Others responded saying he should bring his own bags, that Giant and other stores are giving them out for free, and that since the city council voted on the tax, he did have representation on it. Plus places like California where increases are voted on by the people or prohibited due to referenda now have terrible budget deficits.
Personally I think the bag tax is a good idea, and am kind of surprised by the opposition to it (which I've seen in comments here too.) We're taxed for lots of things we don't vote on -- sales tax, for instance.
Here's his first post:
I discovered something interesting this weekend while shopping at Target: I now will spend less resulting in less taxes collected by the city for my purchases. Why? I refuse to pay the 5 cent per bag tax. So I will only buy what I can carry in my own two hands. I usually spend hundreds of dollars a weekend at Target. Now I spend very little.Update: The City Paper writes about it too.
Fewer purchases = less sales tax generated = more money left in my bank account. And I am not alone.
I also now find it cheaper to drive my hybrid to the Safeway in Maryland to purchase groceries. I get 50+ MPG in my hybrid so an extra mile is nothing compared to 5 cents per bag. So Maryland will now get my sales tax money.
I also find myself ordering more things online now so that they can be delivered bag tax and sales tax free. The only problem is now I need to throw away all those boxes and packaging material. There is no tax on sticking it in my trash can.
So there you go City Council. Someone with a 6 figure salary has now made a lifestyle change because of the bag tax. Taxation without representation now done locally.
Here's to all the Amazon boxes now clogging the rivers.