Comments on: Toronto Plastic Bag Research Full of Holes http://www.martincwiner.com/toronto-plastic-bag-research-full-of-holes/ This is what happens when Martin gets tired of sending mass emails. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:44:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Lobstah and a surprising cavah « steffwilly0 http://www.martincwiner.com/toronto-plastic-bag-research-full-of-holes/comment-page-1/#comment-5623 Lobstah and a surprising cavah « steffwilly0 Fri, 02 Dec 2011 16:52:01 +0000 http://www.martincwiner.com/?p=601#comment-5623 [...] Chianti, Italy Cider Cinsault Concord Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. ← Previous post [...] [...] Chianti, Italy Cider Cinsault Concord Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. ← Previous post [...]

]]> By: Ted Shore http://www.martincwiner.com/toronto-plastic-bag-research-full-of-holes/comment-page-1/#comment-2003 Ted Shore Fri, 07 Jan 2011 02:00:26 +0000 http://www.martincwiner.com/?p=601#comment-2003 Pot calling the kettle black. Your information regarding the Irish levy as presented is not helpful, and misleads the reader to conclude, because bag consumption went down by 84% but liner sales went up by 400% that there was a net increase in plastic consumption. The only useful numbers would the actual weights of the two. In other words, if each person dropped the consumption of bags from 100 lbs per year to 4 lbs (a reduction of 94 lbs, but went from 10 lbs of liners to 40 lbs per year (an increase of 400% in liner sales), then the law was effective - net reduction of of 54 lbs per capita. Your suggestion that the law is illegal is also inconclusive. This is not a "Sales Tax" - no money is collected by the City. As far as I know, no one has challenged this law, and you are further assuming City staff consulted legal, and that legal council was correct. This law is about changing people's behavior. I concur that 5 cents was too low; however, establishing the idea, then raising it later is not a bad strategy rather than going in high and facing greater opposition. I support the fee vs the 'incentive' as I think the retailers who benefit have the choice to roll it back into discounts (this is a highly competitive market, so I think this in fact would happen, and also helps the smaller retailers, as opposed to asking them all to raise food costs to compensate for the incentive). Pot calling the kettle black. Your information regarding the Irish levy as presented is not helpful, and misleads the reader to conclude, because bag consumption went down by 84% but liner sales went up by 400% that there was a net increase in plastic consumption. The only useful numbers would the actual weights of the two. In other words, if each person dropped the consumption of bags from 100 lbs per year to 4 lbs (a reduction of 94 lbs, but went from 10 lbs of liners to 40 lbs per year (an increase of 400% in liner sales), then the law was effective – net reduction of of 54 lbs per capita.

Your suggestion that the law is illegal is also inconclusive. This is not a “Sales Tax” – no money is collected by the City. As far as I know, no one has challenged this law, and you are further assuming City staff consulted legal, and that legal council was correct.

This law is about changing people’s behavior. I concur that 5 cents was too low; however, establishing the idea, then raising it later is not a bad strategy rather than going in high and facing greater opposition. I support the fee vs the ‘incentive’ as I think the retailers who benefit have the choice to roll it back into discounts (this is a highly competitive market, so I think this in fact would happen, and also helps the smaller retailers, as opposed to asking them all to raise food costs to compensate for the incentive).

]]>