Contact FreedomWorks

400 North Capitol Street, NW
Suite 765
Washington, DC 20001

  • Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
  • Local 202.783.3870

Blog

    Bag Statism

    Busy-body statists and nanny- state meddlers are constantly concocting short sighted schemes to take choices and liberties out of the hands of individuals.

    The ideas and utopian schemes of these elites are believed to be on a higher moral and intellectual plane than is possibly comprehended by the incompetent masses.  They profoundly believe that collective decision making is superior to individual choice and liberty.

    Obviously, the collective wisdom of these self-righteous bag banishers is so fundamentally sound that they have sifted through all the possible unintended consequences of eliminating plastic bags.  Well not quite, says the National Review’s Nat Brown:
       

    “Unfortunately, study after study has shown that most of the supposed “benefits” of these bans and taxes have a negligible effect on the environment at best, and can actually have unintended consequences that cause greater environmental harm. Take Ireland, for example. When the New York Times reported the 94 percent decrease, it neglected to specify that it was referring only to plastic grocery-bag use. Sales of non-grocery plastic bags (garbage bags, etc.) rose an astonishing 400 percent, amounting to a net increase of 10 percent in total plastic-bag consumption.”

    Still, dreams of banning plastic bags on a grander scale are surely emanating from fanatical environmentalist epochs everywhere.  Policies similar to that of the leftist wonderland San Francisco, implemented on a national level, would destroy thousands of jobs as well:

    “In addition to the damaging environmental effects of these bans and taxes, there are often significant negative economic outcomes. Unlike Ireland, which had imported most of its bags from China, the U.S. has vibrant plastic manufacturing, recycling, and secondary industries, all of which would be hurt greatly were bans and taxes to increase. For example, Rozenski notes that most composite-lumber companies use recycled bag content when manufacturing their product. “You’re looking at 4,000, maybe 5,000 [recycling] jobs that are created, and it’s a growing industry. With composite lumbers, it puts the number getting near 10,000 direct and indirect jobs through plastic-bag recycling.”

    In some areas, plastic bags are banned like it is nobody’s business, which some believe it isn’t.  The rationalization of a potential environmental heaven trumps all.  Who needs a thoroughly vetted discussion or democracy?

    The incandescent light bulb is headed for extinction here in the United States due to the central planning mindset and the insatiable urge to meddle. There are many flaws inherent in the use of the replacement CFL light bulb, none more startling than the influx of mercury if these enviro-friendly trinkets happen to burst.

    Indeed, the hysterical and ad hoc way in which these flawed policies are formulated sheds light on why they end up falling flat on their face.  Instead of banning plastic bags, it is time to bag statism.