> All your points are addressed in the piece. I only see the author's hypothesis about why not having paper bags is a bad thing. The only firm statement is tha

> All your points are addressed in the piece. I only see the author's hypothesis about why not having paper bags is a bad thing. The only firm statement is that it seems "inconvenient", while all the other points are firmly based on a supposedly unavoidable need for bags. Bags are just containers. Why wouldn't we be reusing boxes for grocery delivery? There are reusable bags, why did the author assume that using a cotton bag a hundred plus times is not reasonable? Just stating that landfills aren't "bad" is not much of an address, either.