Comparing Of Saving Our City One Plastic Bag at a Time and Letter to the Editor
|📌Category:||Books, Environment, Environment problems, Literature|
|📌Published:||09 April 2021|
The author of " Saving Our City One Plastic Bag at a Time'' has the best supported claim. Along with providing a well researched paper, but on a long term goal with lasting results the "Letter to the Editor" has a more practical outlook on the reaction of human beings. While yes plastic and paper bags are harmful to the environment and wildlife who is to say the same result won't come about with reusable bags?
The author of "Letter to the Editor" writes to say that tourists don't carry around reusable bags, they are on vacation. Thus if the shop provided reusable bags how do business owners know that their customers won't just dispose of those bags. So, to charge shop owners with the responsibility of paper or plastic bags is the same as charging them with the responsibility of taking care of local wildlife. An egregious probability the author of the first article didn't consider in their argument.
While the author of "Saving Our City One Plastic Bag at a Time'' had a strong argument against plastic and paper. Citing the bags are contributing to pollution and animal endangerment. While also providing a solution in the creation and possible mandate of canvas or cloth bags. The one thing the argument is needing is an explanation of human behavior toward these man made cloth bags. Expecting everyone to support the possible mandate " Proposition 328". Seems to be rather naive but to also penalize shop owners for the actions and waste of their customers is a wrong that should not be imposed upon them.
So in conclusion, while the first article had strong evidence and a well written paper the author in "Letter to the Editor", had a more practical view. For when trying to enact change of pro or against paper or plastic the response from the public is always an important piece of information that should be shared in an argument. "Letter to the Editor" is the stronger paper for the sole purpose of explaining the perceived reaction of the public in regards to paper or plastic.