3 ms·

They also wouldn't have imagined that not making everything disposable and plastic would be a bad idea and yet here we are. Not everything is better because it

They also wouldn't have imagined that not making everything disposable and plastic would be a bad idea and yet here we are. Not everything is better because it happened in the past. God forbid you have to be a little bit more mindful of wanton consumption than people were in $CURRENT_YEAR - 50. Calling a country third world because you can't throw away tons of disposable diapers... now that's a low standard, or just ridiculously privileged.

croon 9y ago
This has nothing to do with the argument, at all.
- drstewart 9y ago
  It completely does. Why are cloth diapers third world? Why are disposables seen as so superior that they should be had at a discount? They should be expensive to account for their environmental cost. Just because they didn't care about that in the 50s doesn't mean anything. So yeah, it's incredibly relevant.
  - croon 9y ago
    The discussion was about how something that almost every parent uses, relating to one of the most basic human functions, could be outside of the purchasing power of an inhabitant of a major developed country. I don't disagree with a discussion on how we externalize costs in cell phones, take out food containers, packaging for toilet paper, or whatever else. But however reasonable that discussion is, it was besides the point of this discussion.
  - s4vi0r 9y ago
    No, you entirely missed the point. Cloth being better is something else entirely, nor was I suggesting that disposable diapers be discounted with taxpayer money. The point was "Why does the poor in the richest country in the world have to worry about something as inane as affording diapers in 2018?" I agree that people should use cloth - but the response to "Hey, this poor person can't even really afford to buy diapers!" shouldn't be "wow that damn government making her dependent on welfare bux, shes so dumb she doesn't even know about cloth too!". It just reeks of being completely out of touch with the poor experience in America. Maternity leave isn't really a thing for someone like her - should she maybe be working an extra job or two to afford better diapers? Even if she doesn't, how do you know she has the time to deal with changing and washing cloth diapers? Being a stay at home mom doesn't exactly work as well as it did in the 50s or 60s, and she doesn't have a husband working for a tech company or whatever who can support a family on a single salary.
    - chrissnell 9y ago
      Let's be clear and honest about this article: there was no second job for her to work because she quit her first job before the baby was even born to go on assistance. Your argument doesn't hold water with me. My mom worked when she was pregnant with me and went right back to work after I was born. My wife, a physical therapist with a physically demanding job, worked until the very day both of our sons were born and then went back to work four weeks later. The girl in this story did none of that. Again, I don't blame her--the system practically invited her to do this.
hennsen 9y ago
You are right about consumption and throwaway society issues. At the same time, i dont believe the reason people can’t afford diapers is that they are expensive to protect the environment... plus creating lots of trash shouldn’t be a privilege for some - it should be prohibited for all.
- pas 9y ago
  It should be priced. If you are full vegan, and recyle everything for years, and never travel, so your environmental load is minimal, you should be able to afford a year of time saving with a baby, by using disposable diapers. And maybe it could be price adjusted for income, so everyone should do the same effort for the environment.
  - hennsen 9y ago
    There definitely should a price system that also encompasses the health/environmental/social damage a product brings over its full production and lifecycle! That would generally reward people so much for the good things you mentioned that they still could afgord the one bad thing...

croon 9y ago

This has nothing to do with the argument, at all.

drstewart 9y ago
It completely does. Why are cloth diapers third world? Why are disposables seen as so superior that they should be had at a discount? They should be expensive to account for their environmental cost. Just because they didn't care about that in the 50s doesn't mean anything. So yeah, it's incredibly relevant.
- croon 9y ago
  The discussion was about how something that almost every parent uses, relating to one of the most basic human functions, could be outside of the purchasing power of an inhabitant of a major developed country. I don't disagree with a discussion on how we externalize costs in cell phones, take out food containers, packaging for toilet paper, or whatever else. But however reasonable that discussion is, it was besides the point of this discussion.
- s4vi0r 9y ago
  No, you entirely missed the point. Cloth being better is something else entirely, nor was I suggesting that disposable diapers be discounted with taxpayer money. The point was "Why does the poor in the richest country in the world have to worry about something as inane as affording diapers in 2018?" I agree that people should use cloth - but the response to "Hey, this poor person can't even really afford to buy diapers!" shouldn't be "wow that damn government making her dependent on welfare bux, shes so dumb she doesn't even know about cloth too!". It just reeks of being completely out of touch with the poor experience in America. Maternity leave isn't really a thing for someone like her - should she maybe be working an extra job or two to afford better diapers? Even if she doesn't, how do you know she has the time to deal with changing and washing cloth diapers? Being a stay at home mom doesn't exactly work as well as it did in the 50s or 60s, and she doesn't have a husband working for a tech company or whatever who can support a family on a single salary.
  - chrissnell 9y ago
    Let's be clear and honest about this article: there was no second job for her to work because she quit her first job before the baby was even born to go on assistance. Your argument doesn't hold water with me. My mom worked when she was pregnant with me and went right back to work after I was born. My wife, a physical therapist with a physically demanding job, worked until the very day both of our sons were born and then went back to work four weeks later. The girl in this story did none of that. Again, I don't blame her--the system practically invited her to do this.

hennsen 9y ago

You are right about consumption and throwaway society issues. At the same time, i dont believe the reason people can’t afford diapers is that they are expensive to protect the environment... plus creating lots of trash shouldn’t be a privilege for some - it should be prohibited for all.

pas 9y ago
It should be priced. If you are full vegan, and recyle everything for years, and never travel, so your environmental load is minimal, you should be able to afford a year of time saving with a baby, by using disposable diapers. And maybe it could be price adjusted for income, so everyone should do the same effort for the environment.
- hennsen 9y ago
  There definitely should a price system that also encompasses the health/environmental/social damage a product brings over its full production and lifecycle! That would generally reward people so much for the good things you mentioned that they still could afgord the one bad thing...