Do environmentalist care about the environment

Correlation isn't causation. That first article doesn't tie anything together so I didn't bother with the second. What is your point you are making? That a law to use recyclable bags doesn't go far enough to protect the environment and we need significantly more legislation to curb pollution and waste?

 

That is a misleading title.

 

Of course they don't!

There are millions of scientists, activists, bureaucrats, etc that are all quietly getting paid by China and that scary Jewish guy so they can gain control and then eat your babies and make your kids queer. And none of them will admit it.

 

I believe the proper way to preserve the environment is to turn it into a golf course. Gets plenty of water, the dirt gets raked every day, etc. Its love in its purest form.

 

California just did what your article (published early this year) said they should do to close the loop holes. The plastic industry even fought it, just as the article predicted!

Governor signs California plastic bag bill into law

 

Did you read your first article? It basically states that the policy failed because it allowed companies to exploit a loophole and just make thicker "technically recyclable" bags. So the waste has gone up because the plastic bag ban didn't actually ban plastic bags, just some of them.

And somehow, this is all the fault of environmentalists? You're gonna need to walk us through that logic on how for profit corporations exploiting a loophole leads to the supposition that environmentalists don't actually care about the environment.

 

Its those pesky environmentalists not corporations and financial stakeholders who demanded those loopholes to render the law toothless dont ya know

 

He absolutely didn't. I can confidently predict some right wing aggregator dug up this old article after CA passed the new law this week, without much further analysis.

 

Yeah, I could maybe understand the cynical argument that environmentalists' efforts will ultimately make things worse because the flow and power of money will ultimately pervert or undermine their efforts. That might actually be an interesting discussion.

 

I'm starting to worry about OP

 

"Environmentalist" isn't even a really definable group. It could cover anyone from people who think we need to preserve wetlands so they can shoot ducks whenever they want to people who think we need to end industrial capitalism period. Anyways, of all those people, I can also confidently predict that 0% would tell you "just ban plastic bags and we're good."

 

You and I both know it means "liberal."

 

over under on when the false talking point get tossed out about CA mismanaging forests that btw are under FEDERAL control? A favorite maga target: CA.
I'm sure maga world cheered when the orange god threatened to take away federal funding for fighting wildfires from CA. Yay team. The idiots conveniently forget that CA pays more into the fed than it gets back, resulting in CA in effect subsidizing much poorer red states that love to bash CA. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Carry on.

 

Regulations come with unintended consequences. This is something I do think the left under appreciates. I assume the OP would be with me on that, but shooting past these complications of implementation to the questioning of base motives is simply unnecessary.

 

Correction: Envirofascism.

 

Like this:

 

Translation: we regulate problems into existence...and you need to give us more money and power, and surrender more of your freedom, so we can fix those problems.

Vote Dummyrat this November!

 

I’ve seen those thicker “reusable” plastic bags in a few stores even in Florida, I think Sprouts uses them. Definitely a dumb loophole that never should have been there if the intent was to ban plastic waste.

Apparantly CA just signed a new law that bans those bags as well (which I guess is why this is “news”) so we’ll see if that moves the needle in the right direction on plastic waste. Seems like it would have to drastically shift stores over to paper bags which has its own set of issues. If the idea is to get people to remember their re-usable bags the $.10 isn’t going to move the needle.

I recall 40-50 years ago stores up north that didnt even use shopping bags, they just had cardboard boxes (from their own shipping inventory) you could re-use as grocery containers. I guess they were way ahead of the times.