped VanWyngarden as he was putting this manifesto down on paper, stroking his chin in pensive awe of himself.
Please, Mr. VanWyngarden, don’t even try to argue that the Flyer is printed on recycled tapioca pudding wrappers. Grocery bags can be and are made with recycled materials, too.
Not to worry, though, because I have an idea. I think the Flyer should start printing its content on a natural resource that is almost infinitely renewable and is currently being wasted.
I propose that the Flyer be printed on aborted fetuses. It’s a perfect medium for their liberal propaganda. And, just think, even the most expendable and unwanted members of society could do their fair share to help save the environment — it would even free up some space in our landfills.
Win, win.
