my opinion: the bag law is a failure (San Diego, Sacramento: mattresses, purchase)

[thisoldmeemaw]

Originally Posted by dipr

i don't see many people with their own bags, so the cashiers always have to ask

THEN it becomes a matter that they just give you one bag when you need three !

finally: looks like the stores are the ones making big money here at ten cents a bag !!

The stores are to turn the 10 cents for each bag they sell to the State of California.

[sdsvtdriver]

Originally Posted by thisoldmeemaw

The stores are to turn the 10 cents for each bag they sell to the State of California.

Negative. Pure profit - right into grocers pockets. You've been had.

Voters did not approve Prop 65 which would have forced the monies to go to an environmental fund.

Proposition 67 Arguments and Rebuttals | Official Voter Information Guide | California Secretary of State

[citizensadvocate]

We can ask ourselves when has any government made a similar law or ordinance in the past When is the last time a store is forbidden a retail establishment from providing complementary item or service by requiring a minimum charge on any product or amenity in a store. And requiring the store to pocket it but only after itemizing it on a receipt.
Even sales taxes and more recently soda taxes are up to the retailer how to pass it on. Stores do offer we pay the sales tax promotions from time to time. And in Berkeley after the soda tax were passed the price of a soda ironically remained the same as before the tax or a city without the tax because they choose to raise the prices on other items such as sunscreen to cover the soda tax.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

We can ask ourselves when has any government made a similar law or ordinance in the past When is the last time a store is forbidden a retail establishment from providing complementary item or service by requiring a minimum charge on any product or amenity in a store. And requiring the store to pocket it but only after itemizing it on a receipt.
Even sales taxes and more recently soda taxes are up to the retailer how to pass it on. Stores do offer we pay the sales tax promotions from time to time. And in Berkeley after the soda tax were passed the price of a soda ironically remained the same as before the tax or a city without the tax because they choose to raise the prices on other items such as sunscreen to cover the soda tax.

Welcome to a Blue State.

The odes behind the law was good, the way it was written and implemented wasn't.

[citizensadvocate]

Blue states; you think they are about protecting the poor people until this trend came along. This legislation punishes all poor people who except those who are eligible for food stamps.

Look at this video from El Cajon
http://www.10news.com/news/video-bra...ks-woman-from-
Shoplifting has always been a major issue ever since cities pass such policies that encourage outside bags by punishing those who don't bring them.

The state law essentially usurps local control from cities that don't want this nonsense.
These cities were much much cleaner than cities that claim to have reduce litter by their feel good ordinances but now have to contend with much more unsecured garbage spilling from trucks since November as well as increased shoplifting. Look at this article talking about what about the opposite way around http://www.urbanophile.com/2016/04/1...war-on-cities/

fyi The cities that passed ordinances prior to 2014 are grandfathered in and not affected by the new state law even if they dont require a bag fee for non banned bags.

I am still surprised that even though according to a survey done in San Diego that nearly 80% of the population would vote for plastic bags at the checkout counter they let the 15% of the population who support reusable bags outvote them this election.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

I am still surprised that even though according to a survey done in San Diego that nearly 80% of the population would vote for plastic bags at the checkout counter they let the 15% of the population who support reusable bags outvote them this election.

Maybe a new vote on an ordnance to flip it in the next election cycle.

[sdjimbob]

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

Blue states; you think they are about protecting the poor people until this trend came along. This legislation punishes all poor people who except those who are eligible for food stamps.

Look at this video from El Cajon
http://www.10news.com/news/video-bra...ks-woman-from-
Shoplifting has always been a major issue ever since cities pass such policies that encourage outside bags by punishing those who don't bring them.

This law was more about protecting the environment than poor people. Your shoplifting claim is anecdotal. I'm betting it's stayed the same post-plastic bag ban.

[eastcoastbias]

Originally Posted by sdjimbob

This law was more about protecting the environment than poor people. Your shoplifting claim is anecdotal. I'm betting it's stayed the same post-plastic bag ban.

Sadly it actually mirrors the way society works. You establish a system, law or whatever and people find the loop hole and weakness until the powers to be modify things to prevent the unintended consequences.


Think about it, One could easily throw three or four large bags in a cart and place a few items in the bags and go undetected. It is easy to spot items not covered in a cart, throw a few extra unused bags in a cart over some items and things aren't so clear any longer.


There are solutions- You either beef up security or cameras and/or require that a customer places all bags on the checkout belt.

[citizensadvocate]

Lobbyists would never admit they are wrong no matter what happens. As long as their agenda is fulfilled its always a success. The agenda doesn't end with bags but controlling the people. Do a simple search and you will notice the liberal controlled media has pretty much label all plastic bans without "minimum fees" as failures as it fails to get customer to pay or BYOB.

This measure has been an environmental nightmare from the start when "progressive" cities started to embrace this. Not surprisingly as everything defies logic. Cities that did this now ended up knee deep in spilled all other kinds of plastics. EvenIn areas that were once virtually litter free. Google street view proves it.Apparently blue states defend illegal immigrants refugees and poor people tooth to nailbut are ironically willing to turn against them in the disguise of saving the environment. Just like what they did to water supply to some poor independent farmers doing the drought by cutting them off from even household water While large corporate farms including almond farms and industries were completely exempt from mandatory conservation.

FYI Beefing up security measures whether it's extra personnel, more barricades, or high tech solution all cost massive amounts of money which we end users would need to foot the bill. Big monopolistic stores could raise its rates with impunity to cover it but many others stores would turn belly up. Though store could and should require outside bags be checked in at the front but it would be a lot of work for them. Or just strictly forbid outside bags from entering all together.

Why continue to push a policy that had been proven flawed in many ways and continue to make things worse in every possible way. Its all Progressive political bureaucracy and stupidly which alas is embraced by the all almightly UN world government.

[citizensadvocate]

Lobbyists would never admit they are wrong no matter what happens. As long as their agenda is fulfilled its always a success. The agenda doesn't end with bags but controlling the people. Do a simple search and you will notice the liberal controlled media has pretty much label all plastic bans without "minimum fees" as failures as it fails to get customer to pay or BYOB.

This measure has been an environmental nightmare from the start when "progressive" cities started to embrace this. Not surprisingly as everything defies logic. Cities that did this now ended up knee deep in spilled all other kinds of plastics. EvenIn areas that were once virtually litter free. Google street view proves it.Apparently blue states defend illegal immigrants refugees and poor people tooth to nailbut are ironically willing to turn against them in the disguise of saving the environment. Just like what they did to water supply to some poor independent farmers doing the drought by cutting them off from even household water While large corporate farms including almond farms and industries were completely exempt from mandatory conservation.

FYI Beefing up security measures whether it's extra personnel, more barricades, or high tech solution all cost massive amounts of money which we end users would need to foot the bill. Big monopolistic stores could raise its rates with impunity to cover it but many others stores would turn belly up. Though store could and should require outside bags be checked in at the front but it would be a lot of work for them. Its easier to just strictly forbid outside bags from entering all together and post signs in the parking lot of prohibition.

Why continue to push a policy that had been proven flawed in many ways and continue to make things worse in every possible way. Its all Progressive political bureaucracy and stupidly which alas is embraced by the all almightly UN world government.