And now we know the underlying reason..

[GMDino]

(02-12-2017, 12:27 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I just want to go back to this, because it's the most sensible post in the thread so far.

There are some heavy handed actions taken by governments in the name of environmental health that rub me the wrong way, no doubt. I don't think extra taxes on disposable items should happen (though if a store, for instance Aldi, wants to do eliminate bags on their own, good on them. I'm not for the government getting rid of incandescent light bulbs. I do my best to reduce the amount of MSW I produce, but that's not something that should be forced. It works in other countries, but that is not our model. Cleaner water and air, less waste in landfills, relying more on reusable materials and renewable energy sources, all of these things are good but we should not tie them to climate change. We should incentivize investment, we should incentivize recycling and using renewables, we shouldn't penalize those that don't. Just my thoughts.

Why not both?

Big business has shown a *tendency* to not give a dame about the environment if they can save a buck.

(Now I realize that's just over the last 200 years or so.   )

But encouraging people to do well and penalizing people who do not seems fair to me.