Tweet
What do you think of this idea? We know that bottles and cans fill up our landfills. So, government creates a tax, five to ten cents per bottle and can upon purchase. This is supposed to help people recycle the bottles and cans.
We also know that newspapers cause an even greater use of landfills--dead trees do that.,
In Michigan there is a proposed law to do the same with newspapers. "There is no shortage of bad ideas coming out of Lansing. Senate Bill 1285 introduced by Sen. Bruce Patterson, R-Canton, would require customers to pay a deposit on each newspaper they purchase equal to one-half the retail price of the newspaper. The proposed law would operate much like Michigan's bottle deposit law. Newspapers would be required to be returned to a redemption center, with each publisher in the state required to operate at least one such center."
The LA Times loved the bottled deposit--the Chronicle wants an even bigger bottle deposit. This was a bad idea--especially since we know now this is a slush fund for the Governor to use to cover his massive deficit..
If we want bottles and cans recycled, and we punished people with a special recycling tax on them, then why not a tax on each newspaper? A 50% tax may be too high, but think of the trees it could save! Isn't that all that counts?
While I am against raising taxes and fees, the newspapers need to feel the results of its policies: As Democrat Senator Russell Long used to say."
"Don't tax you,
Don't tax me,
Tax the man behind the tree"
The man behind the tree are the newspapers of California that demand higher taxes and fees, AB 32 and other job killers. Time for the newspapers to feel the results of their policies.
I would oppose even this tax, but very reluctantly. What say you?
More...
We also know that newspapers cause an even greater use of landfills--dead trees do that.,
In Michigan there is a proposed law to do the same with newspapers. "There is no shortage of bad ideas coming out of Lansing. Senate Bill 1285 introduced by Sen. Bruce Patterson, R-Canton, would require customers to pay a deposit on each newspaper they purchase equal to one-half the retail price of the newspaper. The proposed law would operate much like Michigan's bottle deposit law. Newspapers would be required to be returned to a redemption center, with each publisher in the state required to operate at least one such center."
The LA Times loved the bottled deposit--the Chronicle wants an even bigger bottle deposit. This was a bad idea--especially since we know now this is a slush fund for the Governor to use to cover his massive deficit..
If we want bottles and cans recycled, and we punished people with a special recycling tax on them, then why not a tax on each newspaper? A 50% tax may be too high, but think of the trees it could save! Isn't that all that counts?
While I am against raising taxes and fees, the newspapers need to feel the results of its policies: As Democrat Senator Russell Long used to say."
"Don't tax you,
Don't tax me,
Tax the man behind the tree"
The man behind the tree are the newspapers of California that demand higher taxes and fees, AB 32 and other job killers. Time for the newspapers to feel the results of their policies.
I would oppose even this tax, but very reluctantly. What say you?
More...