Prev: "NO BOX CONTAINS THE BOX NUMBERS THAT DON'T CONTAIN THEIR OWN BOX NUMBER" ~ XEN
Next: "NO BOX CONTAINS THE BOX NUMBERS THAT DON'T CONTAIN THEIR OWN BOX NUMBER" ~ XEN
From: spudnik on 14 Jun 2010 21:21 1/9, in base-9, 1/10; or. ..10000... what is the canonical digit for base-one? thus&so: time obviously doesn't bend, except in a subjective sense of living & dying, sleeping & waking ... it's too bad about Schroedinger's joke-cat, though ... Schroedinger's cat is dead; long-live Schroedinger's cat! the curvature of space was dyscovered with "synchronized sundials" by Aristarchus; it was measured in Alsace-Lorraine by Gauss, with his theodolite & trigonation ... for money, ne'er again! Dear Editor; It is apparent from the City ordinance, proposed to ban high-density polyethylene (HDPE) bags -- excepting take-out at restaurants -- that it will be a state-wide eco-tax. The "green fee" is slated to be 25 cents for any paper bag from the retailer, grocer or farmer at the market. This is unfortunate for two reasons, although, as I stated a year ago in Council, when it first came-up, the super-light-weight & super-inexpenseve bags (much less than the Staff Report was willing to concede) are so good at what they do, before they inevitably break-up & decompose (but , according to the apocrypha & studies of Heal the Bay etc., HDPEbagsR4ever) that coastal cities may be justified in a ban, to prevent stormdrain blockages. Firstly, just like with "hemp for haemarrhoids," it is not a panacea or much of an economic stop-gap, if only because "only criminals & baby-smotherers will have HDPE bags." Really, there are plenty of natural plastics; "plastic" is really an adjective, as in the plastic arts! Note also that even plant-derived plastic bags will be banned, although they are acknowledged to biodegrade. Secondly, a very small Carbon Tax would be much more realistic than simply allowing Waxman's CO2 cap & trade nostrum, of letting the abitrageurs & daytraders raise the price of our energy as much as they can in the "free market" -- with no provision whatever for government revenue (contrary to the slogan of "cap & tax" used by Tea Partiers, "Republicans," and the WSUrinal). As with the much-greater amount of materiel & energy that is required for the paper bags, we might do better to ban *low* density polypropolene bags at department & boutique stores, which are many times heavier than the HDPE bags. It is surprising that a fifth of the HDPE bags are recycled, considerng that a) they're only good for garbage, if they get dirty, and b) they are quite often re-used by folks; recycling them is an unsanitary joke, though composting might be educational fun. The retailers would get ten of the 25 cents, which seems to be a quite an incentive for the overhead. However, has anyone seen any analysis on the energy requirements for the "reusable" replacement, and their importation? --Sincerely, Brian H. --Stop BP's/Waxman's arbitragueur-daytripper's delight, cap&trade (Captain Tax in the feeble minds of Tea Partiers, "'republicans' R us," and the WSUrinal (and the latter just l o v e Waxman's '91 cap&trade bill !-)) http://wlym.com |