A new standard has swept across our consumerist culture; one that seems to stem from the ‘greenification’ of businesses and plays on the newly adopted ideals of the fledgling eco-conscious demographic. For years, supermarkets and retail stores, big box and mom and pop shops have been slinging our goods into plastic bags so we might carry them off in a cheap, branded, disposable sack. But this is no more, or at least, not for free. With the introduction of the five cent ‘plastic bag tax’ in Toronto, anyone who would like to use a plastic bag provided by the store must pay $0.05 for each bag they use. Without getting into a huge debate about whether or not it’s a good idea, I’d like to say that I think it’s great that our government is changing the standards in our city so that people’s day to day lives are actually affected. Regardless of who is on the hook for the nickels; the businesses or the consumers, I see a great deal of opportunity for change in other facets of our consumptive nature that might be brought on by this initial departure from the comfy norm. But I digress.
My opinion on the new law has little to do with the common arguments of this issue such as, “who has to pay what” and “why don’t the business owners cover the cost as part of their advertising budgets”. My interest is primarily in the social ramifications of implementing this new strategy; I prefer to examine the actual felt response to the change, not the one felt by our wallets, but the one felt by our brains; our sense of community and interconnectedness.
I was driving down the street and spotted a guy walking home from the corner store with a carton of milk in his hand. It was instantly interesting to me because I’m one to notice weird stuff like that, but mainly because I could SEE the milk. It wasn’t in a bag, it wasn’t in a box, and it wasn’t obstructed by some store’s logo or slogan. The fact was that that guy only needed some milk. No eggs, no Dijon mustard, just milk. He probably was just like me; finished off the last carton with breakfast and didn’t have time to grab a new one before he made it home. So there he was—jaunting home, milk in hand, smile on face. And there was a connection there. I saw myself in him a little bit, as anyone who’s ever bought a solitary item after work would see, and it made me think about the bag tax. If we didn’t have the bag tax, he probably would have asked for a bag (or would have been given one even without asking), but since he didn’t, I can now view his purchase, even from my car. And to be able to see his purchase, is to be able to see into his world, and immediately, linkages are drawn between his world and mine. Linkages that would never have been drawn had he been swinging a Dominion bag with contents “X” instead, linkages that connect me to him as fellow men, even if that connection is just that we both like one percent.
My opinion on the new law has little to do with the common arguments of this issue such as, “who has to pay what” and “why don’t the business owners cover the cost as part of their advertising budgets”. My interest is primarily in the social ramifications of implementing this new strategy; I prefer to examine the actual felt response to the change, not the one felt by our wallets, but the one felt by our brains; our sense of community and interconnectedness.
I was driving down the street and spotted a guy walking home from the corner store with a carton of milk in his hand. It was instantly interesting to me because I’m one to notice weird stuff like that, but mainly because I could SEE the milk. It wasn’t in a bag, it wasn’t in a box, and it wasn’t obstructed by some store’s logo or slogan. The fact was that that guy only needed some milk. No eggs, no Dijon mustard, just milk. He probably was just like me; finished off the last carton with breakfast and didn’t have time to grab a new one before he made it home. So there he was—jaunting home, milk in hand, smile on face. And there was a connection there. I saw myself in him a little bit, as anyone who’s ever bought a solitary item after work would see, and it made me think about the bag tax. If we didn’t have the bag tax, he probably would have asked for a bag (or would have been given one even without asking), but since he didn’t, I can now view his purchase, even from my car. And to be able to see his purchase, is to be able to see into his world, and immediately, linkages are drawn between his world and mine. Linkages that would never have been drawn had he been swinging a Dominion bag with contents “X” instead, linkages that connect me to him as fellow men, even if that connection is just that we both like one percent.
It’s interesting to me that now that we’re not using plastic bags as much, not only are we connected through our common goal to save our own asses from a fiery doom, but we’re also being brought closer together by the increase in transparency of our actions. Granted, if people don’t stop to notice these things, then we won’t really ever progress from our shoe-gazing, fast-paced lifestyles; but I think that maybe this lack of bag barriers will help to increase people’s aptitude for exploration, question asking, pondering and in the end, relationships.What do you think!?!
TS
TS
Hey, coming from someone who voluntarily offers to display what's in her purse as some twisted guess-what's-in-the-bag drinking game because I know it's of such interest to people... I am totally open with what I carry.
ReplyDeleteI'd say the most embarassing would be tampons and condoms and oops, did I just say that over the internet? It's all natural, it's all human, and I suppose I'm lucky that I don't have to hide anything about myself or what I carry. In fact these days I am boasting quite an eclectic mix (as I move into the new appartment) from random bike-adjustment tools to salt and pepper packets since I've yet to buy any seasonings, to toothbrushes to USB keys. And ok I think there is one tampon right now too.
I think the removal of plastic bags is a great thing. And for the most part I don't think we are all going to start carrying home our groceries in hand, but for me, in an example at the grocer last night, I bring my backpack and I stuff it - myself. I find it's such a new concept that the casheir automatically still begins to fill the plastic bags and I have to stop her saying "Oh I've got my own bag", and it's almost like it confuses her?
Not to mention it's a nicer, and more productive way of doing things. Tay you know my opinion of how good it makes me feel to be productive. So for one, I'm taking away half of her work, and two, we have to communicate, which I kind of think is human.
And alas, my comments cannot be complete without at least one note: Tay I think you've used the phrase "I digress" in every posting so far. Hey, I like it.
Blogs are all about digression FYI. However I find myself constantly angry at the fact that no one gives plastic bags for free anymore. What am I supposed to carry booze to a friends house in anyway? I walked down the street with
ReplyDeleteI think if that nickel was at least used for something worthwhile i.e. Don River conservation or something, then it would not be a problem, however it just goes to the store, doing nothing.
I just find it ridiculous that places like the LCBO Don't give bags when clearly they are required, and only offer those stupid canvass totes for purchase, not even making a 5 cent bag available.
That and when is the paper bag industry going to up its game? Come on guys, we put a man on the moon, we can make a better paper bag.
Also, they did study in Ireland (where they banned plastic bags years ago) and while society did not crumble, the consumption of store bought plastic bags ( like garbage bags etc.) increased 90%, essentially negating the gracery bag ban.
I also find it a pretty esoteric way to help the environment, as opposed to actually, you know, doing something...
I feel you. Government or any organization that proposed this project did not search the overall implication of banning plastic bags.
Deleteplastic sheds
I think that the bag tax is the start of a very important and cathartic change in our dangerously ill, growth driven, socio-economic rat-wheel of a system. Specifically, we need to price things in society to reflect the actual cost, including the cost to the environment like creation of green house gases in its production and marketing, and the cost to manage the waste it generates, for example.
ReplyDeleteIf we were forced to build in the true and complete costs to the planet into the sale and use of our resources, we would soon invest in greener solutions, which by their very nature, would not become more affordable in comparison to the less clean or less environmentally sustainable alternatives. Think of the effect on the economy…let’s take China for example…let’s pretend that the goods imported from China had to include a carbon tax to reflect the burning of dirty coal that was needed for electricity over there to manufacture those goods, as well as the carbon tax that would reflect the incremental cost of the diesel fuel burned to get the products to North America. The price of that Chinese toaster just tripled…and suddenly it would make economic sense to manufacture the same toaster in Milwaukee and ship by rail to North American markets. Sure the labour costs would be higher than Chinese, but now the real cost of the toaster, including the cost to the environment given how and where it is produced, would drive the best outcome for the planet. It works. It has to work. We are not going to stop the slippery slide into the destruction of our precious earth unless we work within the system to drive the right decisions. We need to price our goods and services to reflect the real cost of their manufacture and use, from raw materials extraction, to manufacturing and marketing, right through to the decommissioning and waste management of the spent goods. Then we will have a sustainable and balanced system.
I was sad to hear that the re-launch of the new 2010 GM Camero was such a huge hit this month…15,000 cars sold in the last month…”signaled a bright point of light in the drab world of the floundering auto maker’….bullshit!
It’s a sign that nothing has changed; more of the same old same old. If that 300hp car was priced to reflect its true cost to the environment, it would cost over $100K…not the $27K as advertised…the Hybrid Toyota or the zero emission Mercedes might be the better deal in comparison.
Yes the shopping bag thing is a small but important step.
We need to be weaned to accept that there is cost to living a consumptive existence; a cost that goes beyond the simple cost of manufacturing and selling a product at a reasonable profit.
Our governments could do away with income tax, and build a balanced system of carbon tax that would deliver ample fiscal revenues, and help motivate the development of sustainable technologies in all levels of the economy. It’s not a question of if we should do this, but a question of how we do this to protect the stability of our economic system, while encouraging economic behavior toward more sustainable solutions.
I hope some day soon you notice a guy walking home with milk not only not in a shopping bag, but in a reusable sterile container he had just returned to the grocery store for one-step sterilization and milk refilling….because it was cheaper than paying the cost of a disposable waxed carton that included an extra $4 in carbon tax because it was made and shipped from Winnipeg and lasts for 200 years in a landfill somewhere after just two weeks in the fridge.
Oh yeah, I like one percent too.
Dave