Feed on


And then they banned the plastic bags.

But why?


(LA) council members stood by the ban, despite being confronted with evidence that bag bans have no discernible effect on the health of the environment and make up less than 1 percent (pdf download) of California's waste stream.

"When you're looking at 1 percent, that's a huge difference," says Councilman Alarcon, who voted for the ban. 

Reason contributor Jay Beeber points out that a similar ban in San Francisco failed to reduce (pdf download) the small number of plastic bags actually littering the street.

Here is the last episode in the series.

8 Responses to “Next!”

  1. Brent says:

    1%… and to think, I thought they only hated the other 99…

  2. Speedmaster says:

    I distinctly remember when we were told we had to switch from paper to plastic … for the environment.

  3. chuck martel says:

    Plastic bags aren't much of an issue.  But styrofoam packing peanuts are.  I don't want to receive a little item in a big box filled with those disgusting things that end up all over  the place.  I'd like the option to indicate on my order that it will be returned at the vendor's expense if it's packed with the bogus peanuts or other weird stuff.  Heck, from now on, I'll just add that stipulation to the order.

  4. Brent says:

    I'm with Chuck on the packing peanuts. I opt for the starch based water dissolvable ones. But then again, does that even make sense for "water challenged" LA?

  5. Rod says:

    You mean the homeless guys are going to have to use paper bags to carry their stuff around?  Paper bags don't have handles.  Next they will be banning supermarket carts and appliance boxes. 

  6. […] turn to next once bath salts are out of the question? Maybe clubbing seals for fun?  Here is the last episode in the series. Share […]

Leave a Reply