> The labeling of the valuation as wrong and implying it is generally known is what I'm objecting to. I was saying that the valuation is not high enough to kee

> The labeling of the valuation as wrong and implying it is generally known is what I'm objecting to. I was saying that the valuation is not high enough to keep people from throwing out reusable bags (ie what you said: "disposable trash"). I didn't use the word "wrong" in any of my comments and I don't think I implied it either. What I (thought I) was implying is that the low perceived value of reusable bags was hurting the city's goal (note: not "my goal", which I also never said, though yeah I support it) of reducing the use of plastic. Clearly you're taking issue with what you assumed was the subtext of my comment. I can't help that. The most I can do is clarify.