IDBillzFan Posted August 30, 2014 Author Share Posted August 30, 2014 Plastic? For real? Why don't they just use their Gucci bags? In parts of the state, particularly up north, when you buy anything at a store that may need a bag, they charge you 10 cents a bag. You can, of course, choose to not use their bag, and use your own bag, but lately that's creating all kinds of health issues when people keep using the same bags to transport food, but don't bother washing the bags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 So is this like a bottle deposit thing? Can you return the bag and get your dime back? Christ I'm glad I don't live there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 In parts of the state, particularly up north, when you buy anything at a store that may need a bag, they charge you 10 cents a bag. You can, of course, choose to not use their bag, and use your own bag, but lately that's creating all kinds of health issues when people keep using the same bags to transport food, but don't bother washing the bags. They charge you for the plastic up north? In LA, at least west-side, they don't carry plastic anymore. You have to buy paper or your own. Not counting corner stores, they still use plastic in my hood at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 They charge you for the plastic up north? In LA, at least west-side, they don't carry plastic anymore. You have to buy paper or your own. Not counting corner stores, they still use plastic in my hood at least. No plastic here in the Bay Area. You bring your own or buy a paper bag for a dime. Been that way for a few years and I have to tell you it may be a pain but you don't see too many plastic bags blowing around the city anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 No plastic here in the Bay Area. You bring your own or buy a paper bag for a dime. Been that way for a few years and I have to tell you it may be a pain but you don't see too many plastic bags blowing around the city anymore. I'm with you, that's how it is in Santa Monica. I thought it was going to be a hassle when it first started but the benefits are noticeable, especially around the beach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 I'm with you, that's how it is in Santa Monica. I thought it was going to be a hassle when it first started but the benefits are noticeable, especially around the beach. Sometimes you have to legislate change. People are lazy and won't change on their own. Uh-oh I think my wife's fear had come to fruition. This medical marijuana is turning me into a liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 31, 2014 Author Share Posted August 31, 2014 They charge you for the plastic up north? In LA, at least west-side, they don't carry plastic anymore. You have to buy paper or your own. Not counting corner stores, they still use plastic in my hood at least. Got my paper and plastic mixed up apparently. We get paper down here all the time, anyway, because we use it for our charcoal chimney. This medical marijuana is turning me into a liberal. So that's what they mean when they refer to dope as a gateway drug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 So that's what they mean when they refer to dope as a gateway drug. I'd prefer heroin addiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 Sometimes you have to legislate change. People are lazy and won't change on their own. Uh-oh I think my wife's fear had come to fruition. This medical marijuana is turning me into a liberal. Got my paper and plastic mixed up apparently. We get paper down here all the time, anyway, because we use it for our charcoal chimney. So that's what they mean when they refer to dope as a gateway drug. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 31, 2014 Share Posted August 31, 2014 I'd prefer heroin addiction. If you should go down that road and ever feel the need to take a nice warm shower, stop by Johnny Hammersticks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 2 pages of waste disposal talk in the Bills thread. Less than I anticipated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 (edited) it would be interesting to see if a correlation exists between bills apologists and political affiliation. i still can't begin to understand the poll that showed overwhelming support for the current management triumvirate.. i'm thinking 7:3 is roughly the ratio of conservatives to liberals here on ppp. Along these lines, I'm curious what the political breakdown among those who claim Watkins didn't cost us 2 firsts is. It sounds like Obamanomics to me, but I suspect blind homerism transcends political identity. Edited September 6, 2014 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Along these lines, I'm curious what the political breakdown among those who claim Watkins didn't cost us 2 firsts is. It sounds like Obamanomics to me, but I suspect blind homerism transcends political identity. The funny thing is, the same people who claim that Sammy didn't cost us two first round picks are the same who claim that Maybin was a waste of a first round pick. Addition is a struggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Along these lines, I'm curious what the political breakdown among those who claim Watkins didn't cost us 2 firsts is. It sounds like Obamanomics to me, but I suspect blind homerism transcends political identity. It didn't cost two first round picks. We swapped first round picks (4 for 9) and gave one away. That's only giving up one pick. Math is hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 It didn't cost two first round picks. We swapped first round picks (4 for 9) and gave one away. That's only giving up one pick. Math is hard. And you claim you're not a liberal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 And you claim you're not a liberal. Seriously. It's one pick. We still used a first round pick in 2014. Saying we lost 2 first round picks means Sammy doesn't count which we know isn't true since he's on the roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 Seriously. It's one pick. We still used a first round pick in 2014. Saying we lost 2 first round picks means Sammy doesn't count which we know isn't true since he's on the roster. I assume you're joking. To acquire the pick used for Watkins we traded this year's first, next year's first, and next year's 4th. The only thing we ultimately received in exchange for those 3 picks is Watkins. Thus, the acquisition of Watkins cost us 3 picks, 2 of which were firsts. I sincerely hope you're just yanking my chain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 It didn't cost two first round picks. We swapped first round picks (4 for 9) and gave one away. That's only giving up one extra pick. Math is hard. Fixed it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 I assume you're joking. To acquire the pick used for Watkins we traded this year's first, next year's first, and next year's 4th. The only thing we ultimately received in exchange for those 3 picks is Watkins. Thus, the acquisition of Watkins cost us 3 picks, 2 of which were firsts. I sincerely hope you're just yanking my chain. We didn't acquire Watkins with the trade, we acquired a first round pick which we then used to select Watkins. We gave two first rounders to get a better first round pick from Cleveland. The net cost of first round picks is one, not two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 (edited) We didn't acquire Watkins with the trade, we acquired a first round pick which we then used to select Watkins. We gave two first rounders to get a better first round pick from Cleveland. The net cost of first round picks is one, not two. That's not even what I said, and I'm not going to rehash it here. I already went through this with the retards over at the toilet bowl of a website known as BBMB. I'll put it as simply as I can and it's the last I'll say on the matter. Every player drafted costs the team drafting him a pick. If we'd drafted Watkins at 9 he would have cost 1 first round pick. The fact that we spent an additional 1st round pick (& 4th) to move up to draft him means that we now have 2 first round picks (and a 4th) invested in Watkins. It's an indisputable fact. That it's even debated helps me understand how a guy peddling Obamanomics can find himself in the White House. Edited September 6, 2014 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts