Dear Editor,
When dealing with saving our natural resources, the motto is
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
– in that order. Best is to not take a plastic bag, next best is
to re-use one you already have, less desirable is to recycle your
bag, and worst is to take a bag and throw it away.
Residents should think differently about 25-cent grocery bag fee
Dear Editor,
When dealing with saving our natural resources, the motto is Reduce, Reuse, Recycle – in that order. Best is to not take a plastic bag, next best is to re-use one you already have, less desirable is to recycle your bag, and worst is to take a bag and throw it away.
I used to feel I was doing my part by recycling my plastic and paper bags. But then I started to understand that recycle is the least eco-friendly option in the Reduce, Reuse Recycle trio. In the last year or so, I became aware of how many bags our family consumed, and then took steps to change our habits. It wasn’t that hard.
Yes, sometimes I had to walk back out to the car to get a bag, but the few extra steps were good for me.
Like the CRV on bottles and cans, this fee would encourage people to re-think their consumer habits. And like the refund of CRV, at most stores they will pay you for reuse of your bag. Living on a country road corner, I can assure you that the CRV significantly reduced the cans and bottles tossed from car windows onto the roadside. Empty cans and bottles are no longer trash – they have value.
A reusable bag at Nob Hill costs $1. You can use it many times. It holds more than a plastic bag, it is stronger, and it keeps your items in better shape.
According to your own article “Based on comments from area residents, such a fee would likely have the desired effect of promoting recycling and reducing waste.” In Italy, they charged a fee for bags at the grocery store. Not surprisingly, almost everyone came to the store with a bag.
Usually siding with the “government stay out of my business” crowd, I have come to believe that certain environmental issues have broader impact. We cannot be blind to the future result of using our resources at an alarming rate. No one will go broke by purchasing a few $1 reusable sacks, or re-using the 25-cent sack they buy. But we can easily bankrupt our natural resources if we do not treat them with respect.
Louise Helland, San Martin
The Golden Quill is awarded for a well-written letter.
$38 billion for the state, $14 billion for San Jose … it’s sheer insanity
Dear Editor,
This is an open letter to President Bush: You have an MBA, you should understand business. The big three automakers signed unsustainable contracts with the United Auto Workers union.
Unless those contracts are renegotiated to become competitive they will fail. This is a world market, people are going to buy where the prices are competitive. You can’t expect people to pay between $2,500 to $5,000 more per vehicle.
The TARP was touted as a aid to the financial world. This was because of the bad paper generated by the subprime loan fiasco. It was to provide operating capital for business, not bail out failed businesses.
If you give the auto industry and UAW money every other failed entity will demand money. These failures are because of mismanagement not the subprime loan fiasco. The state of California is already asking for $38 billion. The city of San Jose is asking for $14 billion.
There is not enough money in the world to bail out every failed state, city, county and business.
Keith C. De Filippis, Gilroy
Let the poor people make a little money from the recycling bin
Dear Editor,
While drinking my morning coffee and reading this morning’s newspaper, I was very upset to read Christine Taylor’s letter in regards to people taking recycling items out of the blue bins that she puts out on the curb to have picked up by the South Valley disposal trucks.
I, too, have seen this happen and I have just one question to ask: What’s the big deal?
What the people are taking out of your bins is recyclable cans and bottles. If you’re not taking your recyclables to a recycling center they can and will receive five or 10 cents per can or bottle. They are not trying to break into your homes, steal your cars or harm and hurt you in anyway.
Plus … you’re putting your blue bin out on the street, not on your porch or inside your home. There are a lot more important things in life to worry about (especially now with the economy) then if someone takes a can or bottle out of your blue bin to try and help themselves or their family survive.
Plus … where is your Christmas spirit? It’s the holidays. Most of the people I have noticed taking things out of the blue bins are homeless or are barely making a living and can’t afford the things that you or I can. Now, if they try to break into someone’s home or try to hurt someone, and use their unfortunate circumstances as an excuse that is a whole other story. I don’t condone that in anyway shape or form. But if your leaving your can or bottles on the street and all they do is walk up to the bin and take a few cans and bottles, what’s wrong with that?
I understand the whole, “stealing is stealing” premise. And I’ve already had a debate with myself in regards to this on “where do we draw the line?” However, I think that I would rather let one man’s trash be another man’s treasure then chase someone away over something so small like bottles and cans.
Hope Harlan, Gilroy
