Carrier Bag use in Scotland

bap98189

geerex wrote: »

I beg to differ. The legislation leaves little room for compromise. The minimum charge is 5p whether that's a spit-through or something more substantial. It's yet another piece of red tape conveniently dressed up as a "green" policy.

You may consider it red tape, but it works. In Ireland bag usage has fallen by 90%, in Wales 79% and in Northern Ireland 72% since those countries introduced a bag tax.

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

It s a tax. Full stop. Who pays the tax?

geerex

ElefantEd wrote: »

No, but some liberties are based on preventing others doing what they like.

This may begin to resemble a Monty Python script, but do you really resent all government interference? You hate using the roads, the currency, the police, fire, and ambulance services, the NHS, the system of laws which enable ordinary living, trade etc to continue?



But not, apparently, spell it!



Why is the water clean? Partly (not entirely of course) because of laws - enforced by the state - stop people polluting or abstracting it, and insist that drinking water is of a certain quality. Similarly the air is clean partly because people are prevented from burning dirty coal, and there are laws about what factories and businesses are set up where.

I've lived in countries with less government than the UK and the relative anarchy this generates is by no means preferable.

This doesn't mean I'm in favour of all new restrictions or laws. In fact, I think some of the new anti-drinking laws are possibly not the right approach, though I thoroughly approve of the smoking in public places ban - why should I be forced to breathe other people's carcinogens?

You agree that there is an alcohol problem in Scotland. What would you do about it? It is after all, costing you a fair bit of money in taxes, though also gaining some through sales taxes (another of those pesky government interventions), so it does affect you. I doubt you can stop people being 'morons' - in your eyes - though.

But suggesting that all government is an unacceptable restriction on liberties is simplistic and, if there were none, you would have an unworkable society.

I love Scotland, it's a great country in many respects, including for some - but not all - of the reasons you've mentioned. We are lucky enough to live in a country where democracy works, and you are perfectly at liberty to campaign to change specific laws you think are wrong, including the smoking ban, drinking laws, speed limits, charges for plastic bags, whatever. You would have to come up with other solutions to public health, traffic management, pollution and climate change issues though.

It's a shame you feel Scotland is a pathetic country. Is there anywhere you would prefer?

One typo. You couldn't let one typo go.

Sums your type up, really.

(Oh, and before you go trawling through my previous posts in an attempt to "out" me, one typing mistake is entirely different to a fundamental lack of understanding regarding how to use a word, or indeed how to properly articulate ideas on a public forum.)

ElefantEd

geerex wrote: »

One typo. You couldn't let one typo go.

Sums your type up, really.

(Oh, and before you go trawling through my previous posts in an attempt to "out" me, one typing mistake is entirely different to a fundamental lack of understanding regarding how to use a word, or indeed how to properly articulate ideas on a public forum.)

What type might that be, exactly? I think it more significant that you fail to answer any of the serious, substantive points I make, preferring instead to complain about a little gentle fun. I'm well aware that everyone, certainly including me, makes typos all the time and I definitely don't believe that one little spelling mistake invalidates someone's arguments and ideas. It honestly was just a little friendly chuckle at the juxtaposition.

If you like I would be happy to retract that tiny little dig, which appears to have offended your delicate sensibilities, so you can focus on having a genuine discussion.

ThumbRemote

geerex wrote: »

One typo. You couldn't let one typo go.

Sums your type up, really.

(Oh, and before you go trawling through my previous posts in an attempt to "out" me, one typing mistake is entirely different to a fundamental lack of understanding regarding how to use a word, or indeed how to properly articulate ideas on a public forum.)

Brilliant! This coming from someone who, over and over again, points out spelling mistakes in other peoples posts.

But of course it's different when it's you, isn't it?

geerex

ThumbRemote wrote: »

Brilliant! This coming from someone who, over and over again, points out spelling mistakes in other peoples posts.

But of course it's different when it's you, isn't it?

Read the part in brackets. That's why I put it there. It actually defies belief that you completely ignored it when I specifically put it there to preempt people like you.

ThumbRemote

geerex wrote: »

Read the part in brackets. That's why I put it there. It actually defies belief that you completely ignored it when I specifically put it there to preempt people like you.

I ignored it because it was wrong. A complete fabrication. A fantasy you might like to believe but is not reality.


e.g.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/67731394#Comment_67731394

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/67692417#Comment_67692417

Were these "a fundamental lack of understanding regarding how to use a word". Or were they, perhaps, small mistakes?

Norman_Castle

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

It s a tax. Full stop. Who pays the tax?

Cunning tax avoidance scheme. Use your own bags.

bod1467

ThumbRemote wrote: »

I ignored it because it was wrong. A complete fabrication. A fantasy you might like to believe but is not reality.


e.g.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/67731394#Comment_67731394

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/67692417#Comment_67692417

Were these "a fundamental lack of understanding regarding how to use a word". Or were they, perhaps, small mistakes?

Rolandtheroadie

Cant sell 3 bottles of wine for £10, so the supermarket sell them for £3.33. Think the beer is now £6.66 instead of 3 for £20.
No great heartache really.
Sure early reports suggested alcohol sales fell when the policy was introduced.