# Alert: Begin Stocking Up On Toilet Paper



## LuxLuthor (Sep 24, 2009)

Feeling their power from the incan bans, your favorite toilet paper is now in the crosshairs. Begin stocking up now.

I'm calculating how many rolls of Charmin Ultra Soft I use and will need for at least 10 years.


----------



## Hooked on Fenix (Sep 24, 2009)

This stinks. Do they expect us to sit down and take this [email protected]? The T.P. companies should stand up for themselves and ban environmentalists from using their products. Make them use leaves and pine cones. When they ban T.P., I'll wipe my butt with a spotted owl (I prefer t.p. though). I bet sooner or later, someone is going to protest by t.p.ing one of the environmentalists' private jets. When are they going to stop being a pain in the butt?


----------



## Bullzeyebill (Sep 24, 2009)

Lux, you are going to have to add on a room to your house to store that fluffy Charmin. :laughing:

Bill


----------



## bshanahan14rulz (Sep 24, 2009)

I'm all for it, but not before they make recycled feel better.... I'd rather use a leaf than some of the stuff out there...


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 24, 2009)

Bullzeyebill said:


> Lux, you are going to have to add on a room to your house to store that fluffy Charmin. :laughing:
> 
> Bill



I would rent a storage unit and fill it with Ultra Soft Charmin before these morons get this passed.


----------



## savumaki (Sep 24, 2009)

The world is not ready to make these major decisions.


----------



## LightWalker (Sep 24, 2009)

LuxLuthor said:


> Feeling their power from the incan bans, your favorite toilet paper is now in the crosshairs. Begin stocking up now.
> 
> I'm calculating how many rolls of Charmin Ultra Soft I use and will need for at least 10 years.


 
You won't have to worry about using toilet paper if there is no food.
http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/02/2009-global-food-catastrophe.html


----------



## EngrPaul (Sep 24, 2009)

Hooked on Fenix said:


> This stinks.


 




Hooked on Fenix said:


> Do they expect us to sit down and take this [email protected]?


 
 



Hooked on Fenix said:


> When are they going to stop being a pain in the butt?


----------



## saabgoblin (Sep 24, 2009)

Well Lightwalker, something has to thin the heard, especially if we are all living to 75+ years of age.:shrug: As for the softness of the recycled stuff, personally, it isn't that bad. Most of the heavy stuff that I have tried just clogs up the toilets anyway, it's like flushing a towel.

Whether you agree with the ban or not, can you at least see the connection between deforestation and destruction of species and their environments and how that deforestation degrades the entire food chain that we all rely on for sustenance? Personally, caring about the health of the planet is caring for your fellow man in my opinion, I just wish that it wasn't given such a bad name or at least used as a tool in politics by political strategists to further divide and conquer for purely political gain regardless of party affiliation.

Our parents and some of you as well may remember when you returned your bottles for a refund and didn't have to worry about recycling and islands of plastic floating in the sea. Our society has become so fast paced and yet lazy that we are drowning in our own success. 

Just makes me wanna buy a flashlight!


----------



## John_Galt (Sep 24, 2009)

If you got a big industrial strength vacuum packer, you could probably store a lot more in the same space, and it would be more weather and pest protected.


----------



## asdalton (Sep 24, 2009)

From my cold, dead hands! :nana:


----------



## LightWalker (Sep 24, 2009)

saabgoblin said:


> Well Lightwalker, something has to thin the heard, especially if we are all living to 75+ years of age.:shrug: As for the softness of the recycled stuff, personally, it isn't that bad. Most of the heavy stuff that I have tried just clogs up the toilets anyway, it's like flushing a towel.
> 
> Whether you agree with the ban or not, can you at least see the connection between deforestation and destruction of species and their environments and how that deforestation degrades the entire food chain that we all rely on for sustenance? Personally, caring about the health of the planet is caring for your fellow man in my opinion, I just wish that it wasn't given such a bad name or at least used as a tool in politics by political strategists to further divide and conquer for purely political gain regardless of party affiliation.
> 
> ...


 
The World is not over populated, some men are just greedy. The Earth is rich in resources.


----------



## Linger (Sep 24, 2009)

*Eat better. When there's nothing to wipe away, it doesn't matter what's available

*Lightwalker - earth _was_ rich. gets poorer every day


----------



## jabe1 (Sep 24, 2009)

Linger said:


> *Eat better. When there's nothing to wipe away, it doesn't matter what's available
> 
> *Lightwalker - earth _was_ rich. gets poorer every day



:twothumbs

Very sane answer... we'll be alright when we can grind-up all of the McMansions and make more TP.


----------



## f22shift (Sep 24, 2009)

Hooked on Fenix said:


> This stinks. Do they expect us to sit down and take this [email protected]? The T.P. companies should stand up for themselves and ban environmentalists from using their products. Make them use leaves and pine cones. When they ban T.P., I'll wipe my butt with a spotted owl (I prefer t.p. though). I bet sooner or later, someone is going to protest by t.p.ing one of the environmentalists' private jets. When are they going to stop being a pain in the butt?


----------



## f22shift (Sep 24, 2009)

LightWalker said:


> The World is not over populated, some men are just greedy. The Earth is rich in resources.


 
i just saw a show today saying we need 3 earths to sustain the amount of people. i'm not sure about that.
another interesting point made by someone else was that it's more about economic wealth rather than the population. people consume more with more money.
then later i saw on cnn about the economy affecting women decisions on kids and that they are delaying or have less kids.

economic downturn=less ppl, less consuming= better for environment? :shrug:


----------



## dealgrabber2002 (Sep 24, 2009)

bshanahan14rulz said:


> I'm all for it, but not before they make recycled feel better.... I'd rather use a leaf than some of the stuff out there...


 
There going to be a lot of bleeding butts in the world.


----------



## MarNav1 (Sep 24, 2009)

C'mon guys, you know where this is headed. Let's give Empath something else to do.


----------



## Hooked on Fenix (Sep 24, 2009)

The environmentalists have gone too far this time. This means war. They can take our lives, but they'll never take our t.p.! We shall meet them on the field of battle riding our trusty steeds (angry, out of work grizzly bears who can't wipe their filthy bums) and shout our battle cry, "Don't squeeze the Charmin!"












Just kidding.


----------



## jtr1962 (Sep 24, 2009)

Never liked the soft stuff anyway. You get 1/4 the number of sheets on a roll, and it breaks apart when you wet it (I'll leave it to the reader's imagination why wetting and wiping is better than just wiping). I personally like the idea of bidets. Let the bidet do the heavy cleaning, and then just use a few sheets of TP to dry everything off. Too bad they haven't caught on in the states so far.


----------



## John_Galt (Sep 24, 2009)

This has gone too far.

Why worry about tp, when a much bigger waste problem is all of the extraneous, frustrating packaging that comes with everything! Think about it, because of one or two isolated acts of crazy by a few wacko's (remember the poisoned aspirin from the 80 or 90's), the rest of the country has to put up with increasingly frustrating packaging, which is a much bigger waste than tp (because, newsflash, trees do this thing they call GROWING, and it happens all the time), and none of it is biodegradable. 

If they were truly worried about these problems, they would focus on the big problems first (extraneous, wasteful packing materials), instead of trying to force idiotic change upon the civilized world.

Dumb***'s. What is the world coming to?

And they can have my tp and incandescent bulbs when they take them from my cold, dead hands (just remember to compost the tp, and recycle the bulbs)... And I plan to live into my 90's...


----------



## saabgoblin (Sep 24, 2009)

Can't disagree with you on the wasteful packaging that is present but I don't mind the stuff that safeguards peoples health with OTC medicines.

As for the forests, yes they do regrow but when you clear cut, you remove almost all of the debris that is supposed to decompose and turn back into nourishing soil so the trees can regrow and sustain wildlife and biodiversity.

Eat your fiber as Linger suggests and Hooked on Fenix, quite squeezing my Charmin:green:! 

Waste is waste, "waste not, want not", source unknown and or variable.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 24, 2009)

Try to imagine how many rolls of luscious, Ultra Soft Charmin (perhaps some in this thread need the Ultra Strong Charmin) could have been made from all the trees that have been burning out of control in western USA this last year...mostly from the cooling waters in the Pacific, but also because practical logging has been likewise attacked, and all those smaller, pre-Smokey The Bear--"Only You Can Prevent Forest Fires" era--'natural fires' have been immediately prevented by more government federal policies thinking they know best.

OK, don't allow any small fires, logging and reseeding, to thin out the aging forests and brush, instead let mother nature burn it all down and pollute the air 1,000 times more than a city full of gas guzzlers. Smart. Very smart. Nothing wrong with sensible environmentalism, but morons are in charge...and they are after your butt wipes.


----------



## saabgoblin (Sep 24, 2009)

Can't disagree with you either Lux, practical logging is a good thing in my book and total fire suppression is unhealthy as well. Forests are supposed to clean themselves with fire and some forests, trees, and wildflowers won't grow without fire. Over extinguishing has lead to excess fuel which burns too hot and sterilizes the forest floor, killing all of the "good" and "bad" bacteria.

My next question is, why do we have to bleach toilet paper white and use all of those seemingly unnecessary chemicals, I don't think that its due to sanitary concerns because isn't the pulp boiled in a mash prior to forming the main rolls? When I can't drink out of a stream due to chemical pollution I don't really want to be around, yeah, I do filter my water when backpacking but every now and then I'll sneak a nip or two from a trusted source.


----------



## bugsy714 (Sep 24, 2009)

Do some research on the corporations that are gaining profits and leaving stumps and toxic stew for us & our children to deal with:

Where does paper come from?
http://www.sundancechannel.com/videos/230335318

If you can find the entire episode it covers the bleaching process and the entire tree to napkin process

So much of conservation is just common sense stuff that would cut into profits for the corporations...


----------



## Crenshaw (Sep 24, 2009)

Hmmmm,

why not spend the money they are wasting on this "save the trees" campaign, and use it to research how to make recycled tp softer. that way, when they demand that people stop using regular tp, they actually have a viable alternative to offer.

Crenshaw


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 24, 2009)

bugsy714 said:


> Do some research on the corporations that are gaining profits and leaving stumps and toxic stew for us & our children to deal with:
> 
> Where does paper come from?
> http://www.sundancechannel.com/videos/230335318
> ...



I suspect that bleaching is a historical preference for wanting to contrast ink on white paper, white representing something clean, not wanting colors that can sometimes stain, puritanical roots, etc.

I no longer care about bleaching. it is always worth seeing the full impact of products we use and examine if things can be done better. As far as the Sundance channel video trying to discuss protecting "old growth" forests, the "TP Terrorists" will not want anyone to think for themselves about the massive and absolute deforestation from fires with their catastrophic pollution and resulting desolation. This seems to be their preferred alternative to my Ultra Soft Charmin. I don't see any King Pines in that photo. Smart. Very smart.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 24, 2009)

Where the heck is Empath? This thread should have never been allowed to continue this long. LOL!  Ya know I luv ya.


----------



## LEDobsession (Sep 24, 2009)

Dang it! What the heck do they want us to wipe with? 1 ply?  I'd rather use 100 grit sand paper than that!  This is America and we love our everyday conveniences and we won't let anyone take them away. Haha. Im with Lux. I think I'll be stocking up.


----------



## RA40 (Sep 24, 2009)

If this is like the stuff in Japan...ugh. The facial tissue and flushable ones are far from "durable" Over thjere we'd use about 2.5X more and it costs more. Double lose.


----------



## bugsy714 (Sep 24, 2009)

lol, a corporation is only interested in profit, at any expense whether it be the public, society, the environment, little old ladies or kittens. 

If things are going to change it will be because A) the government clamps down with new regulations or B) the consumers demand change and vote for it with their dollars. 

A great documentary on this is "The Corporation" 
http://all.gloria.tv/?media=29369

Decent average people need to get together and demand some protection, the sooner the better


----------



## dano (Sep 24, 2009)

"Environmentalist?" I'd equate that title to someone with a propensity for illogical assumptions based on emotion, not facts.

It's a bunch of nonsense. 

There's more forest in the U.S. than there was 100 years ago.

I think it's a dying grasp on a topic that his one foot in the grave: That of the false environmental movement. It's not for the environment, it's for the big money generated by a few to control everyone else. The general public is waking up and starting to realize that it's all a bunch of crap.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 25, 2009)

bugsy714 said:


> lol, a corporation is only interested in profit, at any expense whether it be the public, society, the environment, little old ladies or kittens.
> 
> If things are going to change it will be because A) the government clamps down with new regulations or B) the consumers demand change and vote for it with their dollars.
> 
> ...



Bugsy, God Bless Ya, but you gotta get out more. You do realize that it is possible to practice responsible logging/harvesting right? You have heard of the FSC, right? You do realize that most forests in USA and Europe are FSC compliant, right?

You did take the time to verify that Charmin received the top toilet paper rating from the World Wildlife Fund, correct?


> Each year, WWF rates the big toilet tissue manufacturers on a number of different factors including environmental responsibility, recycled content, energy efficiency and wood sources. Top in the 2006 survey was SCA Hygiene (Svenska Cellulosa on our table), makers of Velvet, Naturelle and now the Charmin and Bounty brands.


The key is using intelligent environmental stewardship, not blind superficial conformity.

Your cute Canadian video clip on the Catholic website fails to reconcile the monumental gifts to humanity by evil capitalists such as Carnegie, Warren Buffet, Bloomberg, Bill & Melinda gates, Paul Newman, Getty, Mellon, Rockefellers, Vanderbuilts, Howard Hughes, Li Ka Shing, Ford, Wood Johnson, Kellog, Lilly, Pew, Wallenberg, Hewlett, Packard, Wosniak, Drexel, Disney, Johns Hopkins, etc. etc.


----------



## Rowrbazzle (Sep 25, 2009)

jtr1962 said:


> Never liked the soft stuff anyway.



Its still way better than that recycled TP. You could get yourself a particularly nasty paper cut from that stuff. (Yikes!)


----------



## angelofwar (Sep 25, 2009)

Crenshaw said:


> Hmmmm,
> 
> why not spend the money they are wasting on this "save the trees" campaign, and use it to research how to make recycled tp softer. that way, when they demand that people stop using regular tp, they actually have a viable alternative to offer.
> 
> Crenshaw


 
+1...quit whining and give us VIABLE Solutions!!!


----------



## Sgt. LED (Sep 25, 2009)

Cotton washcloth


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 25, 2009)

Sgt. LED said:


> Cotton washcloth



LOL! It must be fun visiting your house.


----------



## Scottiver (Sep 25, 2009)

jtr1962 said:


> Never liked the soft stuff anyway. You get 1/4 the number of sheets on a roll, and it breaks apart when you wet it (I'll leave it to the reader's imagination why wetting and wiping is better than just wiping). I personally like the idea of bidets. Let the bidet do the heavy cleaning, and then just use a few sheets of TP to dry everything off. Too bad they haven't caught on in the states so far.


 
That's some sage advice from someone from Flushing, NY


----------



## jtr1962 (Sep 25, 2009)

Scottiver said:


> That's some sage advice from someone from Flushing, NY


I didn't even realize how my location neatly tied in with this thread's topic until now. :laughing: 

And the funny thing is the history behind the name really does have to do with toilets. On some early maps the area which became Flushing was labeled "NO FLUSHING" on account of the area being mostly swamp land. Part of the name stuck when the area was later developed. I looked without success for a link about this, but it's what I remember reading in the papers a long time ago.


----------



## Jay R (Sep 25, 2009)

Not sure where the article gets the comment about Europe using tissue from “recycled paper goods”. You _can_ buy that over here but it’s pretty much one choice out of the 20 or so brands on the shelves. Probably the same in the U.S.
 Mind you, in some countries you have to get thin single ply. I commented on the quality of the paper in the loo once when staying at an old friends house in Venice, Italy and he said that the sewer pipes are so small and antiquated that if you don’t use single ply, they get bunged up and you have to pay hundreds for someone to come around and clear it.


----------



## John_Galt (Sep 25, 2009)

Whenever there is single ply toilet tissue anywhere I go, I always end up using 3-4 times as much tp as when there is two ply (even the really thin, cheap stuff). 


So much for using less paper.


----------



## EngrPaul (Sep 25, 2009)

"Excuse me, could you spare a square?"


----------



## DaFABRICATA (Sep 25, 2009)

EngrPaul said:


> "Excuse me, could you spare a square?"


 





Just don't start tappin your foot by the other stall.......


----------



## Beamhead (Sep 25, 2009)

IMHO some (not all) enviroweenies are out of control a$$wipes.....hmmmmmmm.....:thinking:

They can have my TP, I'll use them for a$$wipes.:devil:


----------



## saabgoblin (Sep 25, 2009)

I believe that Japan is very big on bidets as well as many other countries. You'll use way less paper and personally I believe that it's a lot cleaner but then again you may be using more water. What is worse, clear cutting forests, or increased water usage, well you would have to do a long term study and IMHO, there are so many variables that finding the answer may be a little difficult. America is horrified by the bidet but once you give one a go, they really are great, it's kind like a mini shower for the dirtiest part of your body. :toilet:!

With less paper to be processed, we would potentially have fewer overflows of sewage that threaten coastal water quality and septic systems wouldn't have to be serviced as frequently. Personally, I don't want to deny someone their pleasure or comfort but if that comfort comes at too high a price in relation to sustainability, then your comforts may very well have to end. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure but that is not always the way that humans work.


----------



## saabgoblin (Sep 25, 2009)

DaFABRICATA said:


> Just don't start tappin your foot by the other stall.......


Brilliant!:thumbsup:


----------



## Beamhead (Sep 25, 2009)

saabgoblin said:


> Personally, I don't want to deny someone their pleasure or comfort but if that comfort comes at too high a price in relation to sustainability, then your comforts may very well have to end.


 
That is the kind of convoluted thought process that is frightening to some, who decides who's comforts are unsustainable and then acquires the authority/power to stop it? Will those who's comforts are deemed unsustainable sit quietly by while their comforts are snatched away?


----------



## thelightdude (Sep 25, 2009)

EngrPaul said:


> "Excuse me, could you spare a square?"



The shoes say it all.


----------



## saabgoblin (Sep 25, 2009)

Beamhead said:


> That is the kind of convoluted thought process that is frightening to some, who decides who's comforts are unsustainable and then acquires the authority/power to stop it? Will those who's comforts are deemed unsustainable sit quietly by while their comforts are snatched away?


Please don't misunderstand me Beamhead, I am not saying that someone, corporation and or government should be snatching those things away, although they often do, I am more pointing to the probability in my mind that if the means of production are unsustainable, then the lack of resources will necesitate the removal of those conviences either by scarcity and or affordability.

"And will you try to tell us that you been too long at school
That knowledge is not needed
That power does not rule" Gordon Lightfoot, Sit Down Young Stranger.

Absolute power corrupts absolutly, I am with you there if I am not misinterpreting what you are saying.

Don't they call the folds in your brain convolutions?


----------



## Patriot (Sep 25, 2009)

Beamhead said:


> That is the kind of convoluted thought process that is frightening to some, who decides who's comforts are unsustainable and then acquires the authority/power to stop it? Will those who's comforts are deemed unsustainable sit quietly by while their comforts are snatched away?




In this case it's the relativistic idea that "might makes right." Someone else will determine your comfort level, regardless of resolve by your own means and aside from inherent rights as a human being, on the grounds of "a greater cause" being nurtured. Mind you, the regulators of such decided comfort levels will never be subject to these themselves, insight to the notion that serving the "greater good" was a falsity purveyed by totalitarianist ideas from the start.


----------



## John_Galt (Sep 25, 2009)

Patriot said:


> In this case it's the relativistic idea that "might makes right." Someone else will determine your comfort level, regardless of resolve by your own means and aside from inherent rights as a human being, on the grounds of "a greater cause" being nurtured. Mind you, the regulators of such decided comfort levels will never be subject to these themselves, insight to the notion that serving the "greater good" was a falsity purveyed by totalitarianist ideas from the start.




A rousing cheer of +1!

Never let anyone tell you that they know better what you need want and require than you. The day that any man does is the day there is no hope.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 25, 2009)

saabgoblin said:


> I believe that Japan is very big on bidets as well as many other countries. You'll use way less paper and personally I believe that it's a lot cleaner but then again you may be using more water. What is worse, clear cutting forests, or increased water usage, well you would have to do a long term study and IMHO, there are so many variables that finding the answer may be a little difficult. America is horrified by the bidet but once you give one a go, they really are great, it's kind like a mini shower for the dirtiest part of your body. :toilet:!
> 
> With less paper to be processed, we would potentially have fewer overflows of sewage that threaten coastal water quality and septic systems wouldn't have to be serviced as frequently. Personally, I don't want to deny someone their pleasure or comfort but if that comfort comes at too high a price in relation to sustainability, then your comforts may very well have to end. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure but that is not always the way that humans work.



If you want to have things squirted up your butt, go for it. I find the idea disgusting and repulsive, and have no interest in being subjected to some sort of anti-crap water cannon. I'm sure there is a segment of the population that enjoys such a toy. Does it pulse and vibrate for you also? 

People ranting about this toilet paper crap have no idea what is really going on. They are spoon fed some talking points and gobble it mindlessly. I gave the links in my last post about the FFL and WWF, so to portray wanton clear cutting of forests required to have my Ultra Soft Charmin is ignorant of the facts, and indicates the mindless superficiality in approaching any complex issue.

Be sure and include a careful analysis of the devastating and large scale total loss of forests from major fires as a result of previous "well intentioned" govertnment intervention in your tallies of lost trees. I would be willing to bet that government policies have directly led to far greater loss of forests than the amount of trees chopped down for the total planetary toilet paper supply.

What's missing in environmentalism is actual intelligent thought and careful analysis. Corn production for ethanol mandates in order to increase cleaner energy supply is a similar example of goverment perversion of environmentalism.

There is almost nothing that government does well.


----------



## Empath (Sep 25, 2009)

This thread isn't about something the government is doing. It's about something Greenpeace, possibly some unnamed environmental groups and a corporation that is attempting to capitalize on the concern, is doing.

Concern that government is pushing it is reading too much into it. They may or may not become involved later.


----------



## Linger (Sep 25, 2009)

re: bidet - yes, very common in Japan












LuxLuthor said:


> I find the idea disgusting and repulsive


Fascinating, especially given that people currently rub it off with paper.
Digital tempurature display for a jet of water, or using your fingers and rubbing at the orifice. which is more


----------



## Patriot (Sep 25, 2009)

Empath said:


> Concern that government is pushing it is reading too much into it. They may or may not become involved later.





I agree at "surface level" but I think Lux Luthor's post, and many others, are accurate in that demonstrate the concern of fequent eventualities in these issues. 

Radical environmental groups, are in the business of creating an "earth first" religion in which evironmental issues are elevated in importance beyond most everything, including sometimes, human beings. Radical politicians not in conformity with traditionally held views on human rights and individualism, along with elite political power assemblages, often being control minded, are all to eager to partner with any segment of society seeking to diminish the personal rights of others. Ultimately, the goverment acts as the manipulating agent for what was origianlly just a well intentioned emotional idea, with the negative effect being the diminished sovereignty of the average individual. What often isn't realized is that ideas sometimes have negative consequences far beyond their intended original "good" purposes, with the potentiality for depravity increasing with the size of the group exposed to them.


----------



## jtr1962 (Sep 25, 2009)

Patriot said:


> Radical environmental groups, are in the business of creating an "earth first" religion in which evironmental issues are elevated in importance beyond most everything, including sometimes, human beings.


This is the _real_ problem, not environmentalism per se. Moving towards a future where each individual has less impact on the planet without unduly sacrificing their quality of life makes sense on many levels, even economically. However, a small but vocal group of environmentalists have gone overboard in some areas. I happen to think this is one of them. We could save more trees but just doing something about the junk mail which almost nobody wants anyway. That's what environmentalists should do-go after the low-hanging fruit, so to speak. Find areas of waste where making a change won't severely impact people's lives, and start there. Junk mail is a good start. Going after businesses which have lights burning in unoccupied buildings all night long is another.

What I fear is that the generally good message of environmentalism will end up being lumped with radical efforts like this this, and as a result the public will react negatively to any type of conservation efforts, not matter how sane or well thought out they might be. A big problem I see all too often with certain segments of the environmental movement is a very narrow focus. They'll spot one area of waste, and then try to curb it without seeing the big picture. This topic actually provides a great example. Soft toilet paper may be responsible for some deforestation, but it pales next to junk mail, or for that matter the excessive amount of paper still being used by businesses in this age of electronic documents. Go after the other things first. In fact, go _only_ after the other things. If something is 5% of the problem, why risk turning off the general public to everything good you're trying to do by doggedly focusing on only that 5%? It's a sad but true fact that many environmentalists are great at shooting themselves in the foot.

So in the end, everyone should focus on the big picture. That also includes the general public. While it's unrealistic to expect everyone to live in huts, it might be nice to see more of the general public willing to make small sacrifices in the areas of their life which have a large impact. In fact, there was a time when people would willingly do that rather than complain. While I'm frequently tired of radical environmentalists who would have me live like people did two millenia ago in the name of mother Earth, I'm also equally tired of hearing the general public whine whenever asked to make small, but effective and sensible, sacrifices for the same. There is no middle ground it seems.


----------



## Rexlion (Sep 25, 2009)

Some people (like these extreme environmental groups) believe that folks won't do what's right and best unless forced to do so. Maybe, sometimes, that's at least partly true. But the USA is largely about personal liberty and many citizens don't like being forced. Besides, who says that the group doing the forcing is really right about the need for such change and the means used to effect that change?

Personally, I don't get too excited about how soft my TP is. And if I thought it were really that important in the grand scheme of things, I'd be willing to put my a** on the line (of rough TP) :devil: to make it right. Heck, I use lowly Scott Tissue anyway, so you can tell it doesn't bother me! But in the long run I just don't think it matters that much, and anyway these wackos need to get a life and go save some humans instead of worrying about a few trees... IMO. 

Oh, and one more thing. If I ever get enough money together to get that new monolithic dome house I want built, I would like to put in a bidet. Seems pretty practical to me. Especially since it's so hard to get enough fiber every single day.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Sep 25, 2009)

Rexlion said:


> Especially since it's so hard to get enough fiber every single day.



A teaspoon of Metamucil clears the deck nicely. 

The issue is not really about the 100W light bulb, or the ultra-plush TP. It is the unexamined proselytization, threats, and sanctimonious preaching of the "one, right way." Instead, they could provide a simple presentation of facts, allowance for challenges, healthy debates, and a natural evolution of one's position, without the polarization of being vociferously branded as a [GW] Denier invoking the unconscionable stigma commensurate with denying the Holocaust. Simple education and authentic leadership ("Walk the Talk") that makes sense, has you want to enroll in doing things a new way. 

For example, I had a major breakthrough when at a conference, a friend asked me why I keep the water running while I brush my teeth. There was just a question. They didn't try to make me wrong or launch into a maelstrom of indignant condescension. I had a chance to discover in that moment that I never thought about it. Then I realized I did it because I grew up brushing my teeth with the water on--but didn't really need to. My realization extended to using water outside, doing the dishes, leaving lights on in rooms I wasn't using, etc. etc. More importantly, it taught me a way to ask others the same, simple kind of question, leading to a ripple effect.

Empath, while you are technically correct with regards to the OP linked Times article, it starts with these seemingly noble ideas before moving beyond the Greenpeace groups--to actual Governmental penalties and restrictions of incand light bulbs, high gallon per flush toilets, Cap & Trade legislation, punitive taxes, restrictions, outright bans on anything the environmental lobbyists can slip into bills. 

Very few people stop and question the fundamental validity of the assertions, nor consider the enormous repercussions of using threats, force, and punitive actions because they don't know how to effectively enroll and educate others. This TP issue will be gladly picked up by a series of governmental legislators, or written into a thousand page stimulus or reconciliation bill by a well-connected lobbyist....and suddenly, there goes your beloved plush TP.

When you hear inaccurate phrases like wholesale clear-cutting of forests, and all corporations are evil, it exposes the desire to force people into conforming with their myopic & ignorant positions. Again, much of the motivation with this TP issue (as noted in the NY Times article) is rooted in the silly man-made CO2 emissions causing GW (which has not been proven), and trees being CO2 scrubbers. Once someone identifies themself as a "full blown environmentalist," they become mindlessly susceptible to any notion. They will unquestionably accept into their "green boat" whatever flotsam is floated their way.

My fundamental objection with all of these types of issues is seeing a discriminating human being who cares about the future of their world, morph into a mindless enviromental automaton. I consider that phenomenon as 'evil' because the mindless person is deluded into believing they are making a real contribution. You build a critical mass of vacuous lemmings and they can do real damage on any aspect of any issue.


----------



## Big_Ed (Sep 25, 2009)

My Dad told me when he was a kid, they had an outhouse, and used pages from magazines and the like. And then there was the whole corn cob thing...... Ouch!

And as for bidets, it would seem to me that if we switched from using mostly T.P. to bidets, we'd be using more water, and energy to heat it (I assume the water is heated), so there would be something else for environmentlists to complain about. Not to mention the possibility of job cuts if we needed a lot less T.P. Less loggers needed, T.P. factories would be cutting jobs, less product to ship to stores leading to fewer trucking jobs, etc, etc.... I'd rather flush T.P. down the toilet than jobs. Maybe that's a stretch, but that's how I feel about it.

And it I bet you'd surely get a funny look from the check out attendant at the store when you buy a shopping cart load of T.P.!! But it would be even funnier if you also purchased a whole bunch of Pepto Bismol at the same time.


----------



## nfetterly (Sep 25, 2009)

Seriously - I'm out of work & helping a guy who's working to put together a project for a new tissue machine (200 tons per day) in NY State. I'm working on the deinking / recycling end. So yes please use recycled toilet paper. Actually it's very good. It's not like the ones with wood chips in it that I had in Yugoslavia 20 years ago.

Also - a recycle plant is FANTASTIC for using a flashlight in - it's what they were made for.

Also - having traveled in China alot in the last 5 years - I can personally attest that when you are in the plant (mill, factory etc) and the food you ate catches up to you - what you want to have are the cotton shoe polishing gloves! :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: Use once and dispose of.


----------



## Hooked on Fenix (Sep 26, 2009)

What really chaps my a$$ about this is it is yet another example of choice being taken away from the consumer.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Nov 2, 2009)

OK, I'm all set with 6 gross of Charmin Ultra Soft (Mega Roll size). That should last at least 10 years. Fortunately it comes in 12 packs. 72 12 packs (864 rolls) is a lot of TP - space wise. Took a while to get this much at the local grocery.


----------



## DaFABRICATA (Nov 2, 2009)

LUX, 
Half of it will be dry rotted and fall apart on your booty within 10 years!...:laughing:
Then you'll look like the bear on the TV advertisments..:duh2:


----------



## LuxLuthor (Nov 2, 2009)

DaFABRICATA said:


> LUX,
> Half of it will be dry rotted and fall apart on your booty within 10 years!...:laughing:
> Then you'll look like the bear on the TV advertisments..:duh2:



I have a system or rotating and protecting from bugs. That bear looks pretty damn happy.


----------



## Hooked on Fenix (Nov 2, 2009)

Just got another pack myself. Costco had a $2 off coupon for 30 Jumbo rolls (equal to 75 regular rolls). Unfortunately, the coupon expired yesterday.


----------

